United States
Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K

(Mark One)
 
 RAnnual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20072009

 £Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 
For the transition period from ______________ to ______________

Commission File No. 1-3548
ALLETE, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Minnesota 41-0418150
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)


30 West Superior Street, Duluth, Minnesota 55802-2093
 (Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)

(218) 279-5000
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of Each Class 
Name of Each Stock Exchange
on Which Registered
Common Stock, without par value New York Stock Exchange

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Yes R                      No £

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.
Yes £                      No R

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 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.
Yes R                      No £

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 registrant’s 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. R£

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).
Large Accelerated Filer R
Accelerated Filer £
Non-Accelerated Filer £
Smaller Reporting Company £

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).
Yes £                      No R

The aggregate market value of voting stock held by nonaffiliates on June 29, 2007,30, 2009, was $1,437,610,992.$974,440,368.

As of February 1, 2008,2010, there were 30,829,79135,243,905 shares of ALLETE Common Stock, without par value, outstanding.

Documents Incorporated By Reference

Portions of the Proxy Statement for the 20082010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference in Part III.

 
1

 

Index

Definitions3
  
Safe Harbor Statement Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 19955
  
Part I 
Item 1.Business6
 Energy – Regulated UtilityOperations6
  Electric Sales / Customers6
  Power Supply109
  Transmission &and Distribution11
Investment in ATC11
  Properties11
  Regulatory Matters12
  Regional Organizations15
Minnesota Legislation1415
  Competition15
  Franchises15
Energy – Nonregulated Energy Operations15
Energy – Investment in ATC16
 Real EstateInvestments and Other16
  Seller FinancingBNI Coal16
ALLETE Properties16
Non-Rate Base Generation17
  RegulationOther.18
Competition18
Other1817
 Environmental Matters1817
 Employees2021
Availability of Information21
 Executive Officers of the Registrant2122
Item 1A.Risk Factors2223
Item 1B.Unresolved Staff Comments26
Item 2.Properties26
Item 3.Legal Proceedings26
Item 4.Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders26
Part II 
Item 5.
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
26
27
Item 6.Selected Financial Data2728
Item 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations2829
 Overview2829
 20072009 Compared to 20062008.30
 20062008 Compared to 2005200732
 Critical Accounting Estimates34
 Outlook3635
 Liquidity and Capital Resources4442
 Capital Requirements4846
 Environmental and Other Matters4846
 Market Risk4846
 New Accounting Standards4948
Item 7A.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk5048
Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data5048
Item 9.Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure5048
Item 9A.Controls and Procedures5048
Item 9B.Other Information51
49
Part III 
Item 10.Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance5250
Item 11.Executive Compensation5250
Item 12.Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters5250
Item 13.Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence5250
Item 14.Principal AccountantAccounting Fees and Services52
50
Part IV  
Item 15.Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules5351
  
Signatures5755
  
Consolidated Financial Statements5958

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
2

 

Definitions

The following abbreviations or acronyms are used in the text. References in this report to “we,” “us” and “our” are to ALLETE, Inc. and its subsidiaries, collectively.

Abbreviation or AcronymTerm
AICPAAmerican Institute of Certified Public Accountants
ALLETEALLETE, Inc.
ALLETE PropertiesALLETE Properties, LLC and its subsidiaries
AFUDCAllowance for Funds Used During Construction - the cost of both the debt and equity funds used to finance utility plant additions during construction periods
AREAArrowhead Regional Emission Abatement
ARSAuction Rate Securities
ATCAmerican Transmission Company LLC
Blandin PaperBasinUPM, Blandin Paper MillBasin Electric Power Cooperative
Bison IBison I Wind Project
BNI CoalBNI Coal, Ltd.
BNSFBurlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company
BoswellBoswell Energy Center
Boswell NOX Reduction Plan
NOX emission reductions from Boswell Units 1, 2, and 4
CO2
Carbon Dioxide
CompanyALLETE, Inc. and its subsidiaries
Constellation Energy CommoditiesDCConstellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc.
DOCMinnesota Department of CommerceDirect Current
DRIDevelopment of Regional Impact
EITFEmerging Issues Task Force
Enventis TelecomEnventis Telecom, Inc.
EPAEnvironmental Protection Agency
ESAElectric Service Agreement
ESOPEmployee Stock Ownership Plan
FASBFinancial Accounting Standards Board
FERCFederal Energy Regulatory Commission
Florida LandmarkFlorida Landmark Communities, Inc.
Florida WaterFlorida Water Services Corporation
Form 8-KALLETE Current Report on Form 8-K
Form 10-KALLETE Annual Report on Form 10-K
Form 10-QALLETE Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
FPL EnergyFPL Energy, LLC
FPSCFlorida Public Service Commission
FSPFTRFinancial Accounting Standards Board Staff PositionTransmission Rights
GAAPAccounting Principles Generally Accepted in the United States
GHGGreenhouse Gases
Heating Degree DaysMeasure of the extent to which the average daily temperature is below 65 degrees Fahrenheit, increasing demand for heating
IBEW Local 31International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 31
Invest DirectALLETE’s Direct Stock Purchase and Dividend Reinvestment Plan
IPOInitial Public Offering
kVKilovolt(s)
LaskinLaskin Energy Center
Manitoba HydroManitoba HydroHydro-Electric Board
MBtuMillion British thermal units
Mesabi NuggetMesabi Nugget Delaware, LLC
Minnesota PowerAn operating division of ALLETE, Inc.
Minnkota PowerMinnkota Power Cooperative, Inc.
MISOMidwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
Moody’sMoody’s Investors Service, Inc.
MPCAMinnesota Pollution Control Agency
ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
3

Definitions (Continued)

MPUCMinnesota Public Utilities Commission

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
3


Definitions (Continued)

Abbreviation or AcronymTerm
MW / MWhMegawatt(s) / Megawatthour(s)Megawatt-hour(s)
NextEra EnergyNextEra Energy Resources, LLC
NDPSCNorth Dakota Public Service Commission
Non-residentialRetail commercial, non-retail commercial, office, industrial, warehouse, storage and institutional
NOX
Nitrogen Oxide
Northwest AirlinesNorthwest Airlines, Inc.Oxides
Note ___Note ___ to the consolidated financial statements in this Form 10-K
NPDESNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NYSENew York Stock Exchange
OAGOESMinnesota Office of the Attorney GeneralEnergy Security
Oliver Wind IOliver Wind I Energy Center
Oliver Wind IIOliver Wind II Energy Center
Palm Coast ParkPalm Coast Park development project in Florida
Palm Coast Park DistrictPalm Coast Park Community Development District
PolyMet MiningPolyMet Mining Inc.Corp.
PSCWPublic Service Commission of Wisconsin
PUHCA 1935Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935
PUHCA 2005Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005
Rainy River EnergyRainy River Energy Corporation - Wisconsin
SECSecurities and Exchange Commission
SFASStatement of Financial Accounting Standards No.
SO2
Sulfur Dioxide
Square ButteSquare Butte Electric Cooperative
Standard & Poor’sStandard & Poor’s Ratings Services, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
SWL&PSuperior Water, Light and Power Company
Taconite HarborTaconite Harbor Energy Center
Taconite RidgeTaconite Ridge Energy Center
Town CenterTown Center at Palm Coast development project in Florida
Town Center DistrictTown Center at Palm Coast Community Development District
WDNRWisconsin Department of Natural Resources



ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
4

 

Safe Harbor Statement
Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995

Statements in this report that are not statements of historical facts may be considered “forward-looking” and, accordingly, involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed. Although such forward-looking statements have been made in good faith and are based on reasonable assumptions, there is no assurance that the expected results will be achieved. Any statements that express, or involve discussions as to, future expectations, risks, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions, events, uncertainties, financial performance, or growth strategies (often, but not always, through the use of words or phrases such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” “will likely result,” “will continue,” “could,” “may,” “potential,” “target,” “outlook” or words of similar meaning) are not statements of historical facts and may be forward-looking.

In connection with the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, we are hereby filing cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those projected, or expectations suggested, in forward-looking statements (as such term is defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) made by or on behalf of ALLETE in thethis Annual Report on Form 10-K, in presentations, on our website, in response to questions or otherwise. Any statements that express, or involve discussions as to expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions, or future events or performance (often, but not always, through the use of words or phrases such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” “will likely result,” “will continue,” “could,” “may,” “potential,” “target,” “outlook” or similar expressions) are not statements of historical facts and may be forward-looking.

Forward-looking statements involve estimates, assumptions, risks and uncertainties, which are beyond our control and may cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those that may be projected. These statements are qualified in their entirety by reference to, and are accompanied by, the following important factors, in addition to any assumptions and other factors referred to specifically:specifically in connection with such forward-looking statements:

·our ability to successfully implement our strategic objectives;
·our ability to manage expansion and integrate acquisitions;
·prevailing governmental policies, regulatory actions, and legislation including those of the United States Congress, state legislatures, the FERC, the MPUC, the PSCW, the NDPSC, and various local and county regulators, and city administrators, about allowed rates of return, financings, industry and rate structure, acquisition and disposal of assets and facilities, real estate development, operation and construction of plant facilities, recovery of purchased power, capital investments and other expenses, present or prospective wholesale and retail competition (including but not limited to transmission costs), zoning and permitting of land held for resale and environmental matters;
·our ability to manage expansion and integrate acquisitions;
·
the potential impacts of climate change and future regulation to restrict the emissions of GHG on our Regulated Utility operationsOperations;
·effects of restructuring initiatives in the electric industry;
·economic and geographic factors, including political and economic risks;
·changes in and compliance with laws and policies;regulations;
·weather conditions;
·natural disasters and pandemic diseases;
·war and acts of terrorism;
·wholesale power market conditions;
·population growth rates and demographic patterns;
·effects of competition, including competition for retail and wholesale customers;
·changes in the real estate market;
·pricing and transportation of commodities;
·changes in tax rates or policies or in rates of inflation;
·unanticipated project delays or changes in project costs;
·
availability and management of construction materials and skilled construction labor for capital projects;
·
unanticipated changes in operating expenses, capital and land development expenditures;
·global and domestic economic conditions;conditions affecting us or our customers;
·our ability to access capital markets and bank financing;
·changes in interest rates and the performance of the financial markets;
·our ability to replace a mature workforce and retain qualified, skilled and experienced personnel; and
·the outcome of legal and administrative proceedings (whether civil or criminal) and settlements that affect the business and profitability of ALLETE.

Additional disclosures regarding factors that could cause our results and performance to differ from results or performance anticipated by this report are discussed in Item 1A under the heading “Risk Factors” beginning on page 2223 of this Form 10-K. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made, and we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which that statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events. New factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for management to predict all of these factors, nor can it assess the impact of each of these factors on the businesses of ALLETE or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement. Readers are urged to carefully review and consider the various disclosures made by us in this Form 10-K and in our other reports filed with the SEC that attempt to advise interested parties of the factors that may affect our business.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
5

 

Part I

Item 1.Business

ALLETE is a diversified company that has provided fundamental products and services since 1906. These include our former operations in the water, paper, telecommunications and automotive industries and the core Energy and Real Estate businesses we operate today.

Energy is comprised of Regulated Utility, Nonregulated Energy Operations and Investment in ATC.

·
Regulated Utility includes retail and wholesale rate regulated electric, natural gas and water services in northeastern Minnesota and northwestern Wisconsin under the jurisdiction of state and federal regulatory authorities.
·
Nonregulated Energy Operations includes our coal mining activities in North Dakota, approximately 50 MW of nonregulated generation and Minnesota land sales.
·
Investment in ATC includes our equity ownership interest in ATC.

Real Estate includes our Florida real estate operations.

Other includesregulated utilities, Minnesota Power and SWL&P, as well as our investmentsinvestment in emerging technologies,ATC, a Wisconsin-based utility that owns and earnings on cashmaintains electric transmission assets in parts of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and short-term investments.

ALLETE is incorporated under the laws of Minnesota. Our corporate headquarters are in Duluth, Minnesota. Statistical information is presented as of December 31, 2007, unless otherwise indicated. All subsidiaries are wholly owned unless otherwise specifically indicated. References in this report to “we,” “us” and “our” are to ALLETE and its subsidiaries, collectively.

Year Ended December 31200720062005
    
Consolidated Operating Revenue – Millions$841.7$767.1$737.4
    
Percentage of Consolidated Operating Revenue   
Regulated Utility868378
Nonregulated Energy Operations8916
Real Estate686
 100%100%100%

For a detailed discussion of results of operations and trends, see Item 7 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. For business segment information, see Notes 1 and 2.

Energy – Regulated Utility

Electric Sales / Customers

Illinois. Minnesota Power provides regulated utility electric service in northeastern Minnesota to 141,000144,000 retail customers and wholesale electric service to 16 municipalities. SWL&PMinnesota Power also provides regulated utility electric service to 1 private utility in Wisconsin. SWL&P, a wholesale customer of Minnesota Power, provides regulated electric, natural gas and water service in northwestern Wisconsin to 15,000 electric customers, 12,000 natural gas customers and 10,000 water customers. Our regulated utility operations include retail and wholesale activities under the jurisdiction of state and federal regulatory authorities. (see(See Item 1 -1. Business – Regulated Operations – Regulatory Matters.) In addition

Investments and Other is comprised primarily of BNI Coal, our coal mining operations in North Dakota, and ALLETE Properties, our Florida real estate investment. This segment also includes a small amount of non-rate base generation, approximately 7,000 acres of land available-for-sale in Minnesota, and earnings on cash and investments.

ALLETE is incorporated under the laws of Minnesota. Our corporate headquarters are in Duluth, Minnesota. Statistical information is presented as of December 31, 2009, unless otherwise indicated. All subsidiaries are wholly owned unless otherwise specifically indicated. References in this report to serving residential, commercial“we,” “us” and municipal electric needs,“our” are to ALLETE and its subsidiaries, collectively.

Year Ended December 31
       2009
       2008
       2007
    
Consolidated Operating Revenue – Millions$759.1$801.0$841.7
    
Percentage of Consolidated Operating Revenue   
Regulated Operations90%89%86%
Investments and Other10%11%14%
 100%100%100%

For a detailed discussion of results of operations and trends, see Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. For business segment information, see Note 1. Operations and Significant Accounting Policies and Note 2. Business Segments.


REGULATED OPERATIONS

Electric Sales / Customers

Regulated Utility Electric Sales
Year Ended December 312009%2008%2007%
Millions of Kilowatt-hours      
Retail and Municipals      
Residential1,164101,17291,1419
Commercial1,420121,454121,45611
Industrial4,475377,192577,05455
Municipals (FERC rate regulated)99281,00281,0098
Total Retail and Municipals8,0516710,8208610,66083
Other Power Suppliers4,056331,800142,15717
 Total Regulated Utility Electric Sales12,10710012,62010012,817100

Seasonality

Due to the high proportionconcentration of industrial sales, Minnesota Power is not subject to significant seasonal fluctuations. The operations of our electricindustrial customers, which make up a large portion of our sales portfolio, as shown in the table above, are not typically subject to large industrial customers.

Regulated Utility Electric Sales
Year Ended December 31
2007%2006%2005%
Millions of Kilowatthours      
       
Retail and Municipals      
Residential1,14191,10091,10210
Commercial1,373111,335101,32711
Industrial7,054557,206567,13061
Municipals and Other1,092899089568
 10,6608310,6318310,51590
Other Power Suppliers (a)
2,157172,153171,14210
 12,81710012,78410011,657100

(a)Effective January 1, 2006, Taconite Harbor was redirected from Nonregulated Energy Operations to Regulated Utility.
significant seasonal variations.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
6

 

Energy-Regulated UtilityREGULATED OPERATIONS (Continued)

Industrial Customers

. In 2007,2009, our industrial customers represented 5537 percent of total regulated utility kilowatthourkilowatt-hour sales. Our industrial customers are primarily in the taconite, paper, pulp and wood products, and pipeline industries.

Industrial Customer Electric Sales
Year Ended December 31
2007%2006%2005%
Millions of Kilowatthours
 
Industrial Customer Electric SalesIndustrial Customer Electric Sales
Year Ended December 312009%2008%2007%
Millions of Kilowatt-hours
      
Taconite ProducersTaconite Producers4,408624,517634,558642,124474,579644,40862
Paper, Pulp and Wood ProductsPaper, Pulp and Wood Products1,613231,689231,623231,454331,567221,61323
PipelinesPipelines5628550848075041158285628
Other IndustrialOther Industrial471745064696393946464717
  7,0541007,2061007,1301004,4751007,1921007,054100

Approximately 60 percent of the ore consumed by integrated steel facilities in the United States originates from six taconite customers of Minnesota Power.Power, which represented 2,124 million kilowatt-hours, or 47 percent, of our total industrial sales in 2009. Taconite, an iron-bearing rock of relatively low iron content, that is abundantly available in northern Minnesota isand an important domestic source of raw material for the steel industry. Taconite processing plants use large quantities of electric power to grind the iron-bearing rock, and agglomerate and pelletize the iron particles into taconite pellets. Strong

Beginning in the fall of 2008, worldwide steel makers began to dramatically cut steel production in response to reduced demand driven largely by extensive infrastructure developmentthe global credit concerns. United States raw steel production ran at approximately 50 percent of capacity in China, has resulted2009, reflecting poor demand in very robust world iron oreautomobiles, durable goods, and structural and other steel products.

In late 2008, Minnesota taconite producers began to feel the impacts of decreased steel demand, and steel pricing. This globalization of demand has positively impacted Minnesotareduced taconite producers. With the exception of short-term production curtailments at two taconite plants, our taconite customers operated at maximum production levels occurred in 2007.2009. Annual taconite production in Minnesota was approximately 18 million tons in 2009 (40 million tons in 2008 and 39 million tons in 2007 (40 million tons2007). Consequently, 2009 kilowatt-hour sales to our taconite customers were lower by approximately 54 percent from 2008 levels, and we sold available power to Other Power Suppliers to partially mitigate the earnings impact of these lower taconite sales.

Raw steel production in 2006the United States is projected to improve in 2010, and 41 million tons in 2005) and it is estimated to run at approximately 60 percent of capacity. As a result, Minnesota Power expects an increase in taconite production in 2010 compared to 2009, although production will still be less than previous years’ levels. We will continue to market available power to Other Power Suppliers in an effort to mitigate the earnings impact of these lower industrial sales. These sales are dependent upon the availability of generation and are sold at market-based prices into the MISO market on a daily basis or through bilateral agreements of various durations. We can make no assurances that itour power marketing efforts will be 41.5 million tons in 2008. An 800,000 ton per year expansion at Cleveland Cliffs’ Northshore taconite facility is expected to be completed in April 2008, contributing tofully offset the expected increased production. It is expected that throughout 2008, Minnesota taconite producers will remain in a strong competitive position due to the strength of the world steel industry and their efficiency of production.reduced earnings resulting from lower demand nominations from our industrial customers.

In addition to serving the taconite industry, Minnesota Power also serves a number of customers in the paper, pulp and wood products industry.industry, which represented 1,454 million kilowatt-hours, or 33 percent, of our total industrial sales in 2009. In total, we serve four major paper and pulp mills directly and one paper mill indirectly by providing wholesale service to the retail provider of the mill. Minnesota Power also serves fourseveral wood productsproduct manufacturers. In 2007, approximately 90 percent of our revenue from this industry sector came from the paper and pulp producers, and 10 percent came from the wood products customers.

Minnesota Power’s paper and pulp customers ran at, or very near, full capacity in 2007for the majority of 2009, despite the fact that the industry continuedas a whole experienced the impacts of the global recession in reduced sales of nearly every paper grade. Federal tax credits provided a subsidy for paper producers which allowed them to face high fiber, chemicalremain competitive. Minnesota Power’s paper and energy costs as well as competition from exports in certain grades of paper products. Minnesota Power’spulp customers benefited from the temporary or permanent idling of capacitycompetitor plants both in North America at mills other than those served by Minnesota Power and the idling of capacity in Europe, as well as from thecontinued strength of the Canadian dollar and the Euro which has reduced imports both from Canada and Europe. Our wood products customers ran at reduced capacity levels, and two facilities were indefinitely idled due to the decreased number of new housing starts, a resultant declining demand and pricing for their products. One of the idled facilities was down for all of 2007 while another was idled during the last quarter of 2007.

The pipeline industry is the third key industrial segment served by Minnesota Power with services provided to two crude oil pipelines and one refinery.refinery indirectly through SWL&P, which represented 504 million kilowatt-hours, or 11 percent, of our total industrial sales in 2009. These customers have a common reliance on the importation of Canadian crude oil. After near capacity operationoperations in 20062007, 2008, and 2007,2009, both pipeline operators are executing expansion plans to transport newly developed Western Canadian crude oil reserves (Alberta Oil Sands) to United States markets. Access to traditional Midwest markets is being expanded to Southern markets as the Canadian supply is displacing domestic production and deliveries imported from the Gulf Coast.

Large Power Customer Contracts. Minnesota Power has 9 Large Power contracts with 10 Large Power Customers. All of these contracts serve requirements of 10 MWs or more of generating capacity. The customers consist of five taconite producing facilities (two of which are owned by one company and are served under a single contract), one iron nugget plant, and four paper and pulp mills.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
7

 

Energy-Regulated UtilityREGULATED OPERATIONS (Continued)

Large Power Customer Contracts. Minnesota Power has large power customer contracts with 12 customers (Large Power Customers), 11 of which require 10 MW or more of generating capacity and one that requires at least 8 MW of generating capacity. Large Power Customers consist of five taconite producers, four paper and pulp mills, two pipeline companies and one manufacturer.Contracts (Continued)

Large Power Customer contracts require Minnesota Power to have a certain amount of generating capacity available. (See Minimum Revenue and Demand Under Contract table below.) In turn, each Large Power Customer is required to pay a minimum monthly demand charge that covers the fixed costs associated with having this capacity available to serve the customer, including a return on common equity. Most contracts allow customers to establish the level of megawatts subject to a demand charge on a biannual (power pool season) or four-month basis and require that a portion of their megawatt needs be committed on a take-or-pay basis for at least a portion of the agreement. In addition to the demand charge, each Large Power Customer is billed an energy charge for each kilowatthourkilowatt-hour used that recovers the variable costs incurred in generating electricity. SixFour of the Large Power Customers have interruptible service for a portion of their needs, which provides a discounted demand rate and energy priced at Minnesota Power’s incremental cost after serving all firm power obligations.for the ability to interrupt the customers during system emergencies. Minnesota Power also provides incremental production service for customer demand levels above the contractual take-or-pay levels. There is no demand charge for this service and energy is priced at an increment above Minnesota Power’s cost. Incremental production service is interruptible.

All contracts with Large Power Customers continue past the contract termination date unless the required advance notice of cancellation has been given. The advance notice of cancellation varies from one to four years. Such contracts minimize the impact on earnings that otherwise would result from significant reductions in kilowatthourkilowatt-hour sales to such customers. Large Power Customers are required to take all of their purchased electric service requirements from Minnesota Power for the duration of their contracts. The rates and corresponding revenue associated with capacity and energy provided under these contracts are subject to change through the same regulatory process governing all retail electric rates. (See Item 1. Business – Regulated Operations – Regulatory Matters – Electric Rates.)

Minnesota Power, as permitted by the MPUC, requires its taconite-producing Large Power Customers to pay weekly for electric usage based on monthly energy usage estimates. The customers receive estimated bills based on Minnesota Power’s prediction of the customer’s energy usage, forecasted energy prices, and fuel clause adjustment estimates. Minnesota Power’s five taconite-producing Large Power Customers have generally predictable energy usage on a week-to-week basis, which makes the variance between the estimated usage and actual usage small. Taconite-producing Large Power Customers subject to weekly billings receive interest on the money paid to Minnesota Power within the billing cycle.

Minimum Revenue and Demand Under Contract
As of February 1, 2008
Minimum Annual
Demand Revenue (a,b)
Monthly
Megawatts
   
2008$64.1 million401
2009$27.5 million154
2010$25.5 million148
2011$25.3 million148
2012$15.6 million88

(a)Based on past experience, we believe revenue from our Large Power Customers will be substantially in excess of the minimum contract amounts. For example, in our 2006 Form 10-K we stated that 2007 minimum annual revenue demand from these Large Power Customers would be $62.5 million. Actual 2007 demand revenue from these Large Power Customers was $118.7 million.
(b)Although several contracts have a feature that allows demand to go to zero after a two-year advance notice of a permanent closure, this minimum revenue summary does not reflect this occurrence happening in the forecasted period because we believe it is unlikely.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
8



Energy–Regulated Utility (Continued)

Contract Status for Minnesota Power Large Power Customers
As of February 1, 20082010

Customer(a)
IndustryLocationOwnership
Earliest
Termination Date
Hibbing Taconite Co.(a)
Taconite
Hibbing, MN
62.3% Mittal SteelArcelorMittal USA Inc.
23% Cleveland-Cliffs IncCliffs Natural Resources Inc.
14.7% United States Steel (USS)Corporation
February 29, 2012
December 31, 2015
ArcelorMittal USA – Minorca Mine(b)
TaconiteVirginia, MNArcelorMittal USA Inc.December 31, 2013February 28, 2014
United States Steel Corporation
(USS) Minntac(USS – Minnesota Ore) (b,c)
TaconiteMt. Iron, MN and Keewatin, MNUSSUnited States Steel CorporationOctober 31,February 28, 2014
USS Keewatin TaconiteTaconiteKeewatin, MNUSSOctober 31, 2014
United Taconite LLC(a)
TaconiteEveleth, MNCliffs Natural Resources Inc.December 31, 2015
Mesabi Nugget Delaware, LLCIron NuggetHoyt Lakes, MN
70% Cleveland-CliffsSteel Dynamics, Inc (80%)
30% LaiwuKobe Steel GroupUSA (20%)
February 29, 2012December 31, 2017
UPM, Blandin Paper Mill (a)(b)
PaperGrand Rapids, MNUPM-Kymmene CorporationFebruary 29, 201228, 2014
Boise White Paper, LLC(b)
PaperInternational Falls, MNMadison Dearborn PartnershipBoise Paper Holdings, LLCFebruary 28, 2009December 31, 2013
Sappi Cloquet LLC(a)
Paper and PulpCloquet, MNSappi LimitedFebruary 29, 201228, 2014
NewPage Corporation – Duluth Mills(b)
Paper and PulpDuluth, MNNewPage CorporationAugust 31, 2013
USG Interiors, Inc. (b)
ManufacturerCloquet, MNUSG CorporationFebruary 28, 2009
Enbridge Energy Company,
Limited Partnership (b)
Pipeline
Deer River, MN
Floodwood, MN
Enbridge Energy Company,
Limited Partnership
February 28, 2009
Minnesota Pipeline Company (b)
Pipeline
Staples, MN
Little Falls, MN
Park Rapids, MN
60% Koch Pipeline Co. L.P.
40% Marathon Ashland
Petroleum LLC
February 28, 20092014

(a)During 2009, three Large Power Customers moved to the Large Light and Power rate class.
(b)The contract will terminate four years from the date of written notice from either Minnesota Power or the customer. No notice of contract cancellation has been given by either party. Thus, the earliest date of cancellation is February 29, 2012.28, 2014.
(b)The contract will terminate one year from(c)United States Steel Corporation includes the date of written notice from either Minnesota Power orMinntac Plant in Mountain Iron, MN and the customer. No notice of contract cancellation has been given by either party. Thus, the earliest date of cancellation is February 28, 2009.Keewatin Taconite Plant in Keewatin, MN.

Residential and Commercial Customers. In 2009, our residential and commercial customers represented 22 percent of total regulated utility kilowatt-hour sales. Minnesota Power provides regulated utility electric service in northeastern Minnesota to approximately 144,000 residential and commercial customers. SWL&P provides regulated electric, natural gas and water service in northwestern Wisconsin to approximately 15,000 electric customers, 12,000 natural gas customers and 10,000 water customers.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
98

 

Energy–Regulated UtilityREGULATED OPERATIONS (Continued)

Municipal Customers. In 2009, our municipal customers represented 8 percent of total regulated utility kilowatt-hour sales, which included 16 municipalities in Minnesota and 1 private utility in Wisconsin. SWL&P, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ALLETE, is also a customer of Minnesota Power. In 2008, Minnesota Power entered into new contracts with its municipal customers with the exception of one small customer (less than 2 MW) whose contract is now in the cancellation period. The new contracts transitioned each customer to formula based rates, allowing rates to be adjusted annually based on changes in costs, and expire in December 2013. In February 2009, the FERC approved our municipal contracts, including the formula-based rate provision.

Other Power Suppliers. The Company also enters into off-system sales with Other Power Suppliers. These sales are dependent upon the availability of generation and are sold at market-based prices into the MISO market on a daily basis or through bilateral agreements of various durations.

Approximately 200 MWs of capacity and energy from our Taconite Harbor facility in northern Minnesota has been sold through two sales contracts totaling 175 MWs (201 MWs including a 15 percent reserve), which were effective May 1, 2005, and expire on April 30, 2010. Both contracts contain fixed monthly capacity charges and fixed minimum energy charges. One contract provides for an annual escalator to the energy charge based on increases in our cost of fuel, subject to a small minimum annual escalation. The other contract provides that the energy charge will be the greater of the fixed minimum charge or an annual amount based on the variable production cost of a combined-cycle, natural gas unit. Our exposure in the event of a full or partial outage at our Taconite Harbor facility is significantly limited under both contracts. When the buyer is notified at least two months prior to an outage, there is no liability. Outages with less than two months notice are subject to an annual duration limitation typical of this type of contract.

On October 29, 2009, Minnesota Power entered into an agreement to sell 100 MWs of capacity and energy for the next ten years to Basin. The transaction is scheduled to begin in May 2010, following the expiration of the two wholesale power sales contracts on April 30, 2010. The capacity charge is based on a fixed monthly schedule with a minimum annual escalation provision. The energy charge is based on a fixed monthly schedule and provides for annual escalation based on our cost of fuel. The agreement allows us to recover a pro rata share of increased costs related to emissions that may occur during the last five years of the contract.


Power Supply

In order to meet our customer’scustomers’ electric requirements, we utilize a mix of Company generation and purchased power. The Company’s generation is primarily coal fired,coal-fired, but also includes approximately 115112 MWs of hydro generation from ten hydro stations in Minnesota.Minnesota and 25 MWs of wind generation. Purchased power is made up of long–termlong-term power purchase agreements and market purchases. The following table reflects the Company’s generating capabilities and total electrical requirements as of December 31, 2007.2009. Minnesota Power had an annual net peak load of 1,614 MW1,414 MWs on July 30, 2007.January 15, 2009.


Regulated Utility
Power Supply
Unit
No.
Year
Installed
Net Winter
Capability
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2007
Electric Requirements
   MWMWh%
Coal-Fired     
Boswell Energy Center1195869  
in Cohasset, MN2196069  
 31973350  
 41980429  
   9176,005,52045.7%
Laskin Energy Center1195355  
in Hoyt Lakes, MN2195354  
   109591,4994.5
Taconite Harbor Energy Center1, 2 & 31957, 1957   
in Taconite Harbor, MN 19672201,491,45711.4
Total Coal  1,2468,088,47661.6
Purchased Steam     
Hibbard Energy Center in Duluth, MN3 & 41949, 19514753,3540.4
Hydro     
Group consisting of ten stations in MNVarious 115428,1533.3
Total Company Generation  1,4088,569,98365.3
Long Term Purchased Power     
Square Butte burns lignite coal near Center, ND  2731,533,18611.7
Wind – Oliver County, ND (a)
  20203,6751.5
Total Long Term Purchased Power  2931,736,86113.2
      
Other Purchased Power – Net (b)
  2,819,71521.5
Total Purchased Power  2934,556,57634.7
Total  1,70113,126,559100.0%
ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
9


REGULATED OPERATIONS (Continued)
Power Supply (Continued)
Regulated Utility
Power Supply
Unit
No.
Year
Installed
Net Winter
Capability
Year Ended
December 31, 2009
Electric Requirements
   MWMWh%
Coal-Fired     
Boswell Energy Center1195868  
in Cohasset, MN2196067  
 31973352  
 41980429  
   9165,390,13142.8%
Laskin Energy Center1195355  
in Hoyt Lakes, MN2195351  
   106510,5054.1
Taconite Harbor Energy Center1195775  
in Schroeder, MN2195774  
 3196776  
   2251,058,2638.4
Total Coal  1,2476,958,89955.3
Biomass/Coal/Natural Gas     
Hibbard Renewable Energy Center     
in Duluth, MN3 & 41949, 19515440,7030.3
      
Cloquet Energy Center
in Cloquet, MN
520012219,3400.2
Total Biomass/Coal/Natural Gas  7660,0430.5
Hydro     
Group consisting of ten stations in MNVarious 109434,5413.5
Wind     
Taconite Ridge
in Mt. Iron, MN (a)
1-102008456,2550.4
Total Company Generation  1,4367,509,73859.7
Long-Term Purchased Power     
Square Butte burns lignite coal near Center, ND   1,695,25413.5
Wind – Oliver County, ND   361,6242.9
Hydro – Manitoba Hydro in Winnipeg, MB, Canada   433,5433.4
Total Long-Term Purchased Power   2,490,42119.8
      
Other Purchased Power(b)
   2,579,40820.5
Total Purchased Power   5,069,82940.3
Total  1,43612,579,567100.0%

(a)The nameplate capacity of Oliver Wind I Energy CenterTaconite Ridge is 50-MWs and 48-MWs for the Oliver Wind II Energy Center.25 MWs. The capacity reflected in the table is actual accredited capacity of the facility. Accredited capacity is the amount of net generating capability associated with the facility for which capacity credit may be obtained under applicable Mid-Continent Area Power Pool (MAPP) rules.using limited historical data. As more data is collected, actual accredited capacity may increase.
(b)Includes short term market purchases in the MISO market and from other power suppliers.Other Power Suppliers.

Fuel. Minnesota Power purchases low-sulfur, sub-bituminous coal from the Powder River Basin coal region located in Montana and Wyoming. Coal consumption in 20072009 for electric generation at Minnesota Power’s coal-fired generating stations was approximately 4.94.2 million tons. As of December 31, 2007,2009, Minnesota Power had a coal inventory of about 922,000810,000 tons. Of Minnesota Power’s primary coal supply agreements one agreement extendshave expiration dates through 2011, one extends through 2009, and one has an initial term expiring at the end of 2008.2011. Under these agreements, Minnesota Power has the tonnage flexibility to procure 70 percent to 100 percent of its total coal requirements. In 2008,2010, Minnesota Power expects to obtain coal under these coal supply agreements and in the spot market. This diversity in coal supply options allows Minnesota Power to manage its coal market price and supply risk and to take advantage of favorable spot market prices. Minnesota Power continues to explore future coal supply options. We believe that adequate supplies of low-sulfur, sub-bituminous coal will continue to be available.

In 2001, Minnesota Power and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF)BNSF entered into a long-term agreement under which BNSF transports all of Minnesota Power’s coal by unit train from the Powder River Basin directly to Minnesota Power’s generating facilities or to a designated interconnection point.points. Minnesota Power also has agreements with an affiliate of the Canadian National Railway and with Midwest Energy Resources Company to transport coal from the BNSF interconnection pointpoints to certain Minnesota Power facilities.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
10

 

Energy–Regulated UtilityREGULATED OPERATIONS (Continued)
Power SupplyFuel (Continued)
On January 24, 2008, we received a letter from BNSF alleging the Company defaulted on a material obligation under the Company’s Coal Transportation Agreement (CTA). In the notice, BNSF claimed Minnesota Power underpaid approximately $1.6 million for coal transportation services in 2006 and that failure to pay such amount plus interest within 60 days may result in BNSF’s termination of the CTA. We believe we do not owe the amount claimed, and that BNSF’s claims are wholly without merit. We intend to vigorously defend our position in this dispute.

Coal Delivered to Minnesota Power
Year Ended December 31
200720062005
Coal Delivered to Minnesota PowerCoal Delivered to Minnesota Power
Year Ended December 31
       2009
       2008
       2007
Average Price per Ton$21.78$20.19$19.76$24.99$22.73$21.78
Average Price per MBtu$1.20$1.10$1.08$1.37$1.25$1.20


Long-Term Purchased Power. Minnesota Power has contracts to purchase capacity and energy from various entities. The largest contract is with Square Butte. Under the agreement with Square Butte, which expires at the end of 2026, Minnesota Power is currently entitled to approximately 50 percent of the output of a 455-MW coal-fired generating unit operated by Minnkota Power burnslocated near Center, North Dakota lignite coal supplied by BNI Coal in accordance with the terms of a contract that extends through 2026. Square Butte’s cost of lignite burned in 2007 was approximately $1.09 per MBtu.Dakota. (See Note 11. Commitments, Guarantees, and Contingencies.) The lignite acreage that has been dedicated to Square Butte by BNI Coal is located on lands essentially all of which are under private control and presently leased by BNI Coal. This lignite supply is sufficient to provide fuel for the anticipated useful life of the generating unit. Square Butte’s cost of lignite burned in 2009 was approximately $1.02 per MBtu.

Long Term Purchased Power. Minnesota Power has contractsWe have two wind power purchase agreements with an affiliate of NextEra Energy to purchase capacity and energy from various entities. The largest contract is with Square Butte. Under an agreement with Square Butte expiring at the end of 2026, Minnesota Power is currently entitled to approximately 55 percent (50 percent in 2009 and thereafter) of the output of a 455-MW coal-fired generating unitfrom two wind facilities, Oliver Wind I and II located near Center, North Dakota. (See Note 8.)

In December 2006, weWe began purchasing the output from a 50-MW wind facility, Oliver Wind I, locateda 50-MW facility, in North Dakota, underDecember 2006 and the output from Oliver Wind II, a 25-year48-MW facility, in November 2007. Each agreement is for 25 years and provides for the purchase of all output from the facilities. We pay a contracted energy price and will receive any potential renewable energy or environmental air quality credits.

We also have a power purchase agreement with an affiliate of FPL Energy.

InManitoba Hydro that began in May 2007,2009 and expires in April 2015. Under the MPUC approved a second 25-year wind poweragreement with Manitoba Hydro, Minnesota Power will purchase agreement to purchase an additional 4850 MW of windcapacity and the energy from Oliver Wind II, an expansion of Oliver Wind I locatedassociated with that capacity. Both the capacity price and the energy price are adjusted annually by the change in North Dakota. The MPUC also allowed immediate cost recovery for associated transmission upgrades. In November 2007, Oliver Wind II became operational and we began purchasing the output from the 48-MW wind facility.

On May 11, 2007, the MPUC approved a 50-MW power purchase agreement between Minnesota Power and Manitoba Hydro from May 2009 through April 2015.governmental inflationary index.

Transmission and Distribution

We have electric transmission and distribution lines of 500 kV (8 miles), 250kV (465 miles), 230 kV (605 miles), 161 kV (43 miles), 138 kV (129(128 miles), 115 kV (1,203(1,220 miles) and less than 115 kV (6,347(6,206 miles). We own and operate 170166 substations with a total capacity of 9,58610,287 megavoltamperes. Some of our transmission and distribution lines interconnect with other utilities.


Investment in ATC

Rainy River Energy, our wholly owned subsidiary, owns approximately 8 percent of ATC, a Wisconsin-based utility that owns and maintains electric transmission assets in parts of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Illinois. ATC provides transmission service under rates regulated by the FERC that are set in accordance with the FERC’s policy of establishing the independent operation and ownership of, and investment in, transmission facilities. ATC rates are based on a 12.2 percent return on common equity dedicated to utility plant. We account for our investment in ATC under the equity method of accounting. As of December 31, 2009, our equity investment balance in ATC was $88.4 million ($76.9 million at December 31, 2008). (See Note 6. Investment in ATC.)


Properties

We own office and service buildings, an energy control center, repair shops, and lease offices, and storerooms in various localities. Substantially allAll of our electric plant isplants are subject to mortgages, which collateralize the outstanding first mortgage bonds of Minnesota Power and SWL&P. Generally, we hold fee interest in our real properties subject only to the lien of the mortgages. Most of our electric lines are located on land not owned in fee, but are covered by appropriate easement rights or by necessary permits from governmental authorities. Wisconsin Public Power, Inc. (WPPI)WPPI Energy owns 20 percent of Boswell Unit 4. WPPI Energy has the right to use our transmission line facilities to transport its share of Boswell generation. (See Note 4. Jointly-Owned Electric Facility.)


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
11

 

Energy–Regulated UtilityREGULATED OPERATIONS (Continued)

Regulatory Matters

We are subject to the jurisdiction of various regulatory authorities. The MPUC has regulatory authority over Minnesota Power’s service area in Minnesota, retail rates, retail services, issuance of securities and other matters. The FERC has jurisdiction over the licensing of hydroelectric projects, the establishment of rates and charges for the sale of electricity for resale and transmission of electricity in interstate commerce, and certain accounting and record-keeping practices.practices and ATC. The PSCW has regulatory authority over SWL&P’s retail sales of electricity, natural gas, water, issuances of securities, and water by SWL&P.other matters. The MPUC, FERCNDPSC has jurisdiction over site and PSCW had regulatory authority over 58 percent, 10 percentroute permitting of generation and 8 percent, respectively, of our 2007 consolidated operating revenue.transmission facilities necessary for construction in North Dakota.

Electric Rates. Minnesota Power has historically designeddesigns its electric service rates based on cost of service studies under which allocations are made to the various classes of customers. Nearly all retail sales include billing adjustment clauses, which adjust electric service rates for changes in the cost of fuel and purchased energy, recovery of current and deferred conservation improvement program expenditures and recovery of certain environmental and renewable expenditures.

Information published by the Edison Electric Institute (“(Typical Bills and Average Rates Report – Summer 2007”2009 and “RankingsRankings – July 1, 2007”2009) ranked Minnesota Power as having the nintheighth lowest average retail rates out of 177 investor-owned175 utilities in the United States. WeAccording to this report, Minnesota Power had the lowest rates in Minnesota and third lowest in the region consisting of Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin.

Minnesota Power requires that all large industrial and commercial customers under contract specify the date when power is first required. Thereafter, the customer is generally billed monthly for at least the minimum power for which they contracted. These conditions are part of all contracts covering power to be supplied to new large industrial and commercial customers and to current customers as their contracts expire or are amended. All rates and other contract terms are subject to approval by appropriate regulatory authorities.

Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. The MPUC has jurisdiction over Minnesota Power’s service area in Minnesota, retail rates, retail services, issuance of securities and other matters.

2008 Rate Case. In May 2008, Minnesota Power filed a retail rate increase request with the MPUC seeking additional revenues of approximately $40 million annually; the request also sought an 11.15 percent return on equity, and a capital structure consisting of 54.8 percent equity and 45.2 percent debt. As a result of a May 2009 Order and an August 2009 Reconsideration Order, the MPUC granted Minnesota Power a revenue increase of approximately $20 million, including a return on equity of 10.74 percent and a capital structure consisting of 54.79 percent equity and 45.21 percent debt. Rates went into effect on November 1, 2009.

Interim rates, subject to refund, were in effect from August 1, 2008 through October 31, 2009. During 2009, Minnesota Power recorded a $21.7 million liability for refunds of interim rates, including interest, required to be made as a result of the May 2009 Order and the August 2009 Reconsideration Order. In 2009, $21.4 million was refunded, with a remaining $0.3 million balance to be refunded in early 2010; $7.6 million of the refunds required to be made were related to interim rates charged in 2008.

With the May 2009 Order, the MPUC also approved the stipulation and settlement agreement that affirmed the Company’s continued recovery of fuel and purchased power costs under the former base cost of fuel that was in effect prior to the retail rate filing. The transition to the former base cost of fuel began with the implementation of final rates on November 1, 2009. Any revenue impact associated with this transition will be identified in a future filing related to the Company’s fuel clause operation.

2010 Rate Case. Minnesota Power previously stated its intention to file for additional revenues to recover the costs of significant investments to ensure current and future system reliability, enhance environmental performance and bring new renewable energy to northeastern Minnesota. As a result, Minnesota Power filed a retail rate increase request with the MPUC on November 2, 2009, seeking a return on equity of 11.50 percent, a capital structure consisting of 54.29 percent equity and 45.71 percent debt, and on an annualized basis, an $81.0 million net increase in electric retail revenue.

Minnesota law allows the collection of interim rates while the MPUC processes the rate filing. On December 30, 2009, the MPUC issued an Order (the Order) authorizing $48.5 million of Minnesota Power’s November 2, 2009, interim rate increase request of $73.0 million. The MPUC cited exigent circumstances in reducing Minnesota Power’s interim rate request. Because the scope and depth of this reduction in interim rates was unprecedented, and because Minnesota law does not allow Minnesota Power to formally challenge the MPUC’s action until a final decision in the case is rendered, on January 6, 2010, Minnesota Power sent a letter to the MPUC expressing its concerns about the Order and requested that the MPUC reconsider its decision on its own motion. Minnesota Power described its belief the MPUC’s decision violates the law by prejudging the merits of the rate request prior to an evidentiary hearing and results in the confiscation of utility property. Further, the Company is concerned that the decision will have negative consequences on the environmental policy directions of the State of Minnesota by denying recovery for statutory mandates during the pendency of the rate proceeding. The MPUC has not acted in response to Minnesota Power’s letter.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
12


REGULATED OPERATIONS (Continued)
Regulatory Matters (Continued)

The rate case process requires public hearings and an evidentiary hearing before an administrative law judge, both of which are scheduled for the second quarter of 2010. A final decision on the rate request is expected in the fourth quarter. We cannot predict the final level of rates that may be approved by the MPUC, and we cannot predict whether a legal challenge to the MPUC’s interim rate decision will be forthcoming or successful.

North Dakota Wind Project. On July 7, 2009, the MPUC approved our petition seeking current cost recovery of investments and expenditures related to Bison I and associated transmission upgrades. We anticipate filing a petition with the MPUC in the first quarter of 2010 to establish customer billing rates for the approved cost recovery. Bison I is the first portion of several hundred MWs of our North Dakota Wind Project, which upon completion will fulfill the 2025 renewable energy supply requirement for our retail load. Bison I will be comprised of 33 wind turbines with a total nameplate capacity of 76 MWs, located near Center, North Dakota, and be in service in late 2010 and 2011.

On September 29, 2009, the NDPSC authorized site construction for Bison I. On October 2, 2009, Minnesota Power filed a route permit application with the NDPSC for a 22 mile, 230 kV Bison I transmission line that will connect Bison I to the DC transmission line at the Square Butte Substation in Center, North Dakota. An order is expected in the first quarter 2010.

On December 31, 2009, we purchased an existing 250 kV DC transmission line from Square Butte for $69.7 million. The 465-mile transmission line runs from Center, North Dakota to Duluth, Minnesota. We expect to use this line to transport increasing amounts of wind energy from North Dakota while gradually phasing out coal-based electricity currently being delivered to our system over this transmission line from Square Butte’s lignite coal-fired generating unit. We expect that the Square Butte generating unit will continue to be fully utilized and supplied with lignite coal by BNI Coal, as Minnkota Power is expected to take Square Butte generation not utilized by Minnesota Power. Acquisition of this transmission line was approved by an MPUC order dated December 21, 2009. In addition, the FERC issued an order on November 24, 2009, authorizing acquisition of the transmission facilities and conditionally accepting, upon compliance and other filings, the proposed tariff revisions, interconnection agreement and other related agreements.

Integrated Resource Plan. On October 5, 2009, Minnesota Power filed with the MPUC its 2010 Integrated Resource Plan, a comprehensive estimate of future capacity needs within Minnesota Power’s service territory. Minnesota Power does not anticipate the need for new base load generation within the Minnesota Power service territory over the next 15 years, and plans to meet estimated future customer demand while achieving:

·Increased system flexibility to adapt to volatile business cycles and varied future industrial load scenarios;
·Reductions in the emission of GHGs (primarily carbon dioxide); and
·Compliance with mandated renewable energy standards.

To achieve these objectives over the coming years, we plan to reshape our generation portfolio by adding 300 to 500 megawatts of renewable energy to our generation mix, and exploring options to incorporate peaking or intermediate resources. Our 76 MW Bison I Wind Project in North Dakota is expected to be in service in late 2010 and 2011.

We project average annual long-term growth of approximately one percent in electric usage over the next 15 years. We will also focus on conservation and demand side management to meet the energy savings goals established in Minnesota legislation.

Emission Reduction Plans. We have made investments in pollution control equipment at our Boswell Unit 3 generating unit that reduces particulates, SO2, NOx and mercury emissions to meet future federal and state requirements. This equipment was placed in service in November 2009. During the construction phase, the MPUC authorized a cash return on construction work in progress in lieu of AFUDC, and this amount was collected through a current cost recovery rider. Our 2010 rate case proposes to move this project from a current cost recovery rider to base rates.

The environmental regulatory requirements for Taconite Harbor Unit 3 are pending approval of the Minnesota Regional Haze implementation by the EPA. We are evaluating compliance requirements for this Unit. Environmental retrofits at Laskin and Taconite Harbor Units 1 and 2 have been completed and are in-service.

Boswell NOX Reduction Plan. In September 2008, we submitted to the MPCA and MPUC a $92 million environmental initiative proposing cost recovery for expenditures relating to NOX emission reductions from Boswell Units 1, 2, and 4. The Boswell NOX Reduction Plan is expected to significantly reduce NOX emissions from these units. In conjunction with the NOX reduction, we plan to make an efficiency improvement to our existing turbine/generator at Boswell Unit 4 adding approximately 60 MWs of total output. The Boswell 1, 2 and 4, selective non-catalytic reduction NOX controls are currently in service, while the Boswell 4 low NOX burners and turbine efficiency projects are anticipated to be in service in late 2010. Our 2010 rate case seeks recovery for this project in base rates.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
13


REGULATED OPERATIONS (Continued)
Regulatory Matters (Continued)

Transmission. We have an approved cost recovery rider in-place for certain transmission expenditures, and our current billing factor was approved by the MPUC in June 2009. The billing factor allows us to charge our retail customers on a current basis for the costs of constructing certain transmission facilities plus a return on the capital invested. Our 2010 rate case proposes to move completed transmission projects from the current cost recovery rider to base rates.

Conservation Improvement Program (CIP). Minnesota requires electric utilities to spend a minimum of 1.5 percent of gross operating revenues from service provided in the state on energy CIPs each year. These investments are recovered from retail customers through a billing adjustment and amounts included in retail base rates. The MPUC allows utilities to accumulate, in a deferred account for future cost recovery, all CIP expenditures, as well as a carrying charge on the deferred account balance. Minnesota’s Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 introduced, in addition to minimum spending requirements, an energy-saving goal of 1.5 percent of gross annual retail electric energy sales by 2010. In June 2008, a biennial filing was submitted for 2009 through 2010, and subsequently approved by the OES. For future program years, Minnesota Power will build upon current successful CIPs in an effort to meet the newly established 1.5 percent energy-saving goal. Minnesota Power’s CIP investment goal was $4.6 million for 2009 ($3.7 million for 2008; $3.2 million for 2007), with actual spending of $5.5 million in 2009 ($4.8 million in 2008; $3.9 million in 2007).

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The FERC has jurisdiction over our wholesale electric servicethe licensing of hydroelectric projects, the establishment of rates and operations. charges for the sale of electricity for resale and transmission of electricity in interstate commerce, certain accounting and record-keeping practices and ATC.

Minnesota Power’s hydroelectric facilities, which are locatednon-affiliated municipal customers consist of 16 municipalities in Minnesota and 1 private utility in Wisconsin. SWL&P, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ALLETE, is also a customer of Minnesota Power. In 2008, Minnesota Power entered into new contracts with these municipal customers which transitioned customers to formula-based rates, allowing rates to be adjusted annually based on changes in cost. In February 2009, the FERC approved our municipal contracts which expire December 31, 2013. Under the formula-based rates provision, wholesale rates are also licensed byset at the FERC.beginning of the year based on expected costs and provide for a true-up calculation for actual costs. Wholesale rate increases totaling approximately $6 million and $10 million annually were implemented on February 1, 2009 and January 1, 2010, respectively, with approximately $6 million of additional revenues under the true-up provision accrued in 2009, which will be billed in 2010.

In August 2005, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) was signed into law, which repealed PUHCA 1935 and enacted PUHCA 2005. PUHCA 2005 gives FERC certain authority over books and records of public utility holding companies and their affiliates. It also addresses FERC review and authorization of the allocation of costs for non-power goods, or administrative or management services when requested by a holding company system or state commission. In addition, EPAct 2005 directs the FERC to issue certain rules addressing electricity reliability, investment in energy infrastructure, fuel diversity for electric generation, promotion of energy efficiency and wise energy use. The FERC is currently in the process of implementing EPAct 2005. These include (among others):

·rulemaking for long-term transmission rights;
·dockets pertaining to the development and certification of electric reliability organizations, including delegated authority to regional entities for proposing and enforcing reliability standards;
·rules specifying the form of applications for federal construction permits to be issued in the exercise of federal backstop siting authority for transmission projects;
·rulemaking requiring unregulated transmitting utilities to provide open access to their transmission systems;
·various rulemakings regarding the consideration of merger applications under the revised Federal Power Act Section 203;
·a U.S. Department of Energy study/report on the benefits of economic dispatch and a report on recommendations of regional joint boards that considered economic dispatch;
·rulemaking to facilitate transmission market transparency; and
·the energy market manipulation rulemaking.

We continue to monitor FERC activity in these and other proceedings.

On December 28, 2007, we submitted a filing with the FERC seeking to increase electric rates for our wholesale customers. On February 8, 2008, the FERC approved our wholesale rate filing. Our wholesale customers consist of 16 municipalities in Minnesota and two private utilities in Wisconsin, including SWL&P. The FERC authorized an average 10 percent increase for wholesale municipal customers, a 12.5 percent increase for SWL&P, and an overall return on equity of 11.25 percent. The rate increase will go into effect on March 1, 2008, and on an annualized basis, the filing will generate approximately $7.5 million in additional revenue.

Municipal and Wholesale Customers. Minnesota Power has contracts with 16 Minnesota municipalities receiving wholesale electric service. One contract expires April 2008 (31,000 MWh purchased in 2007), while the other 15 are for service through at least January 2011. In 2007, these municipal customers purchased 893,000 MWh from Minnesota Power. Minnesota Power also has a contract for wholesale service with Dahlberg Light & Power Company (Dahlberg) in Wisconsin. Dahlberg purchased 115,000 MWh in 2007.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
12



Energy–Regulated Utility (Continued)
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Continued)

Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (MISO). Minnesota Power and SWL&P are members of MISO. Minnesota Power and SWL&P retain ownership of their respective transmission assets and control area functions, but their transmission network is under the regional operational control of MISO, and they take and provide transmission service under MISO open access transmission tariff. MISO continues its efforts to standardize rates, terms and conditions of transmission service over its broad region, encompassing all or parts of 15 states and one Canadian province, and over 100,000 MW of generating capacity.

Mid-Continent Area Power Pool (MAPP). Minnesota Power also participates in MAPP, a power pool operating in parts of eight states in the Upper Midwest and in two Canadian provinces. MAPP functions include a regional transmission committee and a generation reserve-sharing pool. Minnesota Power is also a member of the Midwest Reliability Organization that was established as a regional reliability council within the North American Electric Reliability Council on January 1, 2005.

Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. Minnesota Power’s retail rates are based on a 1994 MPUC retail rate order that allows for an 11.6 percent return on common equity dedicated to utility plant. Minnesota Power may file a request to increase rates for its retail utility operations in mid-2008. Retail rates are being adjusted without a rate proceeding to reflect recovery of costs related to the AREA Plan, the Boswell 3 Environmental Improvement Plan (see AREA and Boswell Unit 3 Emission Reduction Plans), transmission investments and renewable investments.

Integrated Resource Plan. On October 31, 2007, Minnesota Power filed its Integrated Resource Plan (IRP), a comprehensive estimate of future capacity needs within the Minnesota Power service territory. Minnesota Power believes it can meet the estimated future customer demand for the next decade while achieving real reductions in the emission of greenhouse gases (primarily carbon dioxide).
Minnesota Power plans to meet expected loads through approximately 2020 by adding a significant amount of renewable generation and some supporting peaking generation. We do not plan to add new coal generation or enter into long-term power purchase agreements from coal-based generation resources without a greenhouse gas solution. We plan to add 300 to 500 megawatts of carbon-minimizing renewable energy to our generation mix. Besides the additional generation from renewable sources, Minnesota Power anticipates future supply will come from a combination of sources, including:
·"As-needed" peaking and intermediate generation facilities;
·Expiration of wholesale contracts presently in place;
·Short-term market purchases;
·Improved efficiency of existing generation and power delivery assets; and
·Expanded conservation and demand-side management initiatives.

We do not anticipate the need for new base load system generation within the Minnesota Power service territory through approximately 2020, and we project a one percent average annual growth in electric usage from our existing customers over that time frame.

Large Power Contracts. In 2006, a contract for approximately 70 MW was executed with PolyMet Mining, a new customer planning to start a copper, nickel and precious metals (non-ferrous) mining operation in late 2008. If PolyMet Mining receives all necessary environmental permits and achieves start-up, the contract will be fully implemented and would run through at least 2018. In April 2007, the MPUC approved our contract with PolyMet Mining.

In June 2007, a contract was executed with Mesabi Nugget, a company currently constructing an iron nugget facility near Hoyt Lakes, Minnesota. Iron nuggets, which typically consist of more than 94 percent iron (compared to taconite pellets at 63-65 percent iron), are ideal in meeting the requirements of electric-arc furnaces producing steel. On February 7, 2008, the MPUC held a hearing on the contract and adopted a motion approving the contract, subject to the issuance of a written order. Mesabi Nugget has received all necessary permits to begin construction and operations in 2008 and would be a 15 MW customer with the potential for further load growth. The Mesabi Nugget contract would run through at least 2017.

A new contract with Blandin Paper was approved by the MPUC on February 4, 2008. The new contract carries forward the same contract term, cancellation provision and take-or-pay provisions of the prior contract and only changed the demand nomination feature.

In February 2008, United States Steel announced its intent to restart a pellet line at its Keewatin Taconite processing facility. This pellet line, which has been idled since 1980, would be restarted and updated as part of a $300 million investment. It is anticipated that this will bring approximately 3.6 million tons of additional pellet making capability to Northeastern Minnesota by 2011, pending successful approval of environmental permitting.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
13


Energy–Regulated Utility (Continued)
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (Continued)

AREA and Boswell Unit 3 Emission Reduction Plans. In May 2006, the MPUC approved our filing for current cost recovery of expenditures to reduce emissions to meet pending federal requirements at Taconite Harbor and Laskin under the AREA Plan. The AREA Plan approval allows Minnesota Power to recover Minnesota jurisdictional costs for SO2, NOX and mercury emission reductions made at these facilities without a rate proceeding. Current cost recovery from retail customers which include a return on investment and recovery of incremental expense. The AREA Plan is expected to significantly reduce emissions from Taconite Harbor and Laskin, while maintaining a reliable and reasonably-priced energy supply to meet the needs of our customers. We believe that control and abatement technologies applicable to these plants have matured to the point where further significant air emission reductions can be attained in a relatively cost-effective manner. Cost recovery filings are required to be made 90 days prior to the anticipated in-service date for the equipment at each unit, with rate recovery beginning the month following the in-service date.

Minnesota Power has completed installation of new equipment at Laskin and current cost recovery of AREA Plan costs has begun. The first of three Taconite Harbor unit installations was completed and placed back in-service in June 2007, with current cost recovery began in July 2007. We anticipate cost recovery on the other Taconite Harbor units once work is completed and the units have been placed back in service, which is expected in late 2008. As of December 31, 2007, we have spent $36 million of the anticipated $60 million in AREA Plan expenditures.

In May 2006, Minnesota Power announced plans to make emission reduction investments at our Boswell Unit 3 generating unit. Plans include reductions of particulate, SO2, NOX and mercury emissions to meet pending federal and state requirements. In late March 2007, the Boswell Unit 3 project received the necessary construction permits. On October 26, 2007, the MPUC issued a written order approving Minnesota Power’s petition for current cost recovery for the Boswell Unit 3 emission reduction plan with some minor modifications and additional reporting requirements. MPUC approval authorized a cash return on construction work in progress during the construction phase in lieu of AFUDC-Equity and allows for a return on investment and current cost recovery of incremental expenses once the unit is placed into service in late 2009. On December 26, 2007, the MPUC approved Boswell Unit 3’s rate adjustment for 2008. As of December 31, 2007, we have spent $89 million of the anticipated $200 million in Boswell Unit 3 emission reduction plan expenditures.

Conservation Improvement Program (CIP). Minnesota requires electric utilities to spend a minimum of 1.5 percent of gross operating revenues from service provided in the state on energy CIP’s each year. These investments are recovered from retail customers through a billing adjustment and amounts included in retail base rates. The MPUC allows utilities to accumulate, in a deferred account for future cost recovery, all CIP expenditures, as well as a carrying charge on the deferred account balance. The Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 introduced, in addition to minimum spending requirements, an energy-saving goal of 1.5 percent of gross annual retail electric energy sales by 2010. In May 2007, an abbreviated filing was submitted and subsequently approved by the MPUC, allowing the continuation of Minnesota Power’s 2006-2007 CIP biennial and related goals for one additional year, through 2008. For future program years, Minnesota Power will build upon current successful CIP’s in an effort to meet the newly established 1.5 percent energy-saving goal. Minnesota Power’s CIP investment goal was $3.2 million for 2007 ($3.2 million for 2006 and 2005), with actual spending of $3.9 million in 2007 ($3.8 million in 2006; $3.6 million in 2005).

Public Service Commission of Wisconsin. SWL&P’s current retail rates are based on a December 2006 PSCW retail rate order that became effective January 1, 2007, and allows for an 11.1 percent return on common equity. Current rates reflect a 2.8 percent average increase in retail utility rates for SWL&P customers (a 2.8 percent increase in electric rates, a 1.4 percent increase in natural gas rates and an 8.6 percent increase in water rates). SWL&P originally requested an average increase in retail utility rates of 5.2 percent in its 2006 application. The approved rates were lower than originally requested due to the subsequent removal of costs for a new water tower and electric substation from the original request. Both of these projects are now estimated to be in service in late 2008 because of delays in obtaining all the necessary construction approvals. SWL&P anticipates filing for another rate increase request in 2008 that would go into effect in 2009. Previously, SWL&P’s retail rates were based on a 2005 PSCW retail order that allowed for an 11.7 percent return on common equity.

Minnesota Legislation

Renewable Energy. In February 2007, Minnesota enacted a law requiring Minnesota Power to generate or procure 25 percent of our energy through renewable energy sources by 2025. The legislation also requires Minnesota Power to meet interim milestones of 12 percent by 2012, 17 percent by 2016, and 20 percent by 2020. The legislation allows the MPUC to modify or delay a standard obligation if implementation will cause significant ratepayer cost or technical reliability issues. If a utility is not in compliance with a standard, the MPUC may order the utility to construct facilities, purchase renewable energy or purchase renewable energy credits. Minnesota Power was developing and making renewable supply additions as part of its generation planning strategy prior to this legislation and this activity continues. Minnesota Power believes it will meet the requirements of this legislation.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
14


Energy–Regulated Utility (Continued)
Minnesota Legislation (Continued)

Greenhouse Gas Reduction. In 2007, Minnesota passed legislation establishing non-binding targets for carbon dioxide reductions. This legislation establishes a goal of reducing statewide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across all sectors reducing those emissions to a level at least 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2015, at least 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and at least 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. Minnesota is also participating in the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Accord, a regional effort to develop a multi-state approach to GHG emission reductions.

We cannot predict the nature or timing of any additional GHG legislation or regulation. Although we are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs could have a material impact on our financial results.

Competition

We believe the overall impact of the EPAct 2005 on the electric utility industry has been positive and are continuing to evaluate the effects on our business as this legislation is being implemented. This federal legislation is designed to bring more certainty to energy markets in which ALLETE participates, as well as to provide investment incentives for energy efficiency, energy infrastructure (such as electric transmission lines), and energy production. The FERC has the responsibility of implementing numerous new standards as a result of the promulgation of the EPAct 2005. To date, the FERC’s regulatory efforts under the EPAct 2005 appear to be generally positive for the utility industry.

Public Service Commission of Wisconsin. The PUHCA 1935 repeal may also allowPSCW has regulatory authority over SWL&P’s retail sales of electricity, natural gas, water, issuances of securities, and other matters.

SWL&P’s current retail rates are based on a December 2008 PSCW retail rate order that became effective January 1, 2009, and allows for an acceleration11.1 percent return on equity. The new rates reflected a 3.5 percent average increase in retail utility rates for SWL&P customers (a 13.4 percent increase in water rates, a 4.7 percent increase in electric rates, and a 0.6 percent decrease in natural gas rates). On an annualized basis, the rate increase will generate approximately $3 million in additional revenue.

North Dakota Public Service Commission. The NDPSC has jurisdiction over site and route permitting of merger activity,generation and transmission facilities necessary for construction in North Dakota.

On September 29, 2009, the NDPSC authorized site construction for Bison I. On October 2, 2009, Minnesota Power filed a route permit application with the NDPSC for the 22 mile, 230 kV Bison I transmission line that will connect Bison I to the DC transmission line at the Square Butte Substation in Center, North Dakota. An order is expected in the first quarter 2010.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
14


Regional Organizations

Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. Minnesota Power and SWL&P are members of MISO, a regional transmission organization. While Minnesota Power and SWL&P retain ownership of their respective transmission assets and control area functions, their transmission network is under the regional operational control of MISO. Minnesota Power and SWL&P take and provide transmission service under the MISO open access transmission tariff. MISO continues its efforts to standardize rates, terms, and conditions of transmission service over its broad region, encompassing all or parts of 15 states and one Canadian province, and over 100,000 MWs of generating capacity.

In January 2009, MISO launched the new Ancillary Services Market (ASM), aimed at establishing a market for energy and operating reserves. In May 2008, in preparation of the new market, Minnesota Power and the other investor-owned utilities in Minnesota prepared a joint filing seeking MPUC approval for the authority to account for costs and revenues that resulted from the institution of the ASM market. The MPUC conditionally approved Minnesota investor-owned utility participation in the MISO ASM market in an order dated March 17, 2009. Under this approval, recovery of ASM charges is subject to refund pending the MPUC’s review of our February 5, 2010 filing which documents the cost effectiveness of ASM. The utilities must validate ASM cost recovery to date, as well as spawn moveson-going recovery, through a review of the cost and benefits of ASM participation. The Company cannot predict the outcome of this proceeding.

Mid-Continent Area Power Pool (MAPP). Minnesota Power also participates in MAPP, a power pool operating in parts of nine states in the Upper Midwest and in two Canadian provinces. MAPP functions include a regional transmission committee that is charged with planning for the future transmission needs of the region as well as ensuring that all electric industry participants have equal access to the transmission system.

Minnesota Legislation

Renewable Energy. In February 2007, Minnesota enacted a law requiring 25 percent of Minnesota Power’s total retail energy sales in Minnesota come from renewable energy sources by state regulators2025. The law also requires Minnesota Power to adopt PUHCA-like regulations, although both events are speculativemeet interim milestones of 12 percent by 2012, 17 percent by 2016, and difficult20 percent by 2020. Minnesota Power has identified a plan to predict. meet the renewable goals set by Minnesota and has included this in the most recent filing of the IRP with the MPUC. The law allows the MPUC to modify or delay a standard obligation if implementation will cause significant ratepayer cost or technical reliability issues. If a utility is not in compliance with a standard, the MPUC may order the utility to construct facilities, purchase renewable energy or purchase renewable energy credits. Minnesota Power was developing and making renewable supply additions as part of its generation planning strategy prior to the enactment of this law and this activity continues.

Greenhouse Gas Reduction. In 2007, Minnesota passed legislation establishing non-binding targets for carbon dioxide reductions. This legislation establishes a goal of reducing statewide GHG emissions across all sectors to a level at least 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2015, at least 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and at least 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. Minnesota is also participating in the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord, a regional effort to develop a multi-state approach to GHG emission reductions.

We cannot predict the timingnature or substancetiming of any futureadditional GHG legislation or regulation. Although we are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs could have a material impact on our financial results.


Competition

Retail energy sales in Minnesota and Wisconsin are made to customers in assigned service territories. As a result, most retail electric customers in Minnesota do not have the ability to choose their electric supplier. Large energy users outside of a municipality of 2 MW and above may be allowed to choose a supplier upon MPUC approval. Minnesota Power serves 10 Large Power facilities over 10 MW, none of which have engaged in a competitive rate process. Two customers within the past 15 years that are over 2 MW but less than 10 MW under our Large Light and Power tariff have participated in a competitive rate process with neighboring electric cooperatives but were ultimately retained by Minnesota Power. Retail electric and natural gas customers in Wisconsin do not have the ability to choose their energy supplier. In both states, however, electricity may compete with other forms of energy. Customers may also choose to generate their own electricity, or substitute other fuels for their manufacturing processes.

For the year ended December 31, 2009, 8 percent of the Company’s energy sales were sales to municipal customers in Minnesota and a private utility in Wisconsin by contract under a formula-based rate approved by FERC. These customers have the right to seek an energy supply from any wholesale electric service provider upon contract expiration.

The FERC has continued with its efforts to promote a more competitive wholesale market through open-access transmission and other means. As a result, our sales to Other Power Suppliers and our purchases to supply our retail and wholesale load are in the competitive market.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
15


Franchises

Minnesota Power holds franchises to construct and maintain an electric distribution and transmission system in 9193 cities and towns located within its electric service territory. SWL&P holds similar franchises for electric, natural gas and/or water systems in 15 cities and towns within its service territory. The remaining cities and towns served by us do not require a franchise to operate within their boundaries. Our exclusive service territories are established by state regulatory agencies.


Energy – Nonregulated Energy OperationsINVESTMENTS AND OTHER

ALLETE’s nonregulated energy operations includeInvestments and Other is comprised primarily of BNI Coal, our coal mining activitiesoperations in North Dakota, and ALLETE Properties, our Florida real estate investment. This segment also includes a small amount of non-rate base generation, approximately 50 MW7,000 acres of nonregulated generationland available-for-sale in Minnesota, and Minnesota land sales.earnings on cash and investments.

BNI Coal

BNI Coal operates a lignite mine in North Dakota. BNI Coal is a low-cost supplier of lignite in North Dakota, producing about 4 million tons annually. Two electric generating cooperatives, Minnkota Power and Square Butte, presently consume virtually all of BNI Coal’s production of lignite under cost-plus, a fixed-feefixed fee coal supply agreements extending through 2026. (See Item 1 - Fuel1. Business – Long-Term Purchased Power and Note 8.11. Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies.) The mining process disturbs and reclaims approximately 210between 200 and 250 acres per year. Laws require that the reclaimed land be at least as productive as it was prior to mining. The average cost to reclaim one acre of land is about $15,000,approximately $35,000; however, depending on conditions, it could be as high as $30,000.significantly higher. Reclamation costs are included in the cost of coal passed through to customers. With lignite reserves of an estimated 600 million tons, BNI Coal has ample capacity to expand production.

Nonregulated generation consists of approximately 50 MW of generation. In 2007, we sold 0.2 million MWh of nonregulated generation (0.2 million in 2006; 1.5 million in 2005). Effective January 1, 2006, Taconite Harbor was redirected from our Nonregulated Energy Operations segment to our Regulated Utility segment in accordance with an update to the Company’s 2004 Resource Plan, as approved by the MPUC.

Nonregulated Power Supply
Unit
No.
Year
Installed
Year
Acquired
Net
Capability
    MW
Steam    
Wood-Fired (a)
    
Cloquet Energy Center52001200122
in Cloquet, MN    
Rapids Energy Center (b)
6 & 71969, 1980200029
in Grand Rapids, MN    
Hydro    
Conventional Run-of-River    
Rapids Energy Center (b)
4 & 5191720001
in Grand Rapids, MN    

(a)Supplemented by coal.
(b)The net generation is primarily dedicated to the needs of one customer.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
15


Energy – Nonregulated Energy Operations (Continued)

Taconite Harbor. Taconite Harbor facility has operated as a rate-based asset within the Minnesota retail jurisdiction since January 1, 2006. Prior to January 1, 2006, the Taconite Harbor facility was operated as nonregulated generation facility. (See Energy – Regulated Utility – Minnesota Public Utilities Commission.)

Rainy River Energy has been engaged in the acquisition and development of nonregulated generation and wholesale power marketing. (See Note 10.)

Rainy River Energy Corporation - Wisconsin continues to study the feasibility of the construction of a natural gas-fired electric generating facility in northwestern Wisconsin.

Minnesota Land. We have about 15,000 acres of land in northern Minnesota, available for sale. We acquired the land in 2001 when we purchased Taconite Harbor from LTV Steel Mining Co.


Energy – Investment in ATC

At December 31, 2007, we had an approximate 8 percent ownership interest in ATC. ATC is a Wisconsin-based public utility that owns and maintains electric transmission assets in parts of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Illinois. ATC provides transmission service under rates regulated by the FERC that are set in accordance with the FERC’s policy of establishing the independent operation and ownership of, and investment in, transmission facilities. (See Note 6.) Our Wisconsin subsidiary, Rainy River Energy Corporation - Wisconsin, has invested $60 million in ATC.


Real EstateProperties

ALLETE Properties isrepresents our Florida real estate business that has operated in Florida since 1991. ALLETE Properties acquires real estate portfoliosinvestment. Our current strategy for the assets is to complete and large land tracts at bulk prices, adds value throughmaintain key entitlements and/orand infrastructure improvements without requiring significant additional investment, and resellssell the propertyportfolio over time or in bulk transactions. ALLETE intends to developers, end-userssell its Florida land assets at reasonable prices when opportunities arise, and investors.reinvest the proceeds in its growth initiatives. ALLETE Properties is focused on acquiring vacant land indoes not intend to acquire additional Florida and other parts of the southeast United States. Management at ALLETE Properties uses their business relationships, understanding of real estate markets and expertise in the land development and sales processes to provide revenue and earnings growth opportunities to ALLETE.estate.

ALLETE Properties is headquartered in Fort Myers, Florida, the location of its southwest Florida regional office. We also have a regional office in Palm Coast, Florida, which oversees northeast Florida operations.

Southwest Florida operations consist of land sales and a third-party brokerage business, with limited land development activities. Inventory includes residential and non-residential land located in Lehigh Acres and Cape Coral. The inventory represents the remaining properties acquired in 1991 from the Resolution Trust Corporation and in 1999 from Avatar Properties, Inc. The operation also generates rental income from a 186,000 square foot retail shopping center located in Winter Haven, Florida. The center is anchored by Macy’s and Belk’s department stores, along with Staples.

Northeast Florida operations focus on land sales and development activities. Development activities involve mainly zoning, permitting, platting and master infrastructure construction. Development costs are financed through a combination of community development district bonds, bank loans and internally-generated funds. Our threetwo major development projects includeare Town Center atand Palm Coast Palm Coast Park andPark. Ormond Crossings, a third major project that is currently in the planning stage, received land use approvals in December 2006. However, due to a change in Florida law that became effective in July 2009, those approvals are being revised. It is anticipated that the City of Ormond Beach, FL will approve a new Development Agreement for Ormond Crossings in the first quarter of 2010. The new agreement will facilitate development of the project as currently planned. Separately, Lake Swamp wetland mitigation bank was permitted on land that was previously part of Ormond Crossings.

Town Center. Town Center, which is located in the cityCity of Palm Coast, is a mixed-use development with a neo-traditional downtown core area. Surrounded by major arterial roads, including Interstate 95, Town Center is adjacent to the Florida Hospital-Flagler, the Flagler County Airport and the Flagler Palm Coast High School. Sites have also been set aside for a new city hall, a community center, an arts and entertainment center, and other public uses. At build-out, Town Center is expected to include approximately 3,200 residential units including lodging rooms and assisted living units, and 3.8 million square feet of various types of non-residential space. Market conditions will determine how quickly Town Center builds out.

Construction of the major infrastructure improvements at Town Center was substantially complete at the end of 2006. Improvements include 3.6 miles of roads, a master storm water management system, underground utilities, street lights, sidewalks, bike paths, and extensive landscaping. To date, our marketing program has targeted a blend of office, retail commercial, residential, mixed-use and institutional project developers. In April 2007, Palm Coast Center, LLC and Target Corporation closed on a 52 acre commercial site and immediately began construction of a 424,000 square foot retail power center. An 85,000 square foot retail center anchored by a Publix grocery store opened in 2007.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
16


Real Estate (Continued)

Pending land sales under contract for properties at2008. At build-out, Town Center totaled $18.9is expected to include approximately 3,000 residential units and 4.0 million at December 31, 2007. Wesquare feet of various types of non-residential space. Sites have the opportunity to receive participation revenue as part of one of these sales contracts.

In March 2005, thealso been set aside for a new city hall, a community center, an art and entertainment center, and other public uses. Market conditions will determine how quickly Town Center District issued $26.4 million of tax-exempt, 6% Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 2005, which are payable through property tax assessments on the land owners over 31 years (by May 1, 2036). The bonds were primarily used to pay for the construction of a portion of the major infrastructure improvements at Town Center. (See Note 8.)builds out.

Palm Coast Park. Palm Coast Park, which is located in the cityCity of Palm Coast, is a 4,700-acre mixed-use development bisected by a six-mile segmentdevelopment. Construction of U.S. Highway 1 about one mile from an existing Interstate 95 interchange and bounded on the west by a Florida East Coast Railroad line. Majormajor infrastructure constructionimprovements at Palm Coast Park was substantially complete byat the end of 2007. At build-out, Palm Coast Park is expected to include approximately 4,000 residential units, 3.23.0 million square feet of various types of non-residential space and certain public facilities. Market conditions will determine how quickly Palm Coast Park builds out. Land sales at Palm Coast Park commenced in August 2006, and in June 2007, LRCF Palm Coast, LLC (a subsidiary of Lowe Enterprises) closed on the first phase of its Sawmill Creek project.

Pending land sales under contract for properties at Palm Coast Park totaled $31.9 million at December 31, 2007. We have the opportunity to receive participation revenue as part of these sales contracts.

In May 2006, the Palm Coast Park District issued $31.8 million of tax-exempt, 5.7% Special Assessment Bonds, Series 2006, which are payable through property tax assessments on the land owners over 31 years (by May 1, 2037). The bonds were primarily used to pay for the construction of the major infrastructure improvements at Palm Coast Park and to mitigate traffic and environmental impacts. (See Note 8.)

ALLETE Properties is funding certain platting and permitting costs; however, the majority of ongoing and future development costs may be funded by Palm Coast Park District bond proceeds. We anticipate that the Palm Coast Park District will need to issue additional bonds to pay for the development of retail commercial, office and industrial lots.

Ormond Crossings. Ormond Crossings, is an approximately 6,000-acre mixed-use development thatwhich is located in both the cityCity of Ormond Beach, in Volusia County and unincorporated Flagler County. The site is bisected by Interstate 95 and a Florida East Coast Railroad line and is adjacent to the city of Ormond Beach airport. Ormond Crossings has three miles of frontage on the east and west sides of Interstate 95 and will have two main entrances each within a mile from an existing U.S. Highway 1 and Interstate 95 interchange.

3,000-acre, mixed-use development. Planning, engineering design, and permitting of the master infrastructure are ongoing. Density of the residential and non-residential components of the project will be determined based on market and traffic mitigation cost considerations. We estimate the first two phases ofAt build out, Ormond Crossings willis expected to include 2,500–3,200approximately 3,000 residential units, and 2.5–3.55.0 million square feet of various types of non-residential space.

space and public facilities. Market conditions will determine when Ormond Crossings will also include an approximately 2,000be built out. We do not expect any development activity at Ormond Crossings in 2010.

Lake Swamp. Lake Swamp wetland mitigation bank is a 1,900 acre regionally significant wetlands mitigation bank that is expected to be fullywas permitted by the St. Johns River Water Management District in 2008 and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers by mid-2009.in December 2009. Wetland mitigation credits will be used at Ormond Crossings and will also be available for sale to developers of other developers. Market conditions will determine how quickly Ormond Crossings builds out.projects that are located in the bank’s service area. Applications are currently being prepared to expand the bank by approximately 1,000 acres.

See Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Outlook for more information on ALLETE Properties’ land holdings.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
16


INVESTMENTS AND OTHER (Continued)

Other Land.Seller Financing. In addition to the major development projects, land inventories in Florida include approximately 1,600 acres of other property. Several smaller development projects are under way to plat these properties, add infrastructure, modify and enhance existing entitlements.

Property sale prices may vary depending on location; physical characteristics; parcel size; whether parcels are sold as raw land, partially developed land or individually developed lots; degree and status of entitlement; and whether the land is ultimately purchased for residential or non-residential development. Certain contracts allow us to receive participation revenue from land sales to third parties if various formula-based criteria are achieved.

Seller Financing

ALLETE Properties sometimesoccasionally provides seller financing.financing to certain qualified buyers. At December 31, 2007,2009, outstanding finance receivables were $15.3$12.9 million, with maturities up to 53 years. These finance receivables accrue interest at market-based rates and are collateralized by the financed properties.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
17


Real Estate (Continued)

Regulation

Regulation.A substantial portion of our development properties in Florida are subject to federal, state and local regulations, and restrictions that may impose significant costs or limitations on our ability to develop the properties. Much of our property is vacant land and some is located in areas where development may affect the natural habitats of various protected wildlife species or in sensitive environmental areas such as wetlands.

Development of real property in Florida entails an extensive approval process involving overlapping regulatory jurisdictions. Real estate projects must generally comply with the provisions of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act (Growth Management Act), which requires counties and cities to adopt comprehensive plans guiding and controlling future real property development in their respective jurisdictions. In addition, development projects that exceed certain specified regulatory thresholds require approval of a comprehensive DRI application. The DRI review process includes an evaluation of a project’s impact on the environment, infrastructure and government services, and requires the involvement of numerous state and local environmental, zoning and community development agencies. Compliance with the Growth Management Act and the DRI process is usually lengthy and costly.Non-Rate Base Generation

CompetitionAs of December 31, 2009, non-rate base generation consists of 30 MWs of generation at Rapids Energy Center. For January through October non-rate base generation also included Cloquet Energy Center (23 MWs of generation), which was transferred to rate base as a result of our 2008 rate order. In 2009, we sold 0.2 million MWh of non-rate base generation (0.2 million in 2008 and 2007).

The real estate industry is very competitive. Our properties are located in Florida. We are focused on acquiring additional vacant land in Florida and other parts of the southeast United States. This region continues to attract competitive real estate operations at many different levels in the land development pipeline. Competitors include local and out-of-state institutional investors, real estate investment trusts and real estate operators, among others. These competitors, both public and private, compete with us in seeking real estate for acquisition, resources for development and sales to prospective buyers. Consequently, competitive market conditions may influence the timing and profitability of our real estate transactions.
Non-Rate Base Power SupplyUnit No.
Year
Installed
Year
Acquired
Net
Capability (MW)
Steam    
Biomass (a)
    
Cloquet Energy Center (b)
52001200122
    in Cloquet, MN    
Rapids Energy Center (c)
6 & 71969, 1980200029
in Grand Rapids, MN    
Hydro    
Conventional Run-of-River    
Rapids Energy Center (c)
4 & 5191720001
in Grand Rapids, MN    

(a)Cloquet Energy Center is supplemented by natural gas; Rapids Energy Center is supplemented by coal.
(b)Transferred to Regulated Operations as a result of our 2008 rate order on November 1, 2009.
(c)The net generation is primarily dedicated to the needs of one customer.


Other

Our Other segment consistsMinnesota Land. We have approximately 7,000 acres of investmentsland available-for-sale in emerging technologies related toMinnesota. We acquired the electric utility industry, and earnings on cash and short-term investments.

Emerging Technology Portfolio. As part of our emerging technology portfolio,land in 2001 when we have several minority investments in venture capital funds and direct investments in privately-held, start-up companies. Since 1985, we have invested in start-up companies, developing technologies that may be utilized bypurchased the electric utility industry. We are committed to invest up to an additional $1.0 million in 2008 and do not have plans to make any additional investments. The investments were first made through emerging technology funds (Funds) initiated by other electric utilities and us. Due to the distribution of investments from matured venture capital funds, we also have direct investments in privately-held companies. Companies in the Funds’ portfolios may complete IPOs, and the Funds may, in some instances, distribute publicly tradable shares to us. Some restrictions on sales may apply, including, but not limited to, underwriter lock-up periods that typically extend for 180 days following an IPO. (See Note 6.)Taconite Harbor generating facilities.

Discontinued Operations. In the past three years, we also had business operations in the water and telecommunications industries. (See Note 13.)

Sale of Water Services Businesses. In early 2005, we completed the exit from our Water Services businesses with the sale of our wastewater assets in Georgia.

Sale of Enventis Telecom. In December 2005, we sold all the stock of our telecommunications subsidiary, Enventis Telecom for $35.5 million. The transaction resulted in an after-tax loss of $3.6 million, which was reported in our 2005 loss from discontinued operations. Net cash proceeds realized from the sale were approximately $29 million after transaction costs, repayment of debt and payment of income taxes.

Environmental Matters

Our businesses are subject to regulation of environmental matters by various federal, state and local authorities. Currently, a number of regulatory changes are under consideration by both the Congress and the EPA. Most notably, clean energy technologies and the regulation of GHGs have taken a lead in these discussions. Minnesota Power’s fossil fueled facilities will likely to be subject to regulation under these climate change policies. Our intention is to reduce our exposure to possible future carbon and GHG legislation by reshaping our generation portfolio, over time, to reduce our reliance on coal.

We consider our businesses to be in substantial compliance with currently applicable environmental regulations and believe all necessary permits to conduct such operations have been obtained. Due to future stricterrestrictive environmental requirements through legislation and/or rulemaking, we anticipate that potential expenditures for environmental matters will be material and will require significant capital investments. (See Item 77. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Capital Requirements.) We are unable to predict if and when any such stricter environmental requirements will be imposed and the impact they will have on the Company.

We review environmental matters for disclosure on a quarterly basis. Accruals for environmental matters are recorded when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated, based on current law and existing technologies. These accruals are adjusted periodically as assessment and remediation efforts progress, or as additional technical or legal information becomesbecome available. Accruals for environmental liabilities are included in the consolidated balance sheet at undiscounted amounts and exclude claims for recoveries from insurance or other third parties. Costs related to environmental contamination treatment and cleanup are charged to expense unless recoverable in rates from customers.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
1817

 


Environmental Matters (Continued)

Air. Clean Air Act. The federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (Clean Air Act) established the acid rain program which created emission allowances for SO2 and system-wide average NOlimits. Minnesota Power’s generating facilities mainly burn low-sulfur western sub-bituminous coal. Square Butte, located in North Dakota, burns lignite coal. All of these facilities are equipped with pollution control equipment such as scrubbers, bag houses, or electrostatic precipitators. Permitted emission requirementsMinnesota Power’s generating facilities are currently being met. The federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (Clean Air Act) established the acid rain program which created emission allowances for SO2 and system wide averaging NOlimits. Each allowance is currently an authorization to emit one ton of SO2, and each utility must have sufficient allowances to cover its annual emissions. Minnesota Power has adequate SO2 allowances for its operations and is in compliance with applicable NOemission requirements.

XNew Source Review. limits. Square ButteOn August 8, 2008, Minnesota Power received a Notice of Violation (NOV) from the United States EPA asserting violations of the New Source Review (NSR) requirements of the Clean Air Act at Boswell Units 1-4 and Laskin Unit 2. The NOV also asserts that the Boswell Unit 4 Title V permit was violated, and that seven projects undertaken at these coal-fired plants between the years 1981 and 2000 should have been reviewed under the NSR requirements. Minnesota Power believes the projects were in full compliance with the Clean Air Act, NSR requirements and applicable permits.

We are engaged in discussions with the EPA regarding resolution of these matters, but we are unable to predict the outcome of these discussions. Since 2006, Minnesota Power has significantly reduced, and continues to reduce, emissions at Boswell and Laskin. The resolution could result in civil penalties and the installation of control technology, some of which is meeting its SOemission allowance requirements through increased usealready planned or completed for other regulatory requirements. Any costs of its existing scrubber.installing pollution control technology would likely be eligible for recovery in rates over time subject to MPUC and FERC approval in a rate proceeding. We are unable to predict the ultimate financial impact or the resolution of these matters at this time.

EPA Clean Air Interstate Rule. In March 2005, the EPA announced the final Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) that reducessought to reduce and permanently capscap emissions of SO2, NOX, and particulates in the eastern United States. The CAIR includes Minnesota was included as one of the 28 states it considersconsidered as “significantly contributing” to air quality standards non-attainment in other downwind states. The CAIR has been challenged in the court system, which may delay implementation or modify provisions in the rules. Minnesota Power is participating in the legal challenge to the CAIR. However, if the CAIR does go into effect, Minnesota Power expects to be required to:

(1)make emissions reductions (See AREA and Boswell Unit 3 Emission Reduction Plans for discussion of current emission reduction initiatives);
(2)
purchase SO2 and NOX allowances through the EPA’s cap-and-trade system (See CAIR Phase I NOX Allowance Purchases below); and/or

(3)use a combination of both (1) and (2).

CAIR will be implemented over two phases. Phase I begins in 2009 and Phase II in 2015. The EPA will allocate an emissions budget to each CAIR-affected state for SO2 and NOX that will result in significant emission reductions. The emissions budgets are reduced from Phase I to Phase II. States can choose to implement the EPA’s proposed model program or develop their own subject to EPA approval. The MPCA has indicated that it plans to adopt the EPA’s Federal Implementation Plan. Minnesota Power is implementing a balanced environmental plan making significant capital investments with the AREA and Boswell Unit 3 emission reduction retrofits in efforts to comply with CAIR Phase I and purchasing emission allowances as necessary. In spite of these efforts, Minnesota Power expects to be in a short position relative to NOX allowances beginning in 2009, and is anticipating purchasing NOX allowances as needed during Phase I of CAIR.

EPA Clean Air Mercury Rule. In March 2005, the EPA also announced the final Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) that would have reduced and permanently capped emissions of electric utility mercury emissions in the continental United States. On February 8,July 11, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturned(Court) vacated the CAIR and remanded the rulemaking to the EPA for reconsideration while also granting our petition that the EPA reconsider including Minnesota as a CAIR state. In September 2008, the EPA and others petitioned the Court for a rehearing or alternatively requested that the CAIR be remanded without a court order. In December 2008, the Court granted the request that the CAIR be remanded without a court order, effectively reinstating a January 1, 2009, compliance date for the CAIR, including Minnesota. However, in the May 12, 2009, Federal Register, the EPA issued a proposed rule that would amend the CAIR to stay its effectiveness with respect to Minnesota until completion of the EPA’s determination of whether Minnesota should be included as a CAIR state. The formal administrative stay of CAIR for Minnesota was published in the November 3, 2009, Federal Register with an effective date of December 3, 2009. The EPA has indicated the CAIR Replacement Rule is expected in April 2010 with finalization in early 2011. At this time we do not have any indication whether Minnesota will be included in the Replacement Rule.

Minnesota Regional Haze. The federal regional haze rule requires states to submit state implementation plans (SIPs) to the EPA to address regional haze visibility impairment in 156 federally-protected parks and wilderness areas. Under the regional haze rule, certain large stationary sources, that were put in place between 1962 and 1977 with emissions contributing to visibility impairment are required to install emission controls, known as best available retrofit technology (BART). We have certain steam units, Boswell Unit 3 and Taconite Harbor Unit 3, which are subject to BART requirements.

Pursuant to the regional haze rule, Minnesota was required to develop its SIP by December 2007. As a mechanism for demonstrating progress towards meeting the long-term regional haze goal, in April 2007, the MPCA advanced a draft conceptual SIP which relied on the implementation of CAIR. However, a formal SIP was never filed due to the Court’s review of CAIR as more fully described above under “EPA Clean Air Interstate Rule.” Subsequently, the MPCA requested that companies with BART eligible units complete and submit a BART emissions control retrofit study, which was done on Taconite Harbor Unit 3 in November 2008. The retrofit work completed in 2009 at Boswell Unit 3 meets the BART requirement for that unit. On December 15, 2009, the MPCA approved the SIP for submittal to the EPA for review and approval. It is uncertain what controls will ultimately be required at Taconite Harbor Unit 3 in connection with the regional haze rule.

EPA National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. In March 2005, the EPA also announced the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) that would have reduced and permanently capped electric utility mercury emissions in the continental United States through a cap-and-trade program. In February 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the CAMR and remanded the rulemaking to the EPA for reconsideration. TheIn October 2008, the EPA petitioned the Supreme Court to review the Court’s decision is subject to appeal. It is uncertain howin the CAMR case. In January 2009, the EPA will respond;withdrew its petition, paving the way for possible regulation of mercury and therefore it is also uncertain whether mercury emission reductions expected as a result of implementing AREA Plan expenditures at Taconite Harbor, and implementationother hazardous air pollutant emissions through Section 112 of the 2006Clean Air Act, setting Maximum Achievable Control Technology standards for the utility sector. In December 2009, Minnesota Mercury Emission Reduction LawPower and other utilities received an Information Collection Request from the EPA, requiring that emissions data be provided and stack testing be performed in order to develop an improved database with which applies to Boswell Units 3 and 4, will meet the EPA’s reformed mercurybase future regulations. (See Minnesota Mercury Emission Law.) Cost estimates for complying with potential future mercury and other hazardous air pollutant regulations under the Clean Air Act are therefore prematurecannot be estimated at this time.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
18


Environmental Matters (Continued)

Minnesota Mercury Emission Law.Reduction Act. This legislation requires Minnesota Power to file mercury emission reduction plans for its Boswell Units 3 and 4.4, with a goal of 90 percent reduction in mercury emissions. The Boswell Unit 3 emission reduction plan was filed with the MPCA in October 2006. Mercury control equipment has been installed and was placed into service in November 2009. (See Item 1. Business – Regulated Operations – Minnesota Power is required to install mercury emission reduction technology and equipment by December 31, 2010. (See AREA and Boswell Unit 3Public Utilities Commission – Emission Reduction Plans in Item 1 Energy – Regulated Utility.Plans.) The next step will be to file aA mercury emissions reduction plan for Boswell Unit 4 is required by July 1, 2011, with implementation no later than December 31, 2014. The legislation calls for an evaluation of a mercury control alternative which provides for environmental and public health benefits without imposing excessive costs on the utility’s customers. Cost estimates for the Boswell Unit 4 emission reduction plan are not available at this time.

Ozone. The EPA is attempting to control, more stringently, emissions that result in ground level ozone. In January 2010, the EPA proposed to reduce the eight-hour ozone standard and to adopt a secondary standard for the protection of sensitive vegetation from ozone-related damage. The EPA projects stating rules to address attainment of these new, more stringent standards will not be required until December 2013.

Climate Change. Minnesota Power is addressing climate change by taking the following steps that also ensure reliable and environmentally compliant generation resources to meet our customer’s requirements.

·Expand our renewable energy supply.
·Improve the efficiency of our coal-based generation facilities, as well as other process efficiencies.
·Provide energy conservation initiatives with our customers and demand side efforts.
·Support research of technologies to reduce carbon emissions from generation facilities and support carbon sequestration efforts.
·Achieve overall carbon emission reductions.

The scientific community generally accepts that emissions of GHGs are linked to global climate change. Climate change creates physical and financial risk. These physical risks could include, but are not limited to, increased or decreased precipitation and water levels in lakes and rivers; increased temperatures; and the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events. These all have the potential to affect the Company’s business and operations.

Federal Legislation. We believe that future regulations may restrict the emissions of GHGs from our generation facilities. Several proposals at the Federal level to “cap” the amount of GHG emissions have been made. On June 26, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. H.R. 2454 is a comprehensive energy bill that also includes a cap-and-trade program. H.R. 2454 allocates a significant number of emission allowances to the electric utility sector to mitigate cost impacts on consumers. Based on the emission allowance allocations, we expect we would have to purchase additional allowances. We’re unable to predict at this time the value of these allowances.

On September 30, 2009, the Senate introduced S. 1733, the Senate version of H.R. 2454. This legislation proposes a more stringent, near-term greenhouse emissions reduction target in 2020 of 20 percent below 2005 levels, as compared to the 17 percent reduction proposed by H.R. 2454. 

Congress may consider proposals other than cap-and-trade programs to address GHG emissions. We are unable to predict the outcome of H.R. 2454, S. 1733, or other efforts that Congress may make with respect to GHG emissions, and the impact that any GHG emission regulations may have on the Company. We cannot predict the nature or timing of any additional GHG legislation or regulation. Although we are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs could have a material impact on our financial results.

Greenhouse Gas Reduction. In 2007, Minnesota passed legislation establishing non-binding targets for carbon dioxide reductions. This legislation establishes a goal of reducing statewide GHG emissions across all sectors to a level at least 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2015, at least 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and at least 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050.

Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord. Minnesota is also participating in the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord (the Accord), a regional effort to develop a multi-state approach to GHG emission reductions. The Accord includes an agreement to develop a multi-sector cap-and-trade system to help meet the targets established by the group.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting. In May 2008, Minnesota passed legislation that required the MPCA to track emissions and make interim emissions reduction recommendations towards meeting the State’s goal of reducing GHG by 80 percent by 2050. GHG emissions from 2008 were reported in 2009.

We cannot predict the nature or timing of any additional GHG legislation or regulation. Although we are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs could have a material impact on our financial results.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
19


Environmental Matters (Continued)
Climate Change (Continued)

International Climate Change Initiatives. The United States is not a party to the Kyoto Protocol, which is a protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that requires developed countries to cap GHG emissions at certain levels during the 2008 to 2012 time period. In December 2009, leaders of developed and developing countries met in Copenhagen, Denmark, under the UNFCCC and issued the Copenhagen Accord. The Copenhagen Accord provides a mechanism for countries to make economy-wide GHG emission mitigation commitments for reducing emissions of GHG by 2020 and provide for developed countries to fund GHG emissions mitigation projects in developing countries. President Obama participated in the development of, and endorsed the Copenhagen Accord.

EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule. On September 22, 2009, the EPA issued the final rule mandating that certain GHG emission sources, including electric generating units, are required to report emission levels. The rule is intended to allow the EPA to collect accurate and timely data on GHG emissions that can be used to form future policy decisions. The rule was effective January 1, 2010, and all GHG emissions must be reported on an annual basis by March 31 of the following year. Currently, we have the equipment and data tools necessary to report our 2010 emissions to comply with this rule.

Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule. On October 27, 2009, the EPA issued the proposed Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring rule. This proposed regulation addresses the six primary greenhouse gases and new thresholds for when permits will be required for new and existing facilities which undergo major modifications. The rule would require large industrial facilities, including power plants, to obtain construction and operating permits that demonstrate Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) are being used at the facility to minimize GHG emissions. The EPA is expected to propose BACT standards for GHG emissions from stationary sources.

For our existing facilities, the proposed rule does not require amending our existing Title V operating permits to include BACT for GHGs. However, modifying or installing units with GHG emissions that trigger the PSD permitting requirements could require amending operating permits to incorporate BACT to control GHG emissions.

EPA Endangerment Findings. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published its findings that the emissions of six GHG, including CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide, endanger human health or welfare. This finding may result in regulations that establish motor vehicle GHG emissions standards in 2010. There is also a possibility that the endangerment finding will enable expansion of the EPA regulation under the Clean Air Act to include GHGs emitted from stationary sources. A petition for review of the EPA’s endangerment findings was filed by the Coalition for Responsible Regulation, et. al. with the United States District Court Circuit Court of Appeals on December 23, 2009.

Research and Study Initiatives. We participate in several research and study initiatives aimed at mitigating the potential impact of carbon emissions regulation on our business. Through this research, we cannot be certain that carbon emissions will be reduced or avoided through use of renewable energy sources or through implementing efficiency and conservation efforts. In developing strategies for our comprehensive approach to reducing our carbon emissions, we participate in and fund organizations and studies.

As an example, we commissioned a study with the University of Minnesota titled: Assessment of Carbon Flows Associated with Forest Management and Biomass Procurement for the Laskin Biomass Facility. This study was the first of its kind to comprehensively look at the carbon lifecycle as it relates to burning biomass for electrical generation in the region.

We participate in the Electric Power Research Institute’s CoalFleet for Tomorrow program, which reviews advanced clean coal generation and carbon capture research and assessment. Similarly, we participate as a North Dakota Lignite Interest member of the Canadian Clean Power Coalition. It also reviews advanced clean coal technologies focusing on lower rank sub-bituminous and lignite fuel energy conversion technologies and carbon control options. These provide Minnesota Power the ability to assess what technologies will best fit the economic fuels that are available in our region and when they may be available.

We also participate in research through the Plains CO2 Reduction Partnership (PCOR). PCOR is looking at CO2 capture technology through research conducted at the Energy and Environmental Research Center, University of North Dakota. Minnesota Power is a partner, along with a number of other utilities, technology providers, and consultants, to further research on CO2 capture techniques, operational issues and costs. The partnership is funded by the members as well as the Department of Energy.

We cannot predict whether our participation in any of these activities will result in a benefit to ALLETE or impact the future financial position or results of operations of the Company.

Water. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act requires NPDES permits to be obtained from the EPA (or, when delegated, from individual state pollution control agencies) for any wastewater discharged into navigable waters. We have obtained all necessary NPDES permits, including NPDES storm water permits for applicable facilities, to conduct our operations. We are in material compliance with these permits.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
20


Environmental Matters (Continued)

Solid and Hazardous Waste. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 regulates the management and disposal of solid wastes and hazardous wastes. We are required to notify the EPA of hazardous waste activity and consequently, routinely submit the necessary reports to the EPA. The Toxic Substances Control Act regulates the management and disposal of materials containing polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB). In response to the EPA Region V’s request for utilities to participate in the Great Lakes Initiative by voluntarily removing remaining PCB inventories, Minnesota Power replacedis in the process of voluntarily replacing its remaining PCB capacitor banks by 2005.banks. Known PCB-contaminated oil in substation equipment was replaced by June 2007. We are in material compliance with these rules.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
Coal Ash Management Facilities. Minnesota Power generates coal ash at all five of its steam electric stations. Two facilities store ash in onsite impoundments (ash ponds) with engineered liners and containment dikes. Another facility stores dry ash in a landfill with an engineered liner and leachate collection system. Two facilities generate a combined wood and coal ash that is either land applied as an approved beneficial use, or trucked to state permitted landfills. Minnesota Power continues to monitor state and federal legislative and regulatory activities that may affect its ash management practices. The EPA is expected to propose new regulations in February 2010 pertaining to the management of coal ash by electric utilities. It is unknown how potential coal ash management rule changes will affect Minnesota Power’s facilities. On March 9, 2009, the EPA requested information from Minnesota Power (and other utilities) on its ash storage impoundments at Boswell and Laskin. On June 22, 2009, Minnesota Power received an additional EPA information request pertaining to Boswell. Minnesota Power responded to both these information requests. On August 19,


Environmental Matters (Continued) 2009, the Minnesota DNR visited both the Boswell and Laskin ash ponds. The purpose of the inspection was to assess the structural integrity of the ash ponds, as well as review operational and maintenance procedures. There were no significant findings or concerns from the DNR staff during the inspections.


SWL&P Manufactured Gas Plant Site.. In May 2001, SWL&P received notice from the WDNR that We are reviewing and addressing environmental conditions at a former manufactured gas plant site within the City of Superior, had found soil contamination on property adjoining a former Manufactured Gas Plant (MGP) site ownedWisconsin, and formerly operated by SWL&P from 1889 to 1904. A report submitted in 2003 identified some MGP-like chemicals that were found in the soil near the former plant site. The final Phase II report was issued on June 7, 2007, confirming our understanding of the issues involved. The final Phase II Report and Risk Assessment were sent to&P. We have been working with the WDNR for review on June 18, 2007. Ato determine the extent of contamination and the remediation plan was developed during the last quarter of 2007 and will be submitted to the WDNR during the first quarter of 2008. Although it is not possible to fully quantify the potential clean-up cost until the WDNR’s review is completed,contaminated locations. At December 31, 2009, we have a $0.5 million liability for this site, which was recorded inaccrued on December 31, 2003, to address the known areas of contamination. The Company has recordedand a corresponding dollar amount as a regulatory asset as we expect recovery of remediation costs to offset this liability. The PSCW approvedbe allowed by the collection through rates of $0.3 million of site investigation costs that had been incurred through 2005. ALLETE maintains pollution liability insurance coverage that includes coverage for SWL&P. A claim has been filed with respect to this matter. The insurance carrier has issued a reservation of rights letter and the Company continues to work with the insurer to determine the availability of insurance coverage.PSCW.


Employees

At December 31, 2007,2009, ALLETE had approximately 1,5001,474 employees, of which 1,4001,411 were full-time.

Minnesota Power and SWL&P have an aggregate 622614 employees who are members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 31. The labor agreement withThroughout 2009, Minnesota Power, SWL&P and IBEW Local 31 expiresworked under contract extensions of the agreements which expired on January 31, 2009. On April 10, 2009, IBEW Local 31 requested binding arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the contracts which also provided Minnesota Power and SWL&P with the protections of no strike clauses. Arbitration hearings took place October 5, 2009, with final resolution for Minnesota Power occurring in January 2010. The terms of the agreement are retro active to February 1, 2009, and will expire on January 31, 2012. SWL&P continues to work with its union and the arbitrator to resolve the remaining differences between the parties.

BNI Coal has 97137 employees, whoof which 100 are members of the IBEW Local 1593. BNI Coal and IBEW Local 1593 have a labor agreement which expires on March 31, 2008. BNI expects to have a new labor agreement in place on, or before, the expiration of the existing contract.2011.


Availability of Information

ALLETE makes its SEC filings, including its annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports, available free of charge on ALLETE’s Websitewebsite www.allete.com, as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
2021

 

Executive Officers of the Registrant

As of February 12, 2010, these are the executive officers of ALLETE:

Executive OfficersInitial Effective Date
  
Donald J. Shippar, Age 5860
 
Chairman and Chief Executive OfficerMay 12, 2009
Chairman, President and Chief Executive OfficerJanuary 1, 2006
President and Chief Executive OfficerJanuary 21, 2004
Executive Vice President – ALLETE and President – Minnesota PowerMay 13, 2003
Alan R. Hodnik, Age 50
President and – ALLETEMay 12, 2009
Chief Operating Officer – Minnesota PowerJanuaryMay 8, 2007
Senior Vice President – Minnesota Power OperationsSeptember 22, 2006
Vice President – Minnesota Power GenerationMay 1, 20022005
Robert J. Adams, Age 47
Vice President – Business Development and Chief Risk OfficerMay 13, 2008
Vice President – Utility Business DevelopmentFebruary 1, 2004
  
Deborah A. Amberg, Age 4244
 
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and SecretaryJanuary 1, 2006
Vice President, General Counsel and SecretaryMarch 8, 2004
  
Steven Q. DeVinck, Age 4850
 
Controller and Vice President – Business SupportDecember 17, 2009
ControllerJuly 12, 2006
  
Laura A. Holquist, Age 46
President – ALLETE Properties, LLCSeptember 6, 2001
Mark A. Schober, Age 5254
 
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerJuly 1, 2006
Senior Vice President and ControllerFebruary 1, 2004
Vice President and ControllerApril 18, 2001
  
Donald W. Stellmaker, Age 5052
 
TreasurerJuly 24, 2004
Claudia Scott Welty, Age 55
Senior Vice President and Chief Administrative OfficerFebruary 1, 2004


All of the executive officers have been employed by us for more than five years in executive or management positions. Prior to election to the positions shown above, the following executives held other positions with the Company during the past five years.

 
Ms. Amberg was a Senior Attorney.
Mr. DeVinck was Director of Nonutility Business Development, and Assistant Controller.
 
Mr. StellmakerHodnik was DirectorGeneral Manager of Financial Planning.Thermal Operations.
Ms. Welty was Vice President Strategy and Technology Development.

 

There are no family relationships between any of the executive officers. All officers and directors are elected or appointed annually.

The present term of office of the executive officers listed above extends to the first meeting of our Board of Directors after the next annual meeting of shareholders. Both meetings are scheduled for May 13, 2008.11, 2010.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
2122

 

Item 1A.                      
Item 1A.Risk Factors

Readers are cautioned that forward-looking statements, including those contained in this Form 10-K, should be read in conjunction with our disclosures under the heading: “Safe Harbor Statement Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995” located on page 5 of this Form 10-K and the factors described below. The risks and uncertainties described in this Form 10-K are not the only ones facing our Company. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are not presently aware of, or that we currently consider immaterial, may also affect our business operations. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could suffer if the concerns set forth below are realized.

Our Regulated Utility results of operations could be negatively impacted if our Large Power Customers experience an economic down cycle or fail to compete effectively in the global economy.

Our 12ten Large Power Customers accounted for approximately 3423 percent of our 20072009 consolidated operating revenue (one(36 percent in 2008). One of these customers accounted for 128 percent of consolidated revenue)revenue in 2009 (12.5 percent in 2008). These customers are involved in cyclical industries that by their nature are adversely impacted by economic downturns and are subject to strong competition in the global marketplace. An economic downturn or failure to compete effectively in the global economy could have a material adverse effect on their operations and, consequently, could negatively impact our results of operations.operations if we are unable to remarket at similar prices the energy that would otherwise have been sold to such Large Power Customers.

Our Regulated Utility isoperations are subject to extensive governmental regulations that may have a negative impact on our business and results of operations.

We are subject to prevailing governmental policies and regulatory actions, including those of the United States Congress, state legislatures, the FERC, the MPUC, the PSCW and the PSCW.NDPSC. These governmental regulations relate to allowed rates of return, financings, industry and rate structure, acquisition and disposal of assets and facilities, operation and construction of plant facilities, recovery of purchased power and capital investments, and present or prospective wholesale and retail competition (including but not limited to transmission costs). These governmental regulations significantly influence our operating environment and may affect our ability to recover costs from our customers. We are required to have numerous permits, approvals and certificates from the agencies that regulate our business. We believe the necessary permits, approvals and certificates have been obtained for existing operations and that our business is conducted in accordance with applicable laws; however, we are unable to predict the impact on our operating results from the future regulatory activities of any of these agencies. Changes in regulations or the imposition of additional regulations could have an adverse impact on our results of operations.

Our ability to obtain rate adjustments to maintain current rates of return depends upon regulatory action under applicable statuesstatutes and regulations, and we cannot assureprovide assurance that rate adjustments will be obtained or current authorized rates of return on capital will be earned. Minnesota Power and SWL&P from time to time file rate cases with federal and state regulatory authorities. In future rate cases, if Minnesota Power and SWL&P do not receive an adequate amount of rate relief, rates are reduced, increased rates are not approved on a timely basis or costs are otherwise unable to be recovered through rates, we may experience an adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. We are unable to predict the impact on our business and operations results from future regulatory activities of any of these agencies.

Our Regulated Utilityoperations could be significantlyadversely impacted by emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) that are linked to global climate change.

The scientific community generally accepts that emissions of GHGs are linked to global climate change. Climate change creates physical and financial risk. These physical risks could include, but are not limited to, increased or decreased precipitation and water levels in lakes and rivers; increased temperatures; and the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events. These all have the potential to affect the Company’s business and operations.

Our operations could be adversely impacted by initiatives designed to reduce the impact of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions such as carbon dioxide from our generating facilities.

Proposals for voluntary initiatives and mandatory controls are being discussed within Minnesota, among a group of midwestern states that includes Minnesota, in the United States Congress and worldwide to reduce GHGs such as carbon dioxide, a by-product of burning fossil fuels.fuels, are being discussed within Minnesota, among a group of Midwestern states that includes Minnesota, in the United States Congress and worldwide. We currently use coal as the primary fuel in 9495 percent of the energy produced by our generating facilities.

We cannot be certain whether new laws or regulations will be adopted to reduce GHGs and what affect any such laws or regulations would have on us. If any new laws or regulations are implemented, they could have a material effect on our results of operations, particularly if implementation costs are not fully recoverable from customers.

Our Regulated Utility has established a goal to reduce overall GHG emissions associated with electric generation and delivery. We plan to expand our renewable energy production, expand customer conservation and process efficiency improvements, select low GHG emitting resources to meet new generation needs, and expand the use of renewable generation resources through dispatching those units based on their environmental performance.

We are participating in research and study initiatives to mitigate the potential impact carbon emissions regulation to our business. There is no assurance that our current reduction efforts will mitigate the impact of any new regulations.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
2223

 


Risk Factors (Continued)

The cost of environmental emission allowances could have a negative financial impact on our Regulated Utility Operations.operations.

Minnesota Power is subject to numerous environmental laws and regulations which cap emissions and could require us to purchase environmental emissions allowances to be in compliance. The laws and regulations expose us to emission allowance price fluctuations which could increase our cost of operations and expose us to emission price fluctuations.operations. We are unable to predict the emission allowance pricing, or regulatory recovery or ratepayer impact of these costs. We will be pursuing a current cost recovery mechanism with the MPUC and FERC.

Our Regulated Utility and Nonregulated Energy Operationsoperations pose certain environmental risks which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

We are subject to extensive environmental laws and regulations affecting many aspects of our present and future operations, including air quality, water quality, waste management, reclamation and other environmental considerations. These laws and regulations can result in increased capital, operating and other costs, as a result of compliance, remediation, containment and monitoring obligations, particularly with regard to laws relating to power plant emissions. These laws and regulations generally require us to obtain and comply with a wide variety of environmental licenses, permits, inspections and other approvals. Both public officials and private individuals may seek to enforce applicable environmental laws and regulations. We cannot predict the financial or operational outcome of any related litigation that may arise.

There are no assurances that existing environmental regulations will not be revised or that new regulations seeking to protect the environment will not be adopted or become applicable to us. Revised or additional regulations which result in increased compliance costs or additional operating restrictions, particularly if those costs are not fully recoverable from customers, could have a material effect on our results of operations.

We cannot predict with certainty the amount or timing of all future expenditures related to environmental matters because of the difficulty of estimating such costs. There is also uncertainty in quantifying liabilities under environmental laws that impose joint and several liability on all potentially responsible parties.

The operation and maintenance of our generating facilities in our Regulated Utility and Nonregulated Energy Operations involve risks that could significantly increase the cost of doing business.

The operation of generating facilities involves many risks, including start-up risks, breakdown or failure of facilities, the dependence on a specific fuel source, or the impact of unusual or adverse weather conditions or other natural events, as well as the risk of performance below expected levels of output or efficiency, the occurrence of any of which could result in lost revenue, increased expenses or both. A significant portion of Minnesota Power’s facilities were constructed many years ago. In particular, older generating equipment, even if maintained in accordance with good engineering practices, may require significant capital expenditures to keep operating at peak efficiency. This equipment is also likely to require periodic upgrading and improvements due to changing environmental standards and technological advances. (See Item I – Environmental Matters.) Minnesota Power could be subject to costs associated with any unexpected failure to produce power, including failure caused by breakdown or forced outage, as well as repairing damage to facilities due to storms, natural disasters, wars, terrorist acts and other catastrophic events. Further, our ability to successfully and timely complete capital improvements to existing facilities or other capital projects is contingent upon many variables and subject to substantial risks. Should any such efforts be unsuccessful, we could be subject to additional costs and/or the write-off of our investment in the project or improvement.

Our Regulated Utility and Nonregulated Energy Operationselectrical generating operations must have adequate and reliable transmission and distribution facilities to deliver electricity to itsour customers.

Minnesota Power depends on transmission and distribution facilities owned by other utilities, and transmission facilities primarily operated by MISO, as well as its own such facilities, to deliver the electricity we produce and sell to our customers, and to other energy suppliers. If transmission capacity is inadequate, our ability to sell and deliver electricity may be hindered, wehindered. We may have to forego sales or we may have to buy more expensive wholesale electricity that is available in the capacity-constrained area. The cost to acquire or provide service may exceed the cost to serve other customers, resulting in lower gross margins. In addition, any infrastructure failure that interrupts or impairs delivery of electricity to our customers could negatively impact the satisfaction of our customers with our service.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
2324

 

Risk Factors (Continued)

In our Regulated Utility and Nonregulated Energy Operationsoperations the price of electricity and fuel may be volatile.

Volatility in market prices for electricity and fuel may result from:

 ·severe or unexpected weather conditions;
 ·seasonality;
 ·changes in electricity usage;
 ·transmission or transportation constraints, inoperability or inefficiencies;
 ·availability of competitively priced alternative energy sources;
 ·changes in supply and demand for energy;
 ·changes in power production capacity;
 ·outages at Minnesota Power’s generating facilities or those of our competitors;
 ·changes in production and storage levels of natural gas, lignite, coal, crude oil and refined products;
 ·natural disasters, wars, sabotage, terrorist acts or other catastrophic events; and
 ·federal, state, local and foreign energy, environmental, or other regulation and legislation.

Since fluctuations in fuel expense related to our regulated utility operations are passed on to customers through our fuel clause, risk of volatility in market prices for fuel and electricity mainly impacts our nonregulated operations at this time.wholesale power sales.

We are dependent on good labor relations.

We believe our relations to be good with our approximately 1,5001,474 employees. Failure to successfully renegotiate labor agreements could adversely affect the services we provide and our results of operations. Approximately 600Currently, 714 of our employees are members of either the International Brotherhood of Electrical WorkersIBEW Local 31 or Local 1593. The labor agreement with Local 31 at Minnesota Power and SWL&P expiresexpired on January 31, 2009. A new agreement between Minnesota Power and Local 31 went into effect in January 2010. The terms of the agreement are retroactive to February 1, 2009 and will expire on January 31, 2012. SWL&P continues to work with its union and the arbitrator to resolve the remaining differences between the parties. The labor agreement with Local 1593 at BNI Coal expires on March 31, 2008.2011.

AThe current downturn in economic conditions couldmay continue to adversely affect our real estate business.investment.

The ability of our real estate businessinvestment to generate revenue is directly related to the Florida real estate market, the national and local economy in general and changes in interest rates.rates and the availability of credit. While conditions in the Florida real estate market may fluctuate over time,the long-term, continued demand for land is dependent on long-term prospects for strong, in-migration population expansion.

We are exposed to risks associated with real estate development.

Our real estate development activities entail risks that include construction delays or cost overruns, which may increase project development costs. In addition, the effects of the rebuilding efforts due to destructive weather, including hurricanes, could cause increased prices for construction materials and create labor shortages which could increase our development costs.

Our real estate development activities require significant expenditures. We obtain funds for our expenditures through cash flow from operations and financings, including the financings of the community development districts in which our development projects are located. We cannot be certain that the funds available from these sources will be sufficient to fund our required or desired expenditures for development. If we are unable to obtain sufficient funds, we may have to defer or otherwise limit our development activities.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
24



Risk Factors (Continued)

Our real estate businessinvestment is subject to extensive regulation through Florida laws regulating planning and land development which makes it difficult and expensive for us to conduct our operations.

Development of real property in Florida entails an extensive approval process involving overlapping regulatory jurisdictions. Real estate projects must generally comply with the provisions of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act (Growth Management Act). In addition, development projects that exceed certain specified regulatory thresholds require approval of a comprehensive DRI application.

The Growth Management Act requires counties and cities to adopt comprehensive plans guiding and controlling future real property development in their respective jurisdictions. After a local government adopts its comprehensive plan, all development orders and development permits must be consistent with the plan. Each plan must address such topics as future land use, capital improvements, traffic circulation, sanitation, sewage, potable water, drainage and solid waste disposal.

The Growth Management Act, in some instances, can significantly affect the ability of developers to obtain local government approval in Florida. In many areas, infrastructure funding has not kept pace with growth. As a result, substandard facilities and services can delay or prevent the issuance of permits. Consequently, the Growth Management Act could adversely affect the cost of and our ability to develop future real estate projects.

The DRI review process includes an evaluation of a project’s impact on the environment, infrastructure and government services, and requires the involvement of numerous state and local environmental, zoning and community development agencies. The DRI approval process is usually lengthy and costly, and conditions, standards or requirements may be imposed on a developer with respect to a particular project, which may materially increase the cost of the project.

Changes in the Growth Management Act or DRI review process or the enactment of new laws regarding the development of real property could adversely affect our ability to develop future real estate projects.

CompetitionMarket performance and other changes could adversely affect our real estate business.decrease the value of pension and postretirement health benefit plan assets, which then could require significant additional funding and increase annual expense.

OverThe performance of the past few years, wecapital markets affects the values of the assets that are held in trust to satisfy future obligations under our pension and postretirement benefit plans. We have experienced an increasesignificant obligations to these plans and the Company holds significant assets in competition for suitable landthese trusts. These assets are subject to market fluctuations and will yield uncertain returns, which may fall below our projected rates of return. A decline in the southeast United States real estate market. The availabilitymarket value of undeveloped land for purchase that meetsthe pension and postretirement benefit plan assets will increase the funding requirements under our internal criteria depends on a number of factors outsidebenefit plans if the actual asset returns do not recover. Additionally, our control, including land availabilitypension and postretirement benefit plan liabilities are sensitive to changes in general, competition with other developersinterest rates. As interest rates decrease, the liabilities increase, potentially increasing benefit expense and land buyers for desirable property, inflation in land prices, zoning, allowable development density and other regulatoryfunding requirements. Our long-term ability to acquire land suitable for development at reasonable prices in locations where we feel there is a viable market is crucial in maintaining our business success.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
25


Risk Factors (Continued)

If we are not able to retain our executive officers and key employees, we may not be able to implement our business strategy and our business could suffer.

The success of our business heavily depends on the leadership of our executive officers, all of whom are employees-at-will and none of whom are subject to any agreements not to compete. If we lose the service of one or more of our executive officers or key employees, or if one or more of them decides to join a competitor or otherwise compete directly or indirectly with us, we may not be able to successfully manage our business or achieve our business objectives. We may have difficulty in retaining and attracting customers, developing new services, negotiating favorable agreements with customers and providing acceptable levels of customer service.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-KWe rely on access to financing sources and capital markets. If we do not have access to sufficient capital in the amount and at the times needed, our ability to execute our business plans, make capital expenditures or pursue acquisitions that we may otherwise rely on for future growth could be impaired.
25



We rely on access to capital markets as sources of liquidity for capital requirements not satisfied by our cash flow from operations. If we are not able to access capital on satisfactory terms, the ability to implement our business plans may be adversely affected. Market disruptions or a downgrade of our credit ratings may increase the cost of borrowing or adversely affect our ability to access financial markets. Such disruptions could include a severe prolonged economic downturn, the bankruptcy of non-affiliated industry leaders in the same line of business or financial services sector, deterioration in capital market conditions, or volatility in commodity prices.


Item 1B.Unresolved Staff Comments

None.


Item 2.Properties

Properties are included in the discussion of our businesses in Item 1 and are incorporated by reference herein.


Item 3.Legal Proceedings

Material legal and regulatory proceedings are included in the discussion of our businesses in Item 1 and are incorporated by reference herein.

We are involved in litigation arising in the normal course of business. Also in the normal course of business, we are involved in tax, regulatory and other governmental audits, inspections, investigations and other proceedings that involve state and federal taxes, safety, compliance with regulations, rate base and cost of service issues, among other things. We do not expect the outcome of these matters to have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.


Item 4.Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of 2007.2009.



ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
26


Part II

Item 5.Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Our common stock is listed on the NYSE under the symbol ALE. We have paid dividends, without interruption, on our common stock since 1948. A quarterly dividend of $0.43$0.44 per share on our common stock will be paid on March 1, 2008,2010, to the holders of record on February 15, 2008.2010.

The following table shows dividends declared per share, and the high and low prices for our common stock for the periods indicated as reported by the NYSE:


2007200620092008
Price RangeDividendsPrice RangeDividendsPrice RangeDividendsPrice RangeDividends
QuarterHighLowDeclaredHighLowDeclaredHighLowDeclaredHighLowDeclared
          
First$49.69$44.93$0.4100$47.81$42.99$0.3625$33.27$23.35$0.44$39.86$33.76$0.43
Second51.3045.390.410048.5544.340.362529.1424.450.4446.1138.820.43
Third50.0538.600.410049.3043.260.362534.5727.750.4449.0038.050.43
Fourth46.4838.170.410047.8442.550.362535.2932.230.4444.6328.280.43
Annual Total $1.640 $1.450  $1.76  $1.72
Dividend Payout Ratio 53% 53%

At February 1, 2008,2010, there were approximately 31,00029,000 common stock shareholders of record.

Common Stock Repurchases. We did not repurchase any ALLETE common stock during the fourth quarter of 2007.2009.



ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
2627

 

Item 6.                      
Item 6.Selected Financial Data

Financial results by segment for the periods presented were impacted by the integration of our Taconite Harbor facility into the Regulated Utility segment effective January 1, 2006. We have operated the Taconite Harbor facility as a rate-based asset within the Minnesota retail jurisdiction since January 1, 2006. Prior to January 1, 2006, we operated our Taconite Harbor facility as nonregulated generation (non-rate base generation sold at market-based rates primarily to the wholesale market). Historical financial results of Taconite Harbor for periods prior to the 2006 redirection are included in our Nonregulated Energy Operations segment.

Operating results of our Water Services businesses and our telecommunications business are included in discontinued operations, and accordingly, amounts have been restated for all periods presented. (See Note 13.) Common share and per share amounts have also been adjusted for all periods to reflect our September 20, 2004, one-for-three common stock reverse split.

2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 
          
Millions          
Operating Revenue$841.7 $767.1 $737.4 $704.1 $659.6 $759.1 $801.0 $841.7 $767.1 $737.4 
Operating Expenses708.0 626.4 692.3
(d)
603.2 561.9 653.1 679.2 710.0 628.8 692.3(e)
Income from Continuing Operations Before Change in Accounting Principle87.6 77.3 17.6
(d)
38.5 29.2 
Income from Continuing Operations Before Non-Controlling Interest – Net of Tax60.7 83.0 89.5 81.9 20.3(e)
Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations – Net of Tax (0.9) (4.3) 73.7 207.2 (f)   (0.9) (4.3)(e)
Change in Accounting Principle – Net of Tax   (7.8)
    (b)
 
Net Income87.6 76.4 13.3 104.4 236.4 60.7 83.0 89.5 81.0 16.0 
Less: Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries(0.3) 0.5 1.9 4.6  2.7 
Net Income Attributable to ALLETE61.0 82.5 87.6 76.4 13.3 
Common Stock Dividends44.3 40.7 34.4 79.7 93.2 56.5 50.4 44.3 40.7 34.4 
Earnings Retained in (Distributed from) Business$43.3 $35.7 $(21.1) $24.7 $143.2 $4.5 $32.1 $43.3 $35.7 $(21.1) 
Shares Outstanding – Millions                    
Year-End30.8 30.4 30.1 29.7 29.1 35.2 32.6 30.8 30.4 30.1 
Average (c)
          
Average (a)
          
Basic28.3 27.8 27.3 28.3 27.6 32.2 29.2 28.3 27.8 27.3 
Diluted28.4 27.9 27.4 28.4 27.8 32.2 29.3 28.4 27.9 27.4 
Diluted Earnings (Loss) Per Share                    
Continuing Operations$3.08 $2.77 $0.64
(d)
$1.35
    (e)
$1.05 $1.89 $2.82 $3.08 $2.77 $0.64(e)
Discontinued Operations (0.03) (0.16) 2.59 7.47(f)
Change in Accounting Principle   (0.27)  
Discontinued Operations (b)
   (0.03) (0.16) 
$3.08 $2.74 $0.48 $3.67 $8.52 $1.89 $2.82 $3.08 $2.74 $0.48 
Total Assets$1,644.2 $1,533.4(a)$1,398.8 $1,431.4 $3,101.3 $2,393.1 $2,134.8 $1,644.2 $1,533.4(d)$1,398.8 
Long-Term Debt410.9 359.8 387.8 389.4 513.9 695.8 588.3 410.9 359.8 387.8 
Return on Common Equity12.4% 12.1% 2.2%
(d)
8.3% 17.7% 6.9% 10.7% 12.4% 12.1% 2.2%(e)
Common Equity Ratio63.7% 63.1% 60.7% 61.7% 64.4% 57.0% 58.0% 63.7% 63.1% 60.7% 
Dividends Declared per Common Share$1.6400 $1.4500 $1.2450 $2.8425 $3.3900 $1.76 $1.72 $1.64 $1.45 $1.245 
Dividend Payout Ratio53% 53% 259%(d)77% 40% 93% 61% 53% 53% 259%(e)
Book Value Per Share at Year-End$24.11 $21.90 $20.03 $21.23 $50.18 $26.39 $25.37 $24.11 $21.90 $20.03 
Capital Expenditures by Segment(c)                    
Regulated Utility Operations$220.6 $107.5 $46.5 $41.7 $42.2 
Non Regulated Utility3.3 1.9 12.1 15.7 26.5 
Real Estate (h)
     
Other   0.4  
Regulated Operations$299.2 $317.0 $220.6 $107.5 $46.5 
Investments and Other4.5 5.9 3.3  1.9 12.1 
Discontinued Operations  4.5 21.4 67.6     4.5 
Total Capital Expenditures$223.9 $109.4 $63.1 $79.2 $136.3 $303.7 $322.9 $223.9 $109.4 $63.1 
Current Cost Recovery (g)
$145 $27    

(a)Included $86.1 million of assets and $107.6 million of liabilities reflecting the adoption of SFAS 158 “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans.” (See Notes 2 and 16.)
(b)Reflected the cumulative effect on prior years (to December 2003) of changing to the equity method of accounting for investments in limited liability companies included in our emerging technology portfolio. (See Note 6.)
(c)Excludes unallocated ESOP shares.
(b)Operating results of our Water Services businesses and our telecommunications business are included in discontinued operations, and accordingly, amounts have been restate for all periods presented.
(c)In 2008, we made changes to our reportable business segments in our continuing effort to manage and measure performance of our operations based on the nature of products and services provided and customers served. (See Note 2. Business Segments.)
(d)Included $86.1 million of assets reflecting the adoption of Plan Accounting – Defined Benefit Pension Plans, and Health and Welfare Benefit Plans.
(e)Impacted by a $50.4 million, or $1.84 per share, charge related to the assignment of the Kendall County power purchase agreement (See Note 10.), a $2.5 million, or $0.09 per share, deferred tax benefit due to comprehensive state tax planning initiatives, and a $3.7 million, or $0.13 per share, current tax benefit due to a positive resolution of income tax audit issues.agreement.
(e)Included a $10.9 million, or $0.38 per share, after-tax debt prepayment cost incurred as part of ALLETE’s financial restructuring in preparation for the spin-off of the Automotive Services business and an $11.5 million, or $0.41 per share, gain on the sale of ADESA shares related to the Company’s ESOP (see Note 16).
(f)Included a $71.6 million, or $2.59 per share, gain on the sale of the Water Services businesses.
(g)Estimated current capital expenditures recoverable outside of a rate case.
(h)Excludes capitalized improvements on our development projects, which are included in inventory. (See Note 6.)


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
2728

 

Item 7.                      
Item 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and notes to those statements and the other financial information appearing elsewhere in this report. In addition to historical information, the following discussion and other parts of this report contain forward-looking information that involves risks and uncertainties. Readers are cautioned that forward-looking statements should be read in conjunction with our disclosures in this Form 10-K under the headings: “Safe Harbor Statement Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995” located on page 5 and “Risk Factors” located in Item 1A. The risks and uncertainties described in this Form 10-K are not the only ones facing our Company. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are not presently aware of, or that we currently consider immaterial, may also affect our business operations. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could suffer if the concerns set forth in this Form 10-K are realized.


Overview

ALLETE isRegulated Operations includes our regulated utilities, Minnesota Power and SWL&P, as well as our investment in ATC, a diversified companyWisconsin-based regulated utility that has provided fundamental productsowns and services since 1906. Thesemaintains electric transmission assets in parts of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Illinois. Minnesota Power provides regulated utility electric service in northeastern Minnesota to 144,000 retail customers and wholesale electric service to 16 municipalities. Minnesota Power also provides regulated utility electric service to 1 private utility in Wisconsin. SWL&P provides regulated electric, natural gas and water service in northwestern Wisconsin to 15,000 electric customers, 12,000 natural gas customers and 10,000 water customers. Our regulated utility operations include our former operations inretail and wholesale activities under the water, paper, telecommunicationsjurisdiction of state and automotive industries and the core Energy and Real Estate businesses we operate today.federal regulatory authorities. (See Item 1. Business – Regulated Operations – Regulatory Matters.)

EnergyInvestments and Other is comprised primarily of Regulated Utility, Nonregulated Energy OperationsBNI Coal, our coal mining operations in North Dakota, and Investment in ATC.

·
Regulated Utility includes retail and wholesale rate regulated electric, natural gas and water services in northeastern Minnesota and northwestern Wisconsin under the jurisdiction of state and federal regulatory authorities.
·
Nonregulated Energy Operations includes our coal mining activities in North Dakota, approximately 50 MW of nonregulated generation and Minnesota land sales.
·
Investment in ATC includes our equity ownership interest in ATC.

Real Estate includesALLETE Properties, our Florida real estate operations.

Otherinvestment. This segment also includes our investmentsa small amount of non-rate base generation, approximately 7,000 acres of land available-for-sale in emerging technologies,Minnesota, and earnings on cash and short-term investments.

WeALLETE is incorporated under the laws of Minnesota. Our corporate headquarters are committedin Duluth, Minnesota. Statistical information is presented as of December 31, 2009, unless otherwise indicated. All subsidiaries are wholly owned unless otherwise specifically indicated. References in this report to earning a financial return that rewards our shareholders, allows for reinvestment in our businesses,“we,” “us” and sustains our growth. We strive“our” are to grow earningsALLETE and dividends that will result in a total shareholder return that is superior to that of similar companies. Our goal is to earn a financial return that will allow us to provide dividend increases while at the same time fund our growth initiatives.its subsidiaries, collectively.

2007
2009 Financial Overview

(The following net income discussion summarizes a comparison of the year ended December 31, 2009, to the year ended December 31, 2008.

Net income attributable to ALLETE for 2009 was $61.0 million, or $1.89 per diluted share compared to $82.5 million, or $2.82 per diluted share for 2008. Earnings per diluted share decreased approximately $0.19 compared to 2008 as a result of additional shares of common stock outstanding in 2009. (See Note 12. Common Stock and Earnings Per Share.)

Regulated Operations net income attributable to ALLETE was $65.9 million in 2009 ($67.9 million in 2008). The decrease is primarily attributable to lower net income at Minnesota Power due to a 4.1 percent decrease in kilowatt-hour sales, higher depreciation and interest expense, and the accrual of retail rate refunds related to 2008. These decreases were partially offset by increased FERC-approved wholesale rates and MPUC-approved current cost recovery revenue. In addition, 2009 reflected $1.4 million in additional after-tax earnings from our investment in ATC as a result of additional investments made to fund our pro-rata share of ATC’s voluntary capital contribution program.

Investments and Other reflected a net loss attributable to ALLETE of $4.9 million in 2009 ($14.6 million of net income attributable to ALLETE in 2008). The decrease is primarily attributable to a $6.5 million reduction in earnings at ALLETE Properties and the absence of non-recurring items recorded in 2008. In 2009, ALLETE Properties recorded a net loss of $4.7 million versus net income of $1.8 million in 2008. In 2008, we recorded a $3.8 million non-recurring gain on the sale of certain available-for-sale securities and $5.8 million in non-recurring tax benefits and related interest due to the closing of a tax year and the completion of an IRS review.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
29


2009 Compared to 2008

See Note 1.2. Business Segments for financial results by segment.)

Net income for 2007 was $87.6 million, or $3.08 per diluted share ($76.4 million, or $2.74 per diluted share for 2006; $13.3 million, or $0.48 per diluted share for 2005). Net income for 2007 was up $11.2 million from 2006 reflecting:Regulated Operations

Regulated UtilityOperating revenue contributed income of $54.9decreased $30.4 million, in 2007 ($46.8 million in 2006; $45.7 million in 2005). The increase in earnings for 2007 reflects:

·increased electric sales to residential, commercial and municipal customers;
·continued strong demand from our industrial customers;
·rate increases, effective January 1, 2007, at SWL&P;
·commencement of current cost recovery on AREA project environmental capital expenditures;
·higher AFUDC related to increased capital expenditures;
·increased operations and maintenance expense, relating to outages and salary and wage increases; and
·a lower effective tax rate.

Nonregulated Energy Operations reported income of $3.5 million in 2007 ($3.7 million in 2006; a loss of $48.5 million in 2005), reflecting a $1.2 million after tax gain on land sold that was part of our purchase of Taconite Harbor and higher lease lot revenueor 4 percent, from 2008 due to newly developed lots. The increaseslower fuel and purchased power recoveries, lower retail and municipal kilowatt-hour sales, lower natural gas revenue at SWL&P, and the accrual of prior year retail rate refunds related to our 2008 retail rate case. These decreases were partially offset by higher sales to Other Power Suppliers, higher FERC-approved wholesale rates and increased revenue from MPUC-approved current cost recovery riders.

Lower fuel and purchased power recoveries along with a decrease in retail and municipal kilowatt-hour sales combined for a total revenue reduction of $116.2 million. Fuel and purchased power recoveries decreased due to a reduction in fuel and purchased power expense. (See Fuel and Purchased Power Expense.) Total kilowatt-hour sales to retail and municipal customers decreased 26 percent from 2008 primarily due to idled production lines and temporary closures at some of our taconite customers’ plants.

Natural gas revenue at SWL&P was lower incomeby $7.8 million due to a 27 percent decrease in the price of natural gas and a 9 percent decline in sales. Natural gas revenue is primarily a flow-through of the natural gas costs. (See Operating and Maintenance Expense.)

Prior year retail rate refunds resulting from BNI Coal, reflecting lower coalthe 2009 MPUC Order and August 2009 Reconsideration Order were recorded in 2009 and resulted in a reduction in revenues of $7.6 million.

The decrease in kilowatt-hour sales to retail and municipal customers has been partially offset by revenue from marketing the power to Other Power Suppliers, which increased $77.2 million in 2007.2009. Sales to Other Power Suppliers are sold at market-based prices into the MISO market on a daily basis or through bilateral agreements of various durations.

Higher rates from the March 1, 2008, and February 1, 2009, FERC-approved wholesale rate increases for our municipal customers increased revenue by $13.2 million.

MPUC-approved current cost recovery rider revenue increased $10.4 million in 2009 from 2008 primarily due to increased capital expenditures related to our Boswell Unit 3 emission reduction plan.

Kilowatt-hours Sold20092008Quantity Variance
%
Variance
Millions    
Regulated Utility    
Retail and Municipals    
Residential1,1641,172(8)(0.7) %
Commercial1,4201,454(34)(2.3) %
Industrial4,4757,192(2,717)(37.8) %
Municipals9921,002(10)(1.0) %
Total Retail and Municipals8,05110,820(2,769)(25.6) %
Other Power Suppliers4,0561,8002,256125.3 %
Total Regulated Utility Kilowatt-hours Sold
12,10712,620(513)(4.1) %

Revenue from electric sales to taconite customers accounted for 15 percent of consolidated operating revenue in 2009 (26 percent in 2008). The decrease in revenue from our taconite customers was partially offset by revenue from electric sales to Other Power Suppliers, which accounted for 20 percent of consolidated operating revenue in 2009 (10 percent in 2008). Revenue from electric sales to paper and pulp mills accounted for 9 percent of consolidated operating revenue in 2009 (9 percent in 2008). Revenue from electric sales to pipelines and other industrials accounted for 7 percent of consolidated operating revenue in 2009 (7 percent in 2008).

Operating expenses decreased $20.1 million, or 3 percent, from 2008.

InvestmentFuel and Purchased Power Expense decreased $26.1 million, or 9 percent, from 2008 due to decreased power generation attributable to lower kilowatt-hour sales, as well as a reduction in ATC contributed incomewholesale electricity prices. Minnesota Power’s coal generating fleet produced fewer kilowatt-hours of $7.5 million in 2007 ($1.9 million in 2006). Our initial investment in ATC began in May 2006. We reachedelectricity due to planned outages to implement environmental retrofits and to respond to decreased demand from our approximate 8 percent ownership in February 2007.taconite customers.

Real EstateOperating and Maintenance Expense contributed income of $17.7decreased $3.5 million from 2008 primarily due to $7.4 million in 2007 ($22.8 million in 2006; $17.5 million in 2005). Income was lower in 2007 than in 2006 due to a weaker real estate market in 2007.

Other reflected net income of $4.0 million in 2007 ($2.1 million in 2006; $2.9 million in 2005). The increase in 2007 included a state tax audit settlement for $1.5 million and the releasenatural gas costs at SWL&P from a loan guarantee for Northwest Airlinesdecline in the price and quantity of $0.6 million after tax.natural gas purchased. This decrease was partially offset by increased salaries and benefits costs, rate case expenses and plant maintenance.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
2830

 

Overview2009 Compared to 2008 (Continued)
Regulated Operations (Continued)

Depreciation Expense increased $9.5 million, or 19 percent, from 2008 reflecting higher property, plant and equipment balances placed in service.
Financial results
Interest expense increased $4.3 million, or 18 percent, from 2008 primarily due to additional long-term debt issued to fund new capital investments and $0.5 million related to retail rate refunds.

Equity earnings increased $2.2 million, or 14 percent, from 2008 reflecting higher earnings from our increased investment in ATC. (See Note 6. Investment in ATC.)

Investments and Other

Operating revenue decreased $11.5 million, or 13 percent, from 2008 primarily due to a $14.3 million reduction in sales revenue at ALLETE Properties. In 2009, ALLETE Properties sold approximately 35 acres of properties located outside of our three main development projects for continuing operations$3.8 million; no other sales were made in 2005 were significantly impacted by a $77.9 million ($50.4 million after tax, or $1.84 per share) charge2009 due to the assignmentcontinued lack of demand for our properties as a result of poor real estate market conditions in Florida. In 2008, ALLETE Properties sold approximately 219 acres of property located outside of our three main development projects for $6.3 million and recognized $3.7 million of previously deferred revenue under percentage of completion accounting. Revenue at ALLETE Properties in 2008 also included a pre-tax gain of $4.5 million from the Kendall County power purchase agreement to Constellation Energy Commodities (Kendall County Charge). (See Note 10.)
sale of a retail shopping center in Winter Haven, Florida.

Financial results by segment from 2005 and 2006 presented and discussed in this Form 10-K were impacted by the integration of our Taconite Harbor facility into the Regulated Utility segment effective January 1, 2006. We have operated the Taconite Harbor facility as a rate-based asset within the Minnesota retail jurisdiction since January 1, 2006. Prior to January 1, 2006, we operated our Taconite Harbor facility as nonregulated generation. Historical financial results of Taconite Harbor for periods prior to the 2006 redirection are included in our Nonregulated Energy Operations segment.
ALLETE Properties20092008
Revenue and Sales ActivityQuantityAmountQuantityAmount
Dollars in Millions    
Revenue from Land Sales    
Acres (a)
35$3.8219$6.3
Contract Sales Price (b)
 3.8 6.3
Revenue Recognized from Previously Deferred Sales  3.7
Revenue from Land Sales 3.8 10.0
Other Revenue (c)
 0.2 8.3
 Total ALLETE Properties Revenue $4.0 $18.3

Kilowatthours Sold200720062005
Millions   
    
Regulated Utility   
Retail and Municipals   
Residential1,1411,1001,102
Commercial1,3731,3351,327
Industrial7,0547,2067,130
Municipals1,008911877
Other847979
Total Retail and Municipals10,66010,63110,515
Other Power Suppliers2,1572,1531,142
Total Regulated Utility12,81712,78411,657
Nonregulated Energy Operations2492401,521
Total Kilowatthours Sold13,06613,02413,178


Real Estate200720062005
Revenue and Sales Activity (a)
QuantityAmountQuantityAmountQuantityAmount
Dollars in Millions      
       
Revenue from Land Sales      
Town Center Sales      
Non-residential Sq. Ft.540,059$15.0401,971$10.8643,000$15.2
Residential Units1301.677312.9
Palm Coast Park      
Non-residential Sq. Ft.40,0002.0
Residential Unit60613.22003.0
Other Land Sales      
Acres (b)
48310.673224.41,10238.1
Lots70.4
Contract Sales Price (c)
 42.4 51.1 53.7
Revenue Recognized from      
Previously Deferred Sales 3.1 9.7 
Deferred Revenue (1.2) (3.8) (10.0)
Adjustments (d)
  (0.9) (1.7)
Revenue from Land Sales 44.3 56.1 42.0
Other Revenue 6.2 6.5 5.5
  $50.5 $62.6 $47.5

(a)Quantity amounts are approximate until final build-out.
(b)Acreage amounts are shown on a gross basis, including wetlands and minoritynon-controlling interest.
(c)(b)Reflected total contract sales price on closed land transactions. Land sales are recorded using a percentage-of-completion method. (See CriticalNote 1. Operations and Significant Accounting Estimates and Note 2.Policies.)
(d)(c)Contributed development dollars, which are credited to costIncluded a $4.5 million pre-tax gain from the sale of real estate sold.a shopping center in Winter Haven, Florida in 2008.

BNI Coal, which operates under a cost-plus contract, recorded additional revenue of $5.6 million as a result of higher expenses. (See Operating Expenses.)

Operating expenses decreased $6.0 million, or 7 percent, from 2008 reflecting lower fuel costs at our non-regulated generating facilities and decreased expense at ALLETE Properties due to both lower cost of land sold and reductions in general and administrative expenses. Expenses incurred as a result of a planned maintenance outage at a non-regulated generating facility in the third quarter of 2008 also contributed to the decrease in 2009. Partially offsetting these decreases was an increase in expense at BNI Coal due to higher permitting costs relating to mining expansion, a warranty credit in 2008, and dragline repairs in 2009. These costs were recovered through the cost-plus contract. (See Operating Revenue.)

Interest expense increased $3.2 million from 2008 primarily due to a decrease in the proportion of ALLETE interest expense assigned to Minnesota Power. We record interest expense for Minnesota Power regulated operations based on Minnesota Power’s authorized capital structure and allocate the balance to Investments and Other. Effective August 1, 2008, the proportion of interest expense assigned to Minnesota Power decreased to reflect the authorized capital structure inherent in interim rates that commenced on that date. Interest expense was also higher in 2009 as 2008 included a $0.6 million reversal of interest expense previously accrued due to the closing of a tax year.

Other income (expense) decreased $16.0 million from 2008 primarily due to a $6.5 million pre-tax gain realized from the sale of certain available-for-sale securities in the first quarter of 2008, lower earnings on excess cash in 2009 of $1.9 million, and $1.4 million of interest income related to tax benefits recognized in the third quarter of 2008. Losses incurred on emerging technology investments totaled $4.6 million in 2009, and were $3.9 million higher than similar losses recorded in 2008.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
2931

 

20072009 Compared to 20062008 (Continued)

(See Note 1. Business SegmentsIncome Taxes – Consolidated

For the year ended December 31, 2009, the effective tax rate was 33.7 percent (34.3 percent for financial resultsthe year ended December 31, 2008). The effective tax rate in each period deviated from the statutory rate (approximately 41 percent for 2009) due to deductions for Medicare health subsidies, AFUDC-Equity, investment tax credits, wind production tax credits, and depletion. In addition, the effective rate for 2009 was impacted by segment.)lower pre-tax income. In 2008, non-recurring tax benefits due to the closing of a tax year and the completion of an IRS review totaled $4.6 million.


2008 Compared to 2007

Regulated UtilityOperations

Regulated Operations contributed income of $67.9 million in 2008 ($62.4 million in 2007). The increase in earnings is primarily the result of higher rates and higher income from our investment in ATC. Higher rates resulted from a March 1, 2008, increase in FERC-approved wholesale rates, an August 1, 2008, MPUC-approved interim rate increase (subject to refund) for retail customers in Minnesota, and MPUC-approved current cost recovery on our environmental retrofit projects. These rate increases were partially offset by the expiration of sales contracts to Other Power Suppliers, and higher operations and maintenance expense, depreciation expense, and interest expense

Operating revenue increased $84.6decreased $11.6 million, or 13.22 percent, from 2006,2007 primarily due to increaseddecreased fuel clauseand purchased power recoveries increased kilowatthourand the expiration of sales contracts to Other Power Suppliers. These decreases were partially offset by higher rates and kilowatt-hour sales to residential, commercialretail and municipal customers, increased power marketing prices, and rate increases at SWL&P.customers.

Fuel clause recoveries increased $63.3 million in 2007 as a result of increasedand purchased power expenses (seerecoveries decreased due to a $42.0 million reduction in fuel and purchased power expense. (See Fuel and Purchased Power Expense discussion below).

Revenue recovered through current cost recovery related to AREA Plan expenditures represented $3.2 million in 2007 ($0.1 million in 2006).below.)

Revenue from sales to other power suppliersOther Power Suppliers decreased $21.1 million from 2007 due to the expiration of sales contracts.

Higher rates resulted from the August 1, 2008, interim rate increase for retail customers in Minnesota of approximately $13 million, current cost recovery on our environmental retrofit projects of approximately $21 million, and the March 1, 2008, increase in FERC-approved wholesale rates of approximately $6 million.

Kilowatt-hour sales to our retail and municipal customers increased $3.6 million, or 3.82 percent from 2006,2007 primarily due to a 3.62 percent increase in industrial load. The increase in industrial sales was primarily due to an idled production line and production delays at one of our taconite customers in 2007. Total regulated utility kilowatt-hour sales were down 2 percent as the price per kilowatthour.expiration of sales contracts to Other Power Suppliers more than offset the increased retail and municipal sales.

New rates at SWL&P, which became effective January 1, 2007, reflect a 2.8 percent increase in electric rates, a 1.4 percent increase in gas rates and an 8.6 percent increase in water rates. These rate increases resulted in a $1.7 million increase in operating revenue.
Kilowatt-hours Sold20082007Quantity Variance
%
Variance
Millions    
Regulated Utility    
Retail and Municipals    
Residential1,1721,141312.7%
Commercial1,4541,457(3)(0.2)%
Industrial7,1927,0541382.0%
Municipals1,0021,008(6)(0.6)%
Total Retail and Municipals10,82010,6601601.5%
Other Power Suppliers1,8002,157(357)(16.6)%
Total Regulated Utility Kilowatt-hours Sold
12,62012,817(197)(1.5)%

Revenue from electric sales to taconite customers accounted for 2426 percent of consolidated operating revenue in each 2007 and 2006.2008 (24 percent in 2007). Revenue from electric sales to paper and pulp mills accounted for 9 percent of consolidated operating revenue in each of 2007 and 2006.2008 (9 percent in 2007). Revenue from electric sales to pipelines and other industrials accounted for 7 percent of consolidated operating revenue in 2007 (62008 (7 percent in 2006)2007).

Overall, kilowatthour sales were flat in 2007. Combined residential, commercial and municipal kilowatthour sales increased 181.0 million, or 5.3 percent, from 2006, while industrial kilowatthour sales decreased by 152.1 million, or 2.1 percent. The increase in residential, commercial and municipal kilowatthour sales was primarily because of two existing municipal customers converting to full-energy requirements and a 9.2 percent increase in Heating Degree Days (primarily in February). The reduction in industrial kilowatthour sales was primarily due to an idle production line and production delays at one of our taconite customers. In September 2007, the affected taconite customer resumed production on the idle line. Minor fluctuations in industrial kilowatthour sales generally do not have a large impact on revenue due to a fixed demand component of revenue that is less sensitive to changes in kilowatthours sales.

Operating expenses increased $76.9decreased $25.1 million, or 14.14 percent, from 2006.2007.

Fuel and Purchased Power Expense increased $65.9decreased $42.0 million, or 23.412 percent, from 20062007 primarily due to a $61.4 million increasedecrease in purchased power reflectingexpense, as a 45.1 percent increase in market purchases and an 11.0 percent increase in market prices. The increase in purchased power was primarily due toresult of higher electricity production at the following outagesCompany’s generation facilities. Megawatt-hour generation at our generating facilities:

·scheduled outage at Boswell Unit 3;
·scheduled outages at Laskin Unit 1facilities and Taconite Harbor Unit 2 relating to AREA Plan environmental upgrades; and
·unscheduled outages at Boswell Unit 4.

Boswell Unit 4 completed generator repairs and returned to service in May 2007. Substantially all of the costs of the replacement coils were covered under the original manufacturer’s warranty.

Lower Square Butte entitlement (See Note 8) and output contributedincreased 9 percent over 2007.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
32


2008 Compared to higher purchased power expense. Square Butte generation was lower in the fourth quarter of 2007 reflecting a major scheduled outage.(Continued)

Replacement purchased power costs are recovered through the fuel adjustment clause in Minnesota.Regulated Operations (Continued)

Operating and Maintenance Expense increased $11.4$10.0 million, or 5.24 percent, from 2006, due to a $9.0 million increase in plant maintenanceover 2007 primarily due to planned$3.3 million in increased natural gas purchases at SWL&P, reflecting a colder 2008, $2.5 million higher salaries and unscheduled outageswages, $1.8 million in increased transmission costs, and salary and wage increases.$1.5 million in conservation improvement costs.

Depreciation Expense decreased $0.4increased $6.9 million, or 16 percent, from 2006, primarily due to the life extension of Boswell Unit 3, mostly offset by2007 reflecting higher depreciable asset balances.property, plant, and equipment balances placed in service and higher annual depreciation rates for distribution and transmission effective January 1, 2008.

Interest Expenseexpense increased $0.8$3.0 million, or 4.014 percent, from 2006,2007 primarily due to higher long-term debt balances reflectingfrom increased construction activity.

Equity earnings increased $2.7 million, or 21 percent, from 2007 reflecting higher earnings from our investment in ATC. (See Note 6. Investment in ATC.)


Investments and Other

Investments and Other reflected net income of $14.6 million in 2008 ($25.2 million in 2007). The increasedecrease in 2008 is primarily due to lower net income at ALLETE Properties, which continues to experience difficult real estate market conditions in Florida. This decrease was partially offset by the capitalizationsale of more AFUDC-Debt.certain available-for-sale securities in the first quarter of 2008, and tax benefits and related interest recognized in the third quarter of 2008.

Operating revenue decreased $29.1 million, or 25 percent, from 2007 primarily due to a decrease in sales revenue at ALLETE Properties in 2008. ALLETE Properties sold 219 acres of property in 2008 compared to 483 acres in 2007. In addition, 580,059 of non-residential square footage and 736 residential units were sold in 2007 compared to no non-residential or residential sales in 2008. Operating revenue in 2008 included a pre-tax gain of $4.5 million for the sale of our retail shopping center in Winter Haven, Florida in May 2008.


ALLETE Properties20082007
Revenue and Sales ActivityQuantityAmountQuantityAmount
Dollars in Millions    
Revenue from Land Sales    
Non-residential Sq. Ft.580,059$17.0
Residential Units73614.8
Acres (a)
219$6.348310.6
Contract Sales Price (b)
 6.3 42.4
Revenue Recognized from Previously Deferred Sales 3.7 3.1
Deferred Revenue  (1.2)
Revenue from Land Sales 10.0 44.3
Other Revenue (c)
 8.3 6.2
 Total ALLETE Properties Revenue $18.3 $50.5

(a)Acreage amounts are shown on a gross basis, including wetlands and non-controlling interest.
(b)Reflected total contract sales price on closed land transactions. Land sales are recorded using a percentage-of-completion method. (See Note 1. Operations and Significant Accounting Policies.)
(c)Included a $4.5 million pre-tax gain from the sale of a shopping center in Winter Haven, Florida in 2008.

Operating expenses decreased $5.7 million, or 6 percent, from 2007, primarily due to a $4.8 million decrease in the cost of real estate sold in Florida.

Interest expense increased $0.7 million in 2008 primarily due to higher interest expense at ALLETE, a portion of which is assigned to Minnesota Power and the remainder is reflected in the Investments and Other segment.

Other income increased $3.2$0.6 million, or 5 percent, from 2006,2007 primarily due to higher earningsa $6.5 million pre-tax gain realized from the capitalizationsale of AFUDC-Equity reflecting increased construction activity.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
30


2007 Compared to 2006 (Continued)

Nonregulated Energy Operations

Operating revenue increased $2.0 million, or 3.1 percent, from 2006, primarily due to higher coal revenue realized under a cost-plus contract. This increase reflects a 12.2 percent increasecertain available-for-sale securities in the delivered price per ton duefirst quarter of 2008 and interest income related to higher coal production expenses (see Operating expenses below),tax benefits recognized in the third quarter of 2008. The gain was triggered when securities were sold to reallocate investments to meet defined investment allocations based upon an approved investment strategy. The increase was partially offset by lower sales volume.

Operating expenses increased $4.3 million, or 7.0 percent, from 2006, reflecting higher coal production expense and higher property taxes. The increase in property taxes is primarily due to higher assessed market values on our Minnesota land, while the increase in coal operating expenses is due to higher fuel costs, tire and dragline repairs.

Interest Expense decreased $1.3 million from 2006, reflecting lower interest on income tax accruals.

Other income increased $1.7 million from 2006, reflecting higherfewer gains on Minnesota land sales and higher lease lot revenue due to leasing newly developed lots.

Investment in ATC

Equity Earnings increased $9.6 million in 2007, resulting from our pro-rata share of ATC’s earnings as discussed in Note 3. Our initial investment in ATC began in May 2006. We reached our approximate 8 percent ownership in February 2007.

Real Estate

Operating revenue decreased $12.1 million, or 19.3 percent, from 2006, due to a weaker real estate market in 2007, and less recognition of deferred revenue, accounted for under the percentage-of-completion method, as major infrastructure reached substantial completion at Town Center in 2006 and at Palm Coast Park in 2007. Revenue from land sales in 2007 was $44.3 million, which included $3.1 million in previously deferred revenue. In 2006, revenue from land sales was $56.1 million which included $9.7 million in previously deferred revenue. At December 31, 2007, revenue of $3.7 million ($5.6 million at December 31, 2006) was deferredMinnesota during 2008, and will be recognizedlower earnings on a percentage-of-completion basis.

Sales at Town Center consisted of 540,059 non-residential square feet (401,971 square feet in 2006),cash and 130 residential units (773 units in 2006). Palm Coast Park sales included 40,000 non-residential square feet (none in 2006) and 606 residential units (200 units in 2006). In 2007, 483 acres of other land were sold (732 acres in 2006).

Operating expenses increased $0.6 million, or 3.1 percent from 2006, reflecting community development district property tax assessments previously capitalized at Town Center during major infrastructure construction partially offset by lower cost of sales due to the decrease in land sales.

Interest expense increased $0.5 million from 2006. Interest capitalization was reduced in 2007 as the major infrastructure construction at Town Center was substantially completed at the end of 2006.

Minority Interest participation was down due to lower earnings.

Other

Interest expense decreased $2.8 million from 2006, primarily due to more interest charged to the regulated utility in 2007 as a result of increased capital expenditures and interest on additional taxes owed on the gain on sale of our Florida Water assets in 2006.

Other income decreased $1.4 million from 2006,short-term investments reflecting lower investment income as a result of lower average cash balances, inand the 2007 partially offset by the release from a loan guarantee for Northwest Airlines, Inc. of $1.0 million.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
33


2008 Compared to 2007 (Continued)

Income Taxes – Consolidated

For the year ended December 31, 2007,2008, the effective tax rate on income from continuing operations before minoritynon-controlling interest was 34.834.3 percent (36.1(34.8 percent for the year ended December 31, 2006)2007). The decreaseeffective tax rate in both years deviated from the effectivestatutory rate compared to last year was(approximately 40 percent) primarily due to the recognition of various tax benefits as well as deductions for Medicare health subsidies, AFUDC-Equity, investment tax credits, and wind production tax credits. In 2007, a tax benefit was realized as a result of a state income tax audit settlement ($1.51.6 million), higher AFUDC-Equity, and a larger domestic manufacturing deduction taken in 2007 compared to 2006. The effective rate of 34.8 percent for the year ended December 31, 2007, deviated from the statutory rate (approximately 40 percent). In 2008, non-recurring tax benefits due to the state incomeclosing of a tax audit settlement, deductions for Medicare health subsidiesyear and domestic manufacturing production, AFUDC-Equity and investment tax credits.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
31



2006 Compared to 2005the completion of an IRS review totaled $4.6 million.

Regulated Utility

Operating revenue was up $63.6 million, or 11 percent, from 2005, reflecting increased kilowatthour sales and increased fuel clause recoveries. Electric sales increased 1,127 million kilowatthours, or 10 percent, mostly due to the addition of Taconite Harbor wholesale power obligations to the Regulated Utility segment effective January 1, 2006. In 2006, the majority of Taconite Harbor sales are reflected in sales to other power suppliers. Sales to other power suppliers were 2,153 million kilowatthours and $94.3 million (1,142 million kilowatthours and $52.8 million in 2005). Absent the inclusion of pre-existing Taconite Harbor wholesale energy sales obligations, sales to other power suppliers were down reflecting less excess energy available for sale due to more planned outages at Company generating facilities in 2006 than 2005. Electric sales to retail and municipal customers increased 116 million kilowatthours, or 1 percent, and $23.5 million, mainly due to strong demand from industrial customers. Fuel clause recoveries were higher in 2006 as a result of increased fuel and purchased power expenses in 2006. Natural gas revenue was down $2.8 million from 2005 reflecting decreased usage due to warmer weather in 2006.

Operating expenses were up $57.8 million, or 12 percent, from 2005.

Fuel and Purchased Power Expense. Fuel and purchased power expense was up $38.0 million from 2005, reflecting the inclusion of Taconite Harbor operations beginning in 2006 ($22.8 million) and increased purchased power expense due to higher prices paid for purchased power, less Company hydro generation available as a result of below normal precipitation levels, and planned maintenance at Company generating facilities in 2006.

Other Operating Expenses. Other operating expenses were up $19.8 million from 2005. Employee compensation was up $7.3 million primarily due to the inclusion of Taconite Harbor, annual wage increases and the inclusion of union employees in our results sharing compensation awards program. Depreciation expense increased $4.8 million primarily due to the inclusion of Taconite Harbor and a full year of depreciation of projects capitalized in 2005. Plant maintenance expense increased $4.7 million reflecting the inclusion of Taconite Harbor maintenance in 2006 ($4.0 million), increased planned maintenance expense at Boswell Unit 4 ($1.6 million) and increased equipment fuel expenses ($0.9 million) partially offset by a decrease in maintenance expense at Boswell Unit 3 ($1.8 million). In 2005, planned maintenance was performed at Boswell Unit 3 while the unit was down due to a cooling tower failure. Pension expense increased $2.2 million primarily due to a reduction in the discount rate (5.50 percent in 2006; 5.75 percent in 2005). Insurance expense was up $1.0 million due to increased premiums. Vegetation management expense was up $0.7 million due to more completed in 2006. Property taxes were up $0.7 million due to higher mill rates in 2006. Purchased natural gas expense was down $2.7 million due to decreased natural gas sales.

Interest expense was up $2.8 million, or 16 percent, from 2005, reflecting the inclusion of Taconite Harbor in 2006 partially offset by lower effective interest rates (5.92 percent in 2006; 6.07 percent in 2005).

Nonregulated Energy Operations

Operating revenue was down $48.9 million, or 43 percent, from 2005 due to the absence of revenue from Taconite Harbor ($55.1 million in 2005) and Kendall County ($3.1 million in 2005). Effective January 1, 2006, Taconite Harbor is reported as part of Regulated Utility. Kendall County operations ceased to be included with our operations effective April 1, 2005, when the Company assigned the power purchase agreement to Constellation Energy Commodities. Coal revenue, realized under cost plus a fixed fee agreements, was up $3.7 million from 2005 reflecting a 16 percent increase in the delivery price per ton due to higher reimbursable coal production expenses (see Operating expenses below). In 2006, tons of coal sold were down 7 percent from 2005 in part due to an outage at Minnkota Power’s Unit 1 in 2006.

Operating expenses were down $125.2 million, or 67 percent, from 2005 reflecting the absence of a $77.9 million charge related to the assignment of the Kendall County power purchase agreement to Constellation Energy Commodities on April 1, 2005, expenses related to Taconite Harbor ($49.3 million in 2005) and other expenses related to Kendall County ($6.3 million in 2005) that were incurred prior to April 1, 2005. Expenses related to coal operations were up $3.4 million reflecting increased equipment lease costs ($1.3 million), higher fuel expenses ($0.6 million) and increased parts and supplies ($0.9 million).

Interest expense was down $3.3 million, or 50 percent, primarily due to the absence of Taconite Harbor in 2006.

Other income (expense) reflected $0.5 million more income in 2006 due to increased Minnesota land sales.

Investment in ATC

Other income (expense) reflected $3.0 million of income in 2006 from our equity investment in ATC, resulting from our share of ATC’s earnings.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
32


2006 Compared to 2005 (Continued)

Real Estate

Operating revenue was up $15.1 million, or 32 percent, from 2005, due to the recognition of revenue from prior land sales at our Town Center development project, which are accounted for under the percentage-of-completion method. Revenue from land sales was $56.1 million in 2006 which included $9.7 million of previously deferred revenue. In 2005, revenue from land sales was $42.0 million. Sales at Town Center represented 773 residential units and the rights to build up to 401,971 square feet of non-residential space in 2006 (643,000 non-residential square feet in 2005). Sales at Palm Coast Park represented 200 residential units in 2006. In 2006, 732 acres of other land were sold (1,102 acres and 7 lots in 2005). The first land sales for Town Center were recorded in June 2005 and the first land sales at Palm Coast Park were recorded in August 2006. At December 31, 2006, revenue of $5.6 million ($11.5 million at December 31, 2005) was deferred and will be recognized on a percentage-of-completion basis as development obligations are completed.

Operating expenses were up $2.9 million, or 17 percent, from 2005 reflecting a $1.6 million increase in the cost of real estate sold ($10.2 million in 2006; $8.6 million in 2005) due to the recognition of the cost of real estate sold at our Town Center development project which were previously deferred under the percentage-of-completion method. Selling expenses increased $0.6 million due to higher broker commission in 2006 and recognition of prior year’s selling expenses at our Town Center development project which were previously deferred under the percentage-of-completion method. Property tax expense was $0.2 million higher in 2006 due to increased assessment values and higher rates. At December 31, 2006, cost of real estate sold totaling $1.3 million ($2.2 million at December 31, 2005) and selling expenses of $0.2 million ($0.3 million at December 31, 2005), primarily related to Town Center land sales, were deferred until development obligations are completed.

Other

Operating expenses were down $1.4 million, or 29 percent, from 2005, reflecting lower general and administrative expenses in 2006.

Interest expense was up $1.6 million, or 70 percent, from 2005, reflecting interest on additional taxes owed on the gain on the sale of our Florida Water assets and state tax audits, and higher variable rates in 2006.

Other income (expense) reflected $9.9 million more income in 2006 due to a $4.4 million increase in earnings on cash and short-term investments due to higher rates and higher average balances in 2006, the absence of $5.1 million of impairments related to certain investments in our emerging technology portfolio recorded in 2005 and the absence of a $1.0 million charge recognized in 2005 for the probable payment under our guarantee of Northwest Airlines debt.

Discontinued Operations

Discontinued operations includes our Water Services businesses that we sold over a three-year period from 2003 to 2005 and our telecommunications business, which we sold in December 2005. There were no losses recognized in discontinued operations in 2007 (a $0.9 million loss in 2006; $4.3 million loss in 2005).

In 2006, discontinued operations reflected a $0.9 million loss resulting from additional legal and administrative expenses related to exiting the Water Services businesses (a $2.5 million loss in 2005). In 2005, administrative and other expenses were incurred to support Florida Water transfer proceedings. A $1.0 million rate-base settlement charge related to the sale of 63 of Florida Water systems to Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. was also recorded in 2005. Our wastewater assets in Georgia were sold in February 2005.

Financial results for our telecommunications business reflected a loss of $1.8 million in 2005. In 2005, we recorded a $3.6 million loss on the sale of this business.

Income Taxes

For the year ended December 31, 2006, the effective tax rate from continuing operations before minority interest was 36.1 percent (2.5 percent benefit for the year ended December 31, 2005). The increase in the effective rate compared to 2005 was primarily due to the lower income from continuing operations in 2005 as a result of the Kendall County Charge, and one-time tax benefits realized in 2005 for adjustments to our deferred tax assets and liabilities as a result of comprehensive state tax planning initiatives, and positive resolution of audit issues. The effective rate of 36.1 percent for the year ended December 31, 2006, was less than the combined state and federal statutory rate because of investment tax credits, deductions for Medicare health subsidies, depletion and the expected use of state capital loss carryforwards.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
33



Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of financial statements and related disclosures in conformity with GAAP requires management to make various estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements. These estimates and assumptions may be revised, which may have a material effect on the consolidated financial statements. Actual results may differ from these estimates and assumptions. These policies are discussed with the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors on a regular basis. The following represent the policies we believe are most critical to our business and the understanding of our results of operations.

Real Estate Revenue and Expense Recognition. We account for sales of real estate in accordance with SFAS 66, “Accounting for Sales of Real Estate.” Revenue from residential and non-residential properties is recorded at the time of closing using the full profit recognition method, provided that cash collections are at least 20 percent of the contract price and the other requirements of SFAS 66 are met. However, if we are obligated to perform significant development activities subsequent to the date of the sale, we recognize revenue using the percentage-of-completion method. This method of accounting requires that we recognize gross profit based upon the relationship of development costs incurred to the total estimated development costs of the parcels. During each reporting period, we must estimate the total costs to be incurred until project completion, including development overhead and interest capitalization costs. These total cost estimates will impact the recognition of profit on sales. The costs are allocated to each lot or parcel based on the relative sales value method. These estimates affect the amount of costs relieved as each lot is sold and incorrect estimates may result in a misstatement of the cost of real estate sold. Additionally, we must estimate the selling price of each individual lot or parcel that is included in inventory for inclusion in the inventory cost model. If the estimated selling prices of the lots are inaccurate, a material difference in the timing of recording cost of real estate sold for the lots sold could occur.

We record land held for sale at the lower of cost or fair value, which is determined by the evaluation of individual land parcels. Real estate costs include the cost of land acquired, subsequent development costs and costs of improvements, capitalized development period interest, real estate taxes and payroll costs of certain employees devoted directly to the development effort. Based on the relative sales value of the parcels within each development project, we capitalize the real estate costs incurred to the cost of real estate parcels in accordance with SFAS 67, “Accounting for Costs and Initial Rental Operations of Real Estate Projects.” When real estate is sold, we include the actual costs incurred and the estimate of future completion costs allocated to the parcel(s) sold, based upon the relative sales value method in the cost of real estate sold. We include land held for sale in Investments on our consolidated balance sheet (See Note 6). In certain cases, we pay fees or construct improvements to mitigate offsite traffic impacts. In return, we receive traffic impact fee credits as a result of some of these expenditures. We recognize revenue from the sale of traffic impact fee credits when payment is received. Certain contracts allow us to receive participation revenue from land sales to third parties if various formula-based criteria are achieved. We recognize participation revenue when there is a contractual obligation to receive this revenue.

Pension and Postretirement Health and Life Actuarial Assumptions. We account for our pension and postretirement benefit obligations in accordance with the provisions of SFAS 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans,” SFAS 87, “Employers’ Accounting for Pensions,” and SFAS 106, “Employers’ Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other Than Pensions.” These standards require the use of assumptions in determining our obligations and annual cost of our pension and postretirement benefits. An important actuarial assumption for pension and other postretirement benefit plans is the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets. In establishing this assumption, we consider the diversification and allocation of plan assets, the actual long-term historical performance for the type of securities invested in, the actual long-term historical performance of plan assets and the impact of current economic conditions, if any, on long-term historical returns. Our pension asset allocation is approximately 61 percent equity, 25 percent debt, 9 percent private equity, 2 percent real estate and 3 percent other securities. Equity securities consist of a mix of market capitalization sizes and both domestic and international securities. We currently use an expected long-term rate of return of 9 percent in our actuarial determination of our pension and other postretirement expense. We annually review our expected long-term rate of return assumption and will adjust it to respond to any changing market conditions. A one-quarter percent decrease in the expected long-term rate of return would increase the annual expense for pension and other postretirement benefits by approximately $1.5 million, pre-tax; conversely, a one-quarter percent increase in the expected long-term rate of return would decrease the annual expense by approximately $1.5 million, pre-tax.

For plan valuation purposes, we currently use a discount rate of 6.25 percent. The discount rate is determined considering high-quality long-term corporate bond rates at the valuation date. The discount rate is compared to the Citigroup Pension Discount Curve adjusted for ALLETE’s specific cash flows. We believe the adjusted discount curve used in this comparison does not materially differ in duration and cash flows for our pension obligation. The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors annually reviews and approves the rate of return and discount rate estimates used for pension valuation and accounting purposes. (See Note 15.)


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
34


Critical Accounting Estimates (Continued)

Regulatory Accounting. Our regulated utility operations are subject to the provisions of SFAS 71, “Accountingguidance on accounting for the Effectseffects of Certain Typescertain types of Regulation”. SFAS 71regulation. This guidance requires us to reflect the effect of regulatory decisions in our financial statements. Regulatory assets or liabilities arise as a result of a difference between GAAP.GAAP and the accounting principles imposed by the regulatory agencies. Regulatory assets represent incurred costs that have been deferred as they are probable for recovery in customer rates. Regulatory liabilities represent obligations to make refunds to customers and amounts collected in rates for which the related costs have not yet been incurred.

We recognize regulatory assets and liabilities in accordance with applicable state and federal regulatory rulings. The recoverability of regulatory assets is periodically assessed by considering factors such as, but not limited to, changes in regulatory rules and rate orders issued by applicable regulatory agencies. The assumptions and judgments used by regulatory authorities may have an impact on the recovery of costs, the rate of return on invested capital, and the timing and amount of assets to be recovered by rates. A change in these assumptions may result in a material impact on our results of operations. (See Note 5. Regulatory Matters.)

Valuation of Investments. As partOur long-term investment portfolio includes the real estate assets of ourALLETE Properties, debt and equity securities consisting primarily of securities held to fund employee benefits, auction rate securities, and investments in emerging technology portfolio, we have several minority investments in venture capital funds and direct investments in privately-held, start-up companies. We account for our investment in venture capital funds under the equity method and account for our direct investments in privately-held companies under the cost method because of our ownership percentage. These investments are included in Investments on our consolidated balance sheet.funds. Our policy is to review these investments for impairment on a quarterly basis by assessing such factors as continued commercial viability of products, cash flow and earnings. Our consideration of possible impairment for our real estate assets requires us to make judgments with respect to the current fair values of this real estate. The poor market conditions for real estate in Florida at this time require us to make certain assumptions in the determination of fair values due to the lack of current comparable sales activity. Any impairment would reduce the carrying value of the investmentour investments and be recognized as a loss. In 2007,2009, we recorded an impairment loss on these investments of $0.5$1.1 million pretax (none in 2006).2008; $0.5 million pretax in 2007), primarily due to our emerging technology funds. (See Note 6.7. Investments.)

Pension and Postretirement Health and Life Actuarial Assumptions. We account for our pension and postretirement benefit obligations in accordance with the accounting standards for defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans. These standards require the use of assumptions in determining our obligations and annual cost of our pension and postretirement benefits. An important actuarial assumption for pension and other postretirement benefit plans is the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets. In establishing the expected long-term return on plan assets, we take into account the actual long-term historical performance of our plan assets, the actual long-term historical performance for the type of securities we are invested in, and apply the historical performance utilizing the target allocation of our plan assets to forecast an expected long-term return.  Our expected rate of return is then selected after considering the results of each of those factors, in addition to considering the impact of current economic conditions, if applicable, on long-term historical returns. Our pension asset allocation at December 31, 2009, was approximately 53 percent equity, 28 percent debt, 14 percent private equity, and 5 percent real estate. Our postretirement health and life asset allocation at December 31, 2009, was approximately 54 percent equity, 38 percent debt, and 8 percent private equity. Equity securities consist of a mix of market capitalization sizes with domestic and international securities. We currently use an expected long-term rate of return of 8.5 percent in our actuarial determination of our pension and other postretirement expense. We review our expected long-term rate of return assumption annually and will adjust it to respond to any changing market conditions. A one-quarter percent decrease in the expected long-term rate of return would increase the annual expense for pension and other postretirement benefits by approximately $1.3 million, pre-tax.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
34


Critical Accounting Estimates (Continued)
Pension and Postretirement Health and Life Actuarial Assumptions (Continued)

The discount rate is computed using the Citigroup Pension Discount Curve adjusted for ALLETE’s projected cash flows to match our plan characteristics.  The Citigroup Pension Discount Curve is determined using high-quality long-term corporate bond rates at the valuation date. We believe the adjusted discount curve used in this comparison does not materially differ in duration and cash flows for our pension obligation. (See Note 16. Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans.)

Taxation. We are required to make judgments regarding the potential tax effects of various financial transactions and our ongoing operations to estimate our obligations to taxing authorities. These tax obligations include income, real estate and sales/use taxes. Judgments related to income taxes require the recognition in our financial statements of the largest tax benefit of a tax position that is “more-likely-than-not” to be sustained on audit. Tax positions that do not meet the “more-likely-than-not” criteria are reflected as a tax liability. These judgments include reservesliability in accordance with the guidance for potential adverse outcomes regarding tax positions that we have taken.accounting for uncertainty in income taxes. We must also assess our ability to generate capital gains to realize tax benefits associated with capital losses expected to be generated in future periods.losses. Capital losses may be deducted only to the extent of capital gains realized during the year of the loss or during the threetwo prior or five succeeding years for federal purposes, and fifteen succeeding years for Minnesota purposes. As of December 31, 2007, weWe have where appropriate, recorded a valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets associated with realized capital losses and impairments to reducethe extent it has been determined that it is more-likely-than-not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets to the amount we estimate is more likely thanasset will not to be realized in accordance with FIN 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109”. While we believe the resulting tax reserve balances as of December 31, 2007, reflect the most likely outcome of these tax matters in accordance with SFAS 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes,” the ultimate amount of capital losses resulting in tax benefits could differ from the net amount of deferred tax assets at December 31, 2007.realized.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K

35


Outlook

ALLETE is an energy company committed to earning a financial return that rewards our shareholders, allows for reinvestment in our businesses and sustains growth. New opportunities have arisen whichTo accomplish this, we believe will allow usintend to achievetake the actions necessary to earn our long term earningsallowed rate of return in our regulated businesses, while we pursue growth goals through our existinginitiatives in renewable energy, transmission and other energy-centric businesses. Our Regulated Utility expects to make significant investments to comply with renewable and environmental requirements, maintain its existing low-cost generation fleet and strengthen and enhance the regional transmission grid. In addition, we expect kilowatt-hour sales growth from existing and potential new customers. Earnings from our ATC investment are expected to grow as we anticipate making additional investments to fund our pro-rata share of ATC’s capital expansion program. We expect net income from Real Estate to be approximately 10 percent to 20 percent of total ALLETE consolidated net income over the next several years.

We will focus our business development activities on growth opportunities in, or complementary to, our core businesses. We believe that current weak market conditionsover the long term, wind energy will presentplay an opportunityincreasingly important role in our nation’s energy mix. We intend to addpursue the establishment of a renewable energy business focused initially on developing wind assets in North Dakota and the upper Midwest. We intend to develop wind resources which will be used to meet renewable supply requirements of our portfolioregulated businesses as well as wind resources that will be marketed to others. We will capitalize on our existing presence in North Dakota through BNI Coal, our recently acquired DC transmission line and our Bison 1 wind project. Through BNI Coal we have a long-term business presence and established landowner relationships in North Dakota. See page 38 for more discussion on the DC line acquisition and our Bison I project. For projects to be marketed to others, we intend to secure long-term power purchase agreements prior to construction of properties for sale at our Real Estate operations. We anticipate that we will have ready accessthe wind generation facilities. Establishment of the business is subject to sufficient funds for capital investments and acquisitions.appropriate MPUC approvals.

Earnings Guidance. In 2008, we expect ALLETE’s diluted earnings per share from continuing operationsWe also plan to bemake investments in the range of $2.70 to $2.90. This guidance reflects:

Regulated Utility
·New FERC-approved wholesale rates effective March 1, 2008;
·Minnesota Power’s intention to file a retail rate case with the MPUC in mid-2008, with interim rates in effect 60 days later;
·Minnesota Power’s expectation that electricity sales to industrial customers will continue at the current high levels during 2008;
·increased revenue from current cost recovery riders related to the Company’s investments in environmental and renewable energy initiatives;
·increased operation and maintenance expenses, including labor and benefit costs;
·increased financing costs associated with the 2008 capital expenditure program;
·anticipation of approximately $316 million in capital expenditures in 2008, about half of which will be invested in environmental and renewable energy initiatives;

Investment in ATC
·the expectation of ALLETE investing an additional $5 to $7 million in ATC in 2008;
Real Estate
·a continuation of the difficult market conditions; and
·an expectation that net income in 2008 will be less than in 2007.

Energy. As part of our strategy, we will leverage the strengths of our Regulated Utility business to improve our strategic and financial outlook and seek growth opportunities in close proximity to existing operations in the Midwest. We believe electric industry deregulation is unlikely in Minnesota and Wisconsin in the next five years.

Minnesota Power expects significant rate base growth over the next several years as it makes capital expenditures to comply with renewable energy requirements and environmental mandates. In addition, significant investment will be made in our existing low-cost generation fleet to provide for continued future operations as we continue to believe ownership of low-cost generation is a competitive advantage. Minnesota Power will also look forupper Midwest transmission opportunities whichthat strengthen andor enhance the regional transmission grid, andor take advantage of our geographicgeographical location between sources of renewable energy and growingend users. In addition, we plan to make additional investments to fund our pro rata share of ATC’s future capital expansion program. Minnesota Power is also participating with other regional utilities in making regional transmission investments as a member of the CapX2020 initiative. The CapX2020 initiative is discussed in more detail on page 40.

We are also exploring investing in other energy-centric businesses that will complement an entrance into the renewable energy markets. Our capital investmentsbusiness, or leverage demand trends related to transmission, environmental control or energy efficiency.

ALLETE intends to sell its Florida land assets at reasonable prices, over time or in bulk transactions, and reinvest the proceeds in its growth initiatives. ALLETE Properties does not intend to acquire additional real estate.

Regulated Operations. Minnesota Power’s long-term strategy is to maintain its competitively priced production of energy, reduce customer concentration exposure, comply with environmental permit conditions and renewable requirements, and earn our allowed rate of return. Keeping the production of energy competitive enables Minnesota Power to effectively compete in the wholesale power markets, and minimizes retail rate increases to help maintain the viability of its customers. As part of maintaining cost competitiveness, Minnesota Power intends to reduce its exposure to possible future carbon and GHG legislation by reshaping its generation portfolio, over time, to reduce its reliance on coal. Minnesota Power intends to reduce its customer concentration risk to reduce exposure to cyclical industries; this may include restructuring commercial contracts, additional sales to other regional power suppliers, and reshaping our power supply to be more flexible to swings in customer demand. We will be recovered throughmonitor and review environmental proposals and may challenge those that add considerable cost with limited environmental benefit. Current economic conditions require a combinationvery careful balancing of the benefit of further environmental controls with the impacts of the costs of those controls on our customers as well as on the company, and its competitive position. We will pursue current cost recovery riders to recover environmental and anticipated increased base electric rates. We also expect an average annual kilowatt-hour growthrenewable investments, and will work with our legislators and regulators to earn a fair return.

Rates. Entities within our Regulated Operations segment file for periodic rate revisions with the MPUC, the FERC or the PSCW.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
35


Outlook (Continued)
Rates (Continued)

2008 Rate Case. In May 2008, Minnesota Power filed a retail rate increase request with the MPUC seeking additional revenues of approximately one$40 million annually; the request also sought an 11.15 percent from our existing customers, as well as up to 400 MWreturn on equity, and a capital structure consisting of additional growth from several potential new industrial customers planning projects in our service territory.54.8 percent equity and 45.2 percent debt. As a result of a May 2009 Order and an August 2009 Reconsideration Order, the MPUC granted Minnesota Power a revenue increase of approximately $20 million, including a return on equity of 10.74 percent and a capital structure consisting of 54.79 percent equity and 45.21 percent debt. Rates went into effect on November 1, 2009.

Our energy strategy isInterim rates, subject to refund, were in effect from August 1, 2008 through October 31, 2009. During 2009, Minnesota Power recorded a $21.7 million liability for refunds of interim rates, including interest, required to be made as a leaderresult of the May 2009 Order and the August 2009 Reconsideration Order. In 2009, $21.4 million was refunded, with a remaining $0.3 million balance to be refunded in early 2010; $7.6 million of the movement toward renewable energyrefunds required to be made were related to interim rates charged in 2008.

With the May 2009 Order, the MPUC also approved the stipulation and cleanersettlement agreement that affirmed the Company’s continued recovery of fuel and purchased power plants. We believe we can meet our customers’ electric energy needs forcosts under the next decade while achieving real reductionsformer base cost of fuel that was in total carbon emissions. We intend to aggressively pursue renewable energy resources and expect to comply with Minnesota’s 25 percent renewable energy mandateeffect prior to the 2025 deadline.retail rate filing. The transition to the former base cost of fuel began with the implementation of final rates on November 1, 2009. Any revenue impact associated with this transition will be identified in a future filing related to the Company’s fuel clause operation.

2010 Rate Case. Minnesota Power previously stated its intention to file for additional revenues to recover the costs of significant investments to ensure current and future system reliability, enhance environmental performance and bring new renewable energy to northeastern Minnesota. As a result, Minnesota Power filed a retail rate increase request with the MPUC on November 2, 2009, seeking a return on equity of 11.50 percent, a capital structure consisting of 54.29 percent equity and 45.71 percent debt, and on an annualized basis, an $81.0 million net increase in electric retail revenue.

Minnesota law allows the collection of interim rates while the MPUC processes the rate filing. On December 30, 2009, the MPUC issued an Order (the Order) authorizing $48.5 million of Minnesota Power’s November 2, 2009, interim rate increase request of $73.0 million. The MPUC cited exigent circumstances in reducing Minnesota Power’s interim rate request. Because the scope and depth of this reduction in interim rates was unprecedented, and because Minnesota law does not allow Minnesota Power to formally challenge the MPUC’s action until a final decision in the case is rendered, on January 6, 2010, Minnesota Power sent a letter to the MPUC expressing its concerns about the Order and requested that the MPUC reconsider its decision on its own motion. Minnesota Power described its belief the MPUC’s decision violates the law by prejudging the merits of the rate request prior to an evidentiary hearing and results in the confiscation of utility property. Further, the Company is concerned that the decision will have negative consequences on the environmental policy directions of the State of Minnesota by denying recovery for statutory mandates during the pendency of the rate proceeding. The MPUC has not acted in response to Minnesota Power’s letter.

The rate case process requires public hearings and an evidentiary hearing before an administrative law judge, both of which are scheduled for the second quarter of 2010. A final decision on the rate request is expected in the fourth quarter. We cannot predict the final level of rates that may be approved by the MPUC, and we cannot predict whether a legal challenge to the MPUC’s interim rate decision will be forthcoming or successful.

FERC-Approved Wholesale Rates. Minnesota Power’s non-affiliated municipal customers consist of 16 municipalities in Minnesota and 1 private utility in Wisconsin. SWL&P, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ALLETE, is also a customer of Minnesota Power. In 2008, Minnesota Power entered into new contracts with these customers which transitioned customers to formula-based rates, allowing rates to be adjusted annually based on changes in cost. In February 2009, the FERC approved our municipal contracts which expire December 31, 2013. Under the formula-based rates provision, wholesale rates are set at the beginning of the year based on expected costs and provide for a true-up calculation for actual costs. Wholesale rate increases totaling approximately $6 million and $10 million annually were implemented on February 1, 2009 and January 1, 2010, respectively, with approximately $6 million of additional revenues under the true-up provision accrued in 2009, which will be billed in 2010.

2009 Wisconsin Rate Increase. SWL&P’s current retail rates are based on a December 2008 PSCW retail rate order that became effective January 1, 2009, and allows for an 11.1 percent return on equity. The new rates reflected a 3.5 percent average increase in retail utility rates for SWL&P customers (a 13.4 percent increase in water rates, a 4.7 percent increase in electric rates, and a 0.6 percent decrease in natural gas rates). On an annualized basis, the rate increase will generate approximately $3 million in additional revenue.

Industrial Customers. Electric power is one of several key inputs in the taconite mining, paper production, and pipeline industries. In 2009, approximately 37 percent (57 percent in 2008), of our Regulated Utility kilowatt-hour sales were made to our industrial customers, which includes the taconite, paper and pulp, and pipeline industries.

Beginning in the fall of 2008, worldwide steel makers began to dramatically cut steel production in response to reduced demand driven largely by the global credit concerns. United States raw steel production ran at approximately 50 percent of capacity in 2009, reflecting poor demand in automobiles, durable goods, and structural and other steel products.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
36

 

Outlook (Continued)
EnergyIndustrial Customers (Continued)

Integrated Resource PlanIn late 2008, Minnesota taconite producers began to feel the impacts of decreased steel demand, and reduced taconite production levels occurred in 2009. Annual taconite production in Minnesota was approximately 18 million tons in 2009 (40 million tons in 2008 and 39 million tons in 2007). On October 31, 2007, Consequently, 2009 kilowatt-hour sales to our taconite customers were lower by approximately 54 percent from 2008 levels, and we sold available power to Other Power Suppliers to partially mitigate the earnings impact of these lower taconite sales.

Raw steel production in the United States is projected to improve in 2010, and is estimated to run at approximately 60 percent of capacity. As a result, Minnesota Power filed its Integrated Resource Plan (IRP),expects an increase in taconite production in 2010 compared to 2009, although production will still be less than previous years’ levels. We will continue to market available power to Other Power Suppliers in an effort to mitigate the earnings impact of these lower industrial sales. Sales to Other Power Suppliers are dependent upon the availability of generation and are sold at market-based prices into the MISO market on a comprehensive estimatedaily basis or through bilateral agreements of futurevarious durations. We can make no assurances that our power marketing efforts will fully offset the reduced earnings resulting from lower demand nominations from our industrial customers.

Minnesota Power’s paper and pulp customers ran at, or very near, full capacity needs within the Minnesota Power service territory. Minnesota Power believes it can meet the estimated future customer demand for the next decade while achieving real reductionsmajority of 2009, despite the fact that the industry as a whole experienced the impacts of the global recession in reduced sales of nearly every paper grade. Federal tax credits provided a subsidy for paper producers which allowed them to remain competitive. Minnesota Power’s paper and pulp customers benefited from the emissiontemporary or permanent idling of GHGs (primarily carbon dioxide).competitor plants both in North America and in Europe, as well as continued strength of the Canadian dollar and the Euro which has reduced imports both from Canada and Europe.

Minnesota PowerOur pipeline customers continued to operate at near capacity levels. As Western Canadian oil sands reserves continue to develop and expand, pipeline operators served by the Company are executing expansion plans to meet expected loads through approximately 2020 by adding a significant amount of renewable generationtransport Western Canadian crude oil reserves (Alberta Oil Sands) to United States markets. Access to traditional Midwest markets is being expanded to Southern markets as the Canadian supply is displacing domestic production and some supporting peaking generation.deliveries imported from the Gulf Coast. We do not planbelieve we are strategically positioned to add new coal generation or enter into long-term power purchase agreements from coal-based generation resources without a GHG solution. We plan to add 300 to 500 megawatts of carbon-minimizing renewable energy to our generation mix. Besides the additional generation from renewable sources, Minnesota Power anticipates future supply will come from a combination of sources, including:
·"As-needed" peaking and intermediate generation facilities;
·Expiration of wholesale contracts presently in place;
·Short-term market purchases;
·Improved efficiency of existing generation and power delivery assets; and
·Expanded conservation and demand-side management initiatives.

We do not anticipate the need for new base load system generation within the Minnesota Power service territory through approximately 2020, and we project a one percent average annual growth in electric usage from our existing customers over that time frame.serve these expanding pipeline facilities.

Mesaba Energy Project. Prospective Additional Load.On August 30, 2007, the MPUC issued an order denying Excelsior Energy Inc.’s request Several companies in northeastern Minnesota continue to progress in development of natural resource based projects that represent long-term growth potential and load diversity for a power purchase agreement with Xcel Energy to sell power from the Mesaba Energy Project (Mesaba Project). We participatedMinnesota Power. These potential projects are in the MPUC proceedingferrous and non-ferrous mining and steel industries. These projects include PolyMet Mining Corporation (PolyMet), Mesabi Nugget Delaware, LLC (Mesabi Nugget), and United States Steel Corporation’s expansion at its Keewatin Taconite facility. Additionally, Essar Steel Limited Minnesota (Essar), continues to demonstratework with local agencies on infrastructure development for its taconite mine, direct reduction iron-making facility, and steel mill within the unnecessary costs the Mesaba Project would cause for our ratepayers and the negative energy policy impacts of a forced resource addition. The MPUC’s August 30, 2007, order states that the MPUC will explore in IRPs and resource acquisition proceedings whether all Minnesota utilities should participate in the Mesaba Project. Beyond the fact that we forecast no need for base load energy supply additions until late in the next decade, we object to the Mesaba Project because it does not include a GHG solution.Nashwauk, MN municipal utility service boundary.

Climate ChangePolyMet. A key component of our energy strategyMinnesota Power has executed a long-term contract with PolyMet, a new industrial customer planning to start a copper-nickel and precious metal (non-ferrous) mining operation in northeastern Minnesota. PolyMet is a goal to reduce overall GHG emissions. While there continuescurrently in the environmental permitting process, and the public comment period on its Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) closed on February 3, 2010. Assuming that the DEIS is judged to be debate aboutcomplete, the causesMinnesota Department of Natural Resources and extentthe U.S. Army Corps of global warming, certain scientific evidence suggestsEngineers may issue a Statement of Adequacy by mid-year 2010, with issuance of environmental permitting to follow. Should these events occur, operations could begin in late 2011 and Minnesota Power will begin to supply approximately 70 MW of power through a contract lasting at least through 2018.

Mesabi Nugget. The construction of the initial Mesabi Nugget facility is essentially complete and the first production occurred in January 2010. Steel Dynamics, Inc., the principal owner of Mesabi Nugget, has indicated that emissions from fossil fuel generation facilities are a contributing factor.commissioning and production ramp-up activities will occur throughout 2010, with full production levels expected to be reached during the year. Mesabi Nugget is currently pursuing permits for taconite mining activities on lands formerly mined by Erie Mining Company and LTV Steel Mining Company near Hoyt Lakes, MN. Assuming receipt of environmental permits to mine by the end of 2010, mining activities could begin in 2011, which would allow Mesabi Nugget to self-supply its own taconite concentrates and would result in increased electrical loads. Minnesota Power has a long history of environmental stewardship.15 MW long-term power supply contract with Mesabi Nugget lasting at least through 2017.

We believe that future regulations may restrictKeewatin Taconite. In February 2008, United States Steel Corporation announced its intent to restart a pellet line at its Keewatin Taconite processing facility (Keetac). This pellet line, which has been idled since 1980, could be restarted and updated as part of a $300 million investment, bringing about 3.6 million tons of additional pellet making capability to northeastern Minnesota. The public comment period for a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the emissions of GHGs from our generation facilities. Several proposalsKeetac facility ended on the Federal level to “cap” the amount of GHG emissions have been made. Other proposals consider establishing emissions allowances or taxes as economic incentives to address the GHG emission issue.January 26, 2010.

In 2007, Minnesota passed legislation establishing non-binding targets for GHG reductions. This legislation establishes a goal of reducing statewide GHG emissions across all sectors producing those emissions to a level at least 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2015, at least 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and at least 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. Minnesota is also participating in the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Accord, a regional effort to develop a multi-state approach to GHG emission reductions. We are proactively taking steps to strategically engage the GHG emission issue and the impact of climate change regulation on our business.

Minnesota Power is addressing this challenge by taking the following steps that also ensure reliable and environmentally compliant generation resources to meet our customer’s requirements.

·We will consider only carbon minimizing resources to supply power to our customers. We will not consider a new coal resource without a carbon emission solution.
·We will aggressively pursue Minnesota’s Renewable Energy Standard by adding significant renewable resources to our portfolio of generation facilities and power supply agreements.
·We will continue to improve the efficiency of coal-based generation facilities.
·We plan to implement aggressive demand side conservation efforts.
·We will continue to support research of technologies to reduce carbon emissions from generation facilities and support carbon sequestration efforts.
·We plan to achieve overall carbon emission reductions while maintaining competitively priced electric service to our customers.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
37

 


Outlook (Continued)
Energy (Continued)

Renewable Generation Sources. EnergyThe areas in which we operate have strong wind, water and biomass resources, and provide us with opportunities to develop a number of renewable forms of generation. Our electric service area in Northeastern Minnesota is well situated for delivery of renewable energy that is generated here and in adjoining regions. We intend to secure the most cost competitive and geographically advantageous renewable energy resources available. We believe that the demand for these resources is likely to grow, and the costs of the resources to generate renewable energy will continue to escalate. While we intend to maintain our disciplined approach to developing generation assets, we also believe that by acting sooner rather than later we can deliver lower cost power to our customers and maintain or improve our cost competitiveness among regional utilities. We will continue to work cooperatively with our customers, our regulators and the communities we serve to develop generation options that reflect the needs of our customers as well as the environment. We believe that our location and our proactive leadership in developing renewable generation provide us with a competitive advantage.

We have already begun executing this strategy. For more than a century, we have been Minnesota’s leading producer of renewable hydroelectric energy. By the second quarter of this year, we will have doubled our renewable generation capacity with wind additions in North Dakota and Minnesota. We will also continue to support research and development activity in carbon capture and storage technologies that will enable our industry to better manage GHG emissions associated with existing and future coal based generating assets.

Renewable Energy.. In February 2007, Minnesota enacted a law requiring Minnesota Power to generate or procure 25 percent of ourMinnesota Power’s total retail energy throughsales in Minnesota come from renewable energy sources by 2025. The legislationlaw also requires Minnesota Power to meet interim milestones of 12 percent by 2012, 17 percent by 2016, and 20 percent by 2020. Minnesota Power has identified a plan to meet the renewable goals set by Minnesota and has included this in the most recent filing of the IRP with the MPUC. The legislationlaw allows the MPUC to modify or delay a standard obligation if implementation will cause significant ratepayer cost or technical reliability issues. If a utility is not in compliance with a standard, the MPUC may order the utility to construct facilities, purchase renewable energy or purchase renewable energy credits. Minnesota Power was developing and making renewable supply additions as part of its generation planning strategy prior to the enactment of this legislationlaw and this activity continues. Minnesota Power believes it will meet the requirements of this legislation.

We are executing our renewable energy strategy. In December 2006 and 2007, we began purchasing the output fromentered into two long-term power purchase agreements for a 50-MWtotal of 98 MWs of wind facility, Oliver Wind I, locatedenergy constructed in North Dakota under(Oliver Wind I and II). Taconite Ridge Wind I, our $50 million, 25-MW wind facility located in northeastern Minnesota became operational in 2008.

North Dakota Wind Project. On December 31, 2009, we purchased an existing 250 kV DC transmission line from Square Butte for $69.7 million. The 465-mile transmission line runs from Center, North Dakota to Duluth, Minnesota. We expect to use this line to transport increasing amounts of wind energy from North Dakota while gradually phasing out coal-based electricity currently being delivered to our system over this transmission line from Square Butte’s lignite coal-fired generating unit. Acquisition of this transmission line was approved by the MPUC and the FERC. In addition, the FERC issued an order on November 24, 2009, authorizing acquisition of the transmission facilities and conditionally accepting, upon compliance and other filings, the proposed tariff revisions, interconnection agreement and other related agreements.

On July 7, 2009, the MPUC approved our petition seeking current cost recovery of investments and expenditures related to Bison I and associated transmission upgrades. We anticipate filing a 25-yearpetition with the MPUC in the first quarter of 2010 to establish customer billing rates for the approved cost recovery. Bison I is the first portion of several hundred MWs of our North Dakota Wind Project, which upon completion will fulfill the 2025 renewable energy supply requirement for our retail load. Bison I, located near Center, North Dakota, will be comprised of 33 wind turbines with a total nameplate capacity of 75.9 MWs and will be phased into service in late 2010 and 2011.

On September 29, 2009, the NDPSC authorized site construction for Bison I. On October 2, 2009, Minnesota Power filed a route permit application with the NDPSC for a 22 mile, 230 kV Bison I transmission line that will connect Bison I to the DC transmission line at the Square Butte Substation in Center, North Dakota. An order is expected in the first quarter of 2010.

Manitoba Hydro. Minnesota Power has a long-term power purchase agreement with an affiliate of FPL Energy.

Manitoba Hydro expiring in 2015. (See Item 1. Business – Power Supply.) In May 2007, the MPUC approved a second 25-year wind power purchase agreement to purchase an additional 48-MW of wind energy from Oliver Wind II, an expansion of Oliver Wind I located in North Dakota. The MPUC also allowed current cost recovery for associated transmission upgrades. In November 2007, Oliver Wind II became operational and we began purchasing the output from the wind facility.

In May 2007, the MPUC approved a 20-year Community-Based Energy Development Project power purchase agreement. The 2.5-MW Wing River Wind project, with Wing River Wind, LLC, became operational July 2007.

In September 2007, the MPUC approved our site permit application and we began construction of the $50 million, 25-MW Taconite Ridge Wind I Facility, located in northeastern Minnesota.addition, Minnesota Power filed a petition for current cost recovery on the Taconite Ridge Wind I Facility with the MPUC in August 2007. In October 2007, the DOC recommended approval of Minnesota Power’s current cost recovery filing. The MPUC hearing regarding Minnesota Power’s current cost recovery filing is currently waiting scheduling. The Taconite Ridge Wind I Facility is expected to become operational in mid-2008.

We continue to investigatenegotiating definitive agreements on two additional renewable energy resources including biomass, hydroelectric and wind generation that will help us meet the Minnesota 25 percent renewable energy standard. In particular, we are conducting a feasibility study for construction of a 25-MW biomass generating unit at Laskin, as well as looking at opportunities to expand biomass energy production at existing facilities. Additionally, we are pursuing a potential 10-MW expansion of our Fond du Lac hydroelectric station. We will make specific renewable project filings for regulatory approval as needed.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
38


Outlook (Continued)
Energy (Continued)

In January 2008, Minnesota Power andpurchased power transactions with Manitoba Hydro executed a term sheet for the purchase of surplus energy beginning in 2008 andHydro: an anticipated 250-MW capacity purchase to begin in about 2020. Minnesota Power anticipates the initial purchase of surplus energy will be about 100 MWs during high hydro production periodsover the next ten years, followed by an anticipated long-term purchase of a 250-MW capacity and energy agreement beginning in the spring and fall.approximately 2020. The 250-MW long-term purchase will require construction of hydroelectric facilities in Manitoba and major new transmission facilities between Canada and the United States. Transmission studies and definitive agreement negotiations are ongoing. Both purchases require MPUC approval.

Hibbard Renewable Energy Center. On September 30, 2009, we purchased boilers and associated systems previously owned by the City of Duluth. This facility was initially built in the late 1930s as a coal burning power plant, and retrofitted to burn wood-based biomass fuel as well as coal. Over time, Minnesota Power intends to invest approximately $20 million to upgrade the boilers and Manitoba Hydro have one yearassociated systems to complete negotiationsincrease biomass energy generation at the plant. Hibbard’s current generating capacity is approximately 50 MWs. This purchase will help us achieve Minnesota’s mandate of providing 25 percent of our retail energy from renewable resources by 2025.

Integrated Resource Plan. On October 5, 2009, Minnesota Power filed with the MPUC its 2010 Integrated Resource Plan, a comprehensive estimate of future capacity needs within Minnesota Power’s service territory. Minnesota Power does not anticipate the need for new base load generation within the Minnesota Power service territory over the next 15 years, and sign a definitive agreement. Each purchaseplans to meet estimated future customer demand while achieving:

·Increased system flexibility to adapt to volatile business cycles and varied future industrial load scenarios;
·Reductions in the emission of GHGs (primarily carbon dioxide); and
·Compliance with mandated renewable energy standards.

To achieve these objectives over the coming years, we plan to reshape our generation portfolio by adding 300 to 500 megawatts of renewable energy to our generation mix, and exploring options to incorporate peaking or intermediate resources. Our 76 MW Bison I Wind Project in North Dakota is expected to require MPUC approval.be in service in late 2010 and 2011.

We project average annual long-term growth of approximately one percent in electric usage over the next 15 years. We will also focus on conservation and demand side management to meet the energy savings goals established in Minnesota legislation.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
38


Outlook (Continued)

Climate Change. Minnesota Power is addressing climate change by taking the following steps that also ensure reliable and environmentally compliant generation resources to meet our customer’s requirements.

·Expand our renewable energy supply.
·Improve the efficiency of our coal-based generation facilities, as well as other process efficiencies.
·Provide energy conservation initiatives with our customers and demand side efforts.
·Support research of technologies to reduce carbon emissions from generation facilities and support carbon sequestration efforts.
·Achieve overall carbon emission reductions.

The scientific community generally accepts that emissions of GHGs are linked to global climate change. Climate change creates physical and financial risk. These physical risks could include, but are not limited to, increased or decreased precipitation and water levels in lakes and rivers; increased temperatures; and the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events. These all have the potential to affect the Company’s business and operations.

CapX 2020.Federal Legislation. We believe that future regulations may restrict the emissions of GHGs from our generation facilities. Several proposals at the Federal level to “cap” the amount of GHG emissions have been made. On June 26, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. H.R. 2454 is a comprehensive energy bill that also includes a cap-and-trade program. H.R. 2454 allocates a significant number of emission allowances to the electric utility sector to mitigate cost impacts on consumers. Based on the emission allowance allocations, we expect we would have to purchase additional allowances. We’re unable to predict at this time the value of these allowances.

On September 30, 2009, the Senate introduced S. 1733, the Senate version of H.R. 2454. This legislation proposes a more stringent, near-term greenhouse emissions reduction target in 2020 of 20 percent below 2005 levels, as compared to the 17 percent reduction proposed by H.R. 2454. 

Congress may consider proposals other than cap-and-trade programs to address GHG emissions. We are unable to predict the outcome of H.R. 2454, S. 1733, or other efforts that Congress may make with respect to GHG emissions, and the impact that any GHG emission regulations may have on the Company. We cannot predict the nature or timing of any additional GHG legislation or regulation. Although we are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs could have a material impact on our financial results.

Greenhouse Gas Reduction. In 2007, Minnesota passed legislation establishing non-binding targets for carbon dioxide reductions. This legislation establishes a goal of reducing statewide GHG emissions across all sectors to a level at least 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2015, at least 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and at least 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050.

Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord. Minnesota is also participating in the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord (the Accord), a regional effort to develop a multi-state approach to GHG emission reductions. The Accord includes an agreement to develop a multi-sector cap-and-trade system to help meet the targets established by the group.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting. In May 2008, Minnesota passed legislation that required the MPCA to track emissions and make interim emissions reduction recommendations towards meeting the State’s goal of reducing GHG by 80 percent by 2050. GHG emissions from 2008 were reported in 2009.

We cannot predict the nature or timing of any additional GHG legislation or regulation. Although we are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs could have a material impact on our financial results.

International Climate Change Initiatives. The United States is not a party to the Kyoto Protocol, which is a protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that requires developed countries to cap GHG emissions at certain levels during the 2008 to 2012 time period. In December 2009, leaders of developed and developing countries met in Copenhagen, Denmark, under the UNFCCC and issued the Copenhagen Accord. The Copenhagen Accord provides a mechanism for countries to make economy-wide GHG emission mitigation commitments for reducing emissions of GHG by 2020 and provide for developed countries to fund GHG emissions mitigation projects in developing countries. President Obama participated in the development of, and endorsed the Copenhagen Accord.

EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule. On September 22, 2009, the EPA issued the final rule mandating that certain GHG emission sources, including electric generating units, are required to report emission levels. The rule is intended to allow the EPA to collect accurate and timely data on GHG emissions that can be used to form future policy decisions. The rule was effective January 1, 2010, and all GHG emissions must be reported on an annual basis by March 31 of the following year. Currently, we have the equipment and data tools necessary to report our 2010 emissions to comply with this rule.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
39


Outlook (Continued)
Climate Change (Continued)

Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule. On October 27, 2009, the EPA issued the proposed Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring rule. This proposed regulation addresses the six primary greenhouse gases and new thresholds for when permits will be required for new facilities and existing facilities which undergo major modifications. The rule would require large industrial facilities, including power plants, to obtain construction and operating permits that demonstrate Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) are being used at the facility to minimize GHG emissions. The EPA is expected to propose BACT standards for GHG emissions from stationary sources.

For our existing facilities, the proposed rule does not require amending our existing Title V operating permits to include BACT for GHGs. However, modifying or installing units with GHG emissions that trigger the PSD permitting requirements could require amending operating permits to incorporate BACT to control GHG emissions.

EPA Endangerment Findings. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published its findings that the emissions of six GHG, including CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide, endanger human health or welfare. This finding may result in regulations that establish motor vehicle GHG emissions standards in 2010. There is also a possibility that the endangerment finding will enable expansion of the EPA regulation under the Clean Air Act to include GHGs emitted from stationary sources. A petition for review of the EPA’s endangerment findings was filed by the Coalition for Responsible Regulation, et. al. with the United States District Court Circuit Court of Appeals on December 23, 2009.

Coal Ash Management Facilities. Minnesota Power generates coal ash at all five of its steam electric stations. Two facilities store ash in onsite impoundments (ash ponds) with engineered liners and containment dikes. Another facility stores dry ash in a landfill with an engineered liner and leachate collection system. Two facilities generate a combined wood and coal ash that is either land applied as an approved beneficial use, or trucked to state permitted landfills. Minnesota Power continues to monitor state and federal legislative and regulatory activities that may affect its ash management practices. The EPA is expected to propose new regulations in February 2010 pertaining to the management of coal ash by electric utilities. It is unknown how potential coal ash management rule changes will affect Minnesota Power’s facilities. On March 9, 2009, the EPA requested information from Minnesota Power (and other utilities) on its ash storage impoundments at Boswell and Laskin. On June 22, 2009, Minnesota Power received an additional EPA information request pertaining to Boswell. Minnesota Power responded to both these information requests. On August 19, 2009, the Minnesota DNR visited both the Boswell and Laskin ash ponds. The purpose of the inspection was to assess the structural integrity of the ash ponds, as well as review operational and maintenance procedures. There were no significant findings or concerns from the DNR staff during the inspections.

CapX2020. Minnesota Power is a participant in the CapX 2020 projectCapX2020 initiative which represents an effort to ensure the electricityelectric transmission and distribution reliability ofin Minnesota and the surrounding region for the future. CapX 2020 started with the state'sCapX2020, which includes Minnesota’s largest transmission owners, includingconsists of electric cooperatives, municipals and investor-owned utilities, assessingand has assessed the transmission system and projected growth in customer demand for electricity through 2020. Studies show that the region's transmission system will require major upgrades and expansion to accommodate increased electricity demand as well as support renewable energy expansion through 2020.

The CapX 2020 participants filed a Certificate of Need for three 345 kV lines and associated system interconnections with the MPUC in August 2007. Following a public process, the MPUC is expected to decide on the need for these 345 kV lines by early 2009. If the MPUC certifies need, it will then determine routes for the new lines in subsequent proceedings. Portions of the 345 kV lines will also require approvals by federal officials and by regulators in North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin. A fourth line, a 230 kV line in north central Minnesota, is also among the CapX 2020 projects. A request for a Certificate of Need/Site Permit for this line is expected to be filed by mid-2008, with the MPUC decision on need and routing expected approximately one year later.

Minnesota Power mayintends to invest capital in two of the lines, a 250-mile 345 kV line between Fargo, North Dakota and Monticello, Minnesota, and a 70-mile, 230 kV line between Bemidji and Grand Rapids, Minnesota. The MPUC issued the Certificate of Need for the 230 kV line in July 2009. The MPUC decision on the Route Permit application is expected in 2010. Our total investment in these two lines would entail an estimated $60 million and $90 million, respectively. Upon receipt of the required Certificates of Need, weis expected to be approximately $100 million. We intend to fileseek recovery of these costs in a filing with the MPUC for current cost recovery of the expenditures related to our investment in the linesfirst quarter of 2010, under a Minnesota Power transmission cost recovery tariff rider mechanism authorized by Minnesota legislation. For the utilities involved, the first four projects represent a combined investment of approximately $1.4 to $1.7 billion. Construction of the lines is targeted to begin in 2009 orlate 2010 and last approximately threemay take up to four years, but depends on the timing and outcome of regulatory need and routing decisions.years.

AREA and Boswell Unit 3 Emission Reduction Plans.Plans. In May 2006, the MPUC approved our filing for current cost recovery of expenditures to reduce emissions to meet pending federal requirements at Taconite Harbor and Laskin under the AREA Plan. The AREA Plan approval allows Minnesota Power to recover Minnesota jurisdictional costs for SO2, NOX and mercury emission reductionsWe have made at these facilities without a rate proceeding. Current cost recovery from retail customers will include a return on investment and recovery of incremental expense. The AREA Plan is expected to significantly reduce emissions from Taconite Harbor and Laskin, while maintaining a reliable and reasonably-priced energy supply to meet the needs of our customers. We believe thatinvestments in pollution control and abatement technologies applicable to these plants have matured to the point where further significant air emission reductions can be attained in a relatively cost-effective manner. Current cost recovery filings are required to be made 90 days prior to the anticipated in-service date for the equipment at each unit, with rate recovery beginning the month following the in-service date.

Minnesota Power has completed installation of new equipment at Laskin and current cost recovery of AREA Plan costs has begun. The first of three Taconite Harbor unit installations was completed and placed back in-service in June 2007, with current cost-recovery began in July 2007. We anticipate cost recovery on the other Taconite Harbor units once work is completed and the units have been placed back in-service, which is expected in late 2008. As of December 31, 2007, we have spent $36 million of the anticipated $60 million in AREA Plan expenditures.

In May 2006, we announced plans to make emission reduction investments at our Boswell Unit 3 generating unit. Plans include reductions of particulate,unit that reduces particulates, SO2, NOXx and mercury emissions to meet pendingfuture federal and state requirements. In late March 2007,This equipment was placed in service in November 2009. During the Boswell Unit 3 project receivedconstruction phase, the necessary construction permits. On October 26, 2007, the MPUC issued a written order approving Minnesota Power’s petition for current cost recovery for the Boswell Unit 3 emission reduction plan with some minor modifications and additional reporting requirements. MPUC approval authorized a cash return on construction work in progress during the construction phase in lieu of AFUDC-EquityAFUDC, and allows forthis amount was collected through a return on investment and current cost recovery rider. Our 2010 rate case proposes to move this project from a current cost recovery rider to base rates.

The environmental regulatory requirements for Taconite Harbor Unit 3 are pending approval of incremental operationsthe Minnesota Regional Haze implementation by the EPA. We are evaluating compliance requirements for this Unit. Environmental retrofits at Laskin and maintenance expenses onceTaconite Harbor Units 1 and 2 have been completed and are in-service.

Boswell NOX Reduction Plan. In September 2008, we submitted to the unitMPCA and MPUC a $92 million environmental initiative proposing cost recovery for expenditures relating to NOX emission reductions from Boswell Units 1, 2, and 4. The Boswell NOX Reduction Plan is placed intoexpected to significantly reduce NOX emissions from these units. In conjunction with the NOX reduction, we plan to make an efficiency improvement to our existing turbine/generator at Boswell Unit 4 adding approximately 60 MWs of total output. The Boswell 1, 2 and 4, selective non-catalytic reduction NOX controls are currently in service, while the Boswell 4 low NOX burners and turbine efficiency projects are anticipated to be in service in late 2009. On December 26, 2007, the MPUC approved Boswell Unit 3’s2010. Our 2010 rate adjustmentcase seeks recovery for 2008. As of December 31, 2007, we have spent $89 million of the anticipated $200 millionthis project in Boswell Unit 3 emission reduction plan expenditures.base rates.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
39



Outlook (Continued)
Energy (Continued)

Rate Cases. We have and will continue to significantly increase our rate base. On December 28, 2007, we submitted a filing with the FERC seeking to increase electric rates for our wholesale customers. On February 8, 2008, the FERC approved our wholesale rate. Our wholesale customers consist of 16 municipalities in Minnesota and two private utilities in Wisconsin, including SWL&P. The FERC authorized an average 10 percent increase for wholesale municipal customers, a 12.5 percent increase for SWL&P, and an overall return on equity of 11.25 percent. The rate increase will go into effect on March 1, 2008, and on an annualized basis, the filing will generate approximately $7.5 million in additional revenue. We also anticipate filing a retail rate case with the MPUC in mid-2008. SWL&P also anticipates filing a retail rate case with the PSCW in 2008.

Industrial Customers. Electric power is a key component in the mining, paper production and pipeline industries. Approximately 50 percent of our Regulated Utility kilowatthour sales are made to our Large Power Customers in the taconite, paper and pulp, and pipeline industries.

Based on our research of the taconite industry, Minnesota taconite production for 2008 is anticipated to be about 41.5 million tons (production was 39 million tons in 2007; 40 million tons in 2006 and 41 million tons in 2005).

The pulp and paper customers are projected to run near capacity in 2008. Capacity closures in North America and Europe, along with the strength of the Euro and Canadian dollar, should benefit Minnesota Power’s customers.

Our pipeline customers continued to operate at or above historic pumping levels during 2007 and forecast operating at record pumping levels in 2008. As Western Canadian oil sands reserves continue to develop and expand, pipeline operators served by the Company are executing expansion plans to transport additional crude oil supply to United States markets. We believe we are strategically positioned to serve these expanding pipeline facilities as Canadian supply continues to grow and displace domestic and imported Gulf Coast production.

Several natural resource-based companies have been making significant progress developing new projects in northeastern Minnesota. These potential projects are in the ferrous and non-ferrous mining, paper, oil and steel related industries. They include the Polymet Mining, Mesabi Nugget and Minnesota Steel Industry projects, as well as the Keewatin Taconite expansion. If some or all of these projects are completed, Minnesota Power could serve between 100 MW and 400 MW of new load.

In 2006, a contract for approximately 70 MW was executed with PolyMet Mining, a new customer planning to start a copper, nickel and precious metals (non-ferrous) mining operation in late 2008. If PolyMet Mining receives all necessary environmental permits and achieves start-up, the contract will be fully implemented and would run through at least 2018. In April 2007, the MPUC approved our contract with PolyMet Mining.

In June 2007, a contract was executed with Mesabi Nugget, a company currently constructing an iron nugget facility near Hoyt Lakes, Minnesota. Iron nuggets, which typically consist of more than 94 percent iron (compared to taconite pellets at 63-65 percent iron), are ideal in meeting the requirements of electric-arc furnaces producing steel. On February 7, 2008, the MPUC held a hearing on the contract and adopted a motion approving the contract, subject to the issuance of a written order. Mesabi Nugget has received all necessary permits to begin construction and operations in 2008 and would be a 15-MW customer with the potential for further load growth. The Mesabi Nugget contract would run through at least 2017.

In February 2008, United States Steel announced its intent to restart a pellet line at its Keewatin Taconite processing facility. This pellet line, which has been idled since 1980, would be restarted and updated as part of a $300 million investment. It is anticipated to bring about 3.6 million tons of additional pellet making capability to Northeastern Minnesota by 2011, pending successful approval of environmental permitting.

A new contract with Blandin Paper was approved by the MPUC on February 4, 2008. The new contract carries forward the same contract term, cancellation provision and take-or-pay provisions of the prior contract and only changed the demand nomination feature.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
40

 

Outlook (Continued)
Energy. (Continued)
Transmission. We have an approved cost recovery rider in-place for certain transmission expenditures, and our current billing factor was approved by the MPUC in June 2009. The billing factor allows us to charge our retail customers on a current basis for the costs of constructing certain transmission facilities plus a return on the capital invested. Our 2010 rate case proposes to move completed transmission projects from the current cost recovery rider to base rates.

Power Sales Agreement. On October 29, 2009, Minnesota Fuel Clause. In June 2003,Power entered into an agreement to sell Basin 100 MWs of capacity and energy for the MPUC initiatednext ten years. The transaction is scheduled to begin in May 2010, following the expiration of two wholesale power sales contracts on April 30, 2010. The Basin agreement contains a fixed monthly schedule of capacity charges with an investigation intoannual escalation provision. The energy charge is based on a fixed monthly schedule and provides for annual escalation based on our cost of fuel. The agreement allows us to recover a pro-rata share of increased costs related to emissions that may occur during the continuing usefulnesslast five years of the fuel clause as a regulatory tool for electric utilities. Our initial comments on the proposed scope and procedure of the investigation were filed in July 2003. In November 2003, the MPUC approved the initial scope and procedure of the investigation. Subsequent comments were filed during 2004. The fuel clause docket then became dormant while the MISO Day 2 docket, which held many fuel clause considerations, became active. In March 2007, the MPUC solicited comments on whether the original fuel clause investigation should continue and, if so, what issues should be pursued. We filed comments in April 2007, suggesting that if the investigation continued, it should focus on remaining key elements of the fuel clause, beyond the purchased power transactions examined in the MISO Day 2 proceeding, such as fuel purchases and outages. Additionally, we suggested that more specialized fuel clause issues be addressed in separate dockets on an as needed basis. The DOC filed a letter requesting that the parties to the docket update the record in this proceeding by the end of September 2007. Minnesotacontract. (See Item 3. Power complied by filing additional comments, updating our previous filings in the fuel clause investigation docket to account for changes occurring since the investigation began in July 2003. Reply comments were filed in October 2007. The fuel clause investigation docket is awaiting further action by the MPUC.Marketing.)

Fuel Clause Recovery of MISO Day 2 Costs. We filed a petition with the MPUC in February 2005 to amend our fuel clause to accommodate costs and revenue related to the day-ahead and real-time markets through which we engage in wholesale energy transactions in MISO (MISO Day 2). In December 2006, the MPUC issued an order allowing us and the other utilities involved in the MISO Day 2 proceeding to continue recovering MISO Day 2 charges through the Minnesota retail fuel clause except for MISO Day 2 administrative charges. On January 8, 2007, this order was challenged by the Minnesota OAG, through a request for reconsideration. The request was opposed by Minnesota Power and the other utilities, as well as MISO. The reconsideration request was denied by the MPUC. Upon denial of the reconsideration request, the OAG appealed the MPUC Order in a filing with the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Oral argument in the case will be held on February 27, 2008, and a decision would be expected approximately 90 days thereafter. The Company is unable to predict the outcome of this matter.

The December 2006 MPUC order, subject to appeal, granted deferred accounting treatment for three MISO Day 2 charge types that were determined to be administrative charges. Under the order, Minnesota Power refunded, through customer bills, approximately $2 million of administrative charges previously collected through the fuel clause between April 1, 2005, and December 31, 2006, and recorded these administrative charges as a regulatory asset. We were permitted to continue accumulating MISO Day 2 administrative charges after December 31, 2006, as a regulatory asset until we file our next rate case, at which time recovery for such charges will be determined. The balance of this regulatory asset was $3.7 million on December 31, 2007, and we consider regulatory recovery to be probable. This order removed the subject to refund requirement of the two interim orders, and included extensive fuel clause reporting requirements impacting our monthly and annual fuel clause filings with the MPUC. There was no impact on earnings as a result of this ruling. As a result of the MPUC’s December 2006 order allowing recovery of nearly all MISO Day 2 charges through the fuel clause, we rescinded our December 2005 Letter of Intent to Withdraw from MISO in December 2006.

Investment in ATC.ATC. Our Wisconsin subsidiary, Rainy River Energy Corporation – Wisconsin, has invested $60 million in ATC. As ofAt December 31, 2007,2009, our equity investment balance in ATC was $65.7$88.4 million, representing approximately an approximate 8 percent ownership interest. (See Note 6.) We will haveATC provides transmission service under rates regulated by the opportunityFERC that are set in accordance with the FERC’s policy of establishing the independent operation and ownership of, and investment in, transmission facilities. ATC rates are based on a 12.2 percent return on common equity dedicated to utility plant. ATC has identified $2.5 billion in future projects needed over the next 10 years to improve the adequacy and reliability of the electric transmission system. This investment is expected to be funded through a combination of internally generated cash, debt, and investor contributions. As additional opportunities arise, we plan to make additional investments in ATC through general capital calls based upon our pro-rata investment levelownership interest in ATC. WeOn January 29, 2010, we invested an additional $1.2 million in ATC. In total, we expect to invest an additional $5 to $7approximately $2 million throughout 2010. (See Note 6. Investment in 2008.ATC.)

Investments and Other

BNI Coal. In 2009, BNI Coal sold approximately 4.2 million tons of coal (4.5 million tons in 2008) and anticipates similar sales in 2010.

Real Estate. ALLETE Properties.Conditions ALLETE Properties represents our Florida real estate investment. Our current strategy for the assets is to complete and maintain key entitlements and infrastructure improvements without requiring significant additional investment, and sell the portfolio over time or in bulk transactions. ALLETE intends to sell its Florida land assets at reasonable prices when opportunities arise, and reinvest the proceeds in its growth initiatives. ALLETE does not intend to acquire additional Florida real estate.

Our two major development projects are Town Center and Palm Coast Park. Ormond Crossings, a third major project that is currently in the planning stage, received land use approvals in December 2006. However, due to a change in the Florida real estate market were very difficultlaw that became effective in 2007. Market demand worsened throughoutJuly 2009, those approvals are being revised. It is anticipated that the year, consistent with conditions experienced throughout mostCity of Ormond Beach, FL will approve a new Development Agreement for Ormond Crossings in the first quarter of 2010. The new agreement will facilitate development of the restproject as currently planned. Separately, Lake Swamp wetland mitigation bank was permitted on land that was previously part of the country. While we are unable to predict when the Florida real estate market will improve, we believe the long-term growth indicators for Florida real estate remain strong.Ormond Crossings.

Substantially all of our properties have key entitlements in place. With minimal leverage, low on-going carrying costs and a low inventory book basis, we expect that our Real Estate business will continue to be profitable, and an important contributor to ALLETE’s on-going earnings stream. We expect net income from Real Estate to be approximately 10 percent to 20 percent of total ALLETE consolidated net income over the next several years. We believe the northeastern Florida market area where a large portion of our real estate inventory is located will continue to experience above average long-term population growth, and our inventory of mixed-use land in those areas will remain attractive to buyers.

ALLETE Properties plans to maximize the value of the property it currently owns through entitlement, infrastructure improvements and orderly sales of properties. In addition to managing its current real estate inventory, ALLETE Properties is focused on identifying, acquiring, entitling and developing infrastructure on vacant land in Florida and other parts of the southeast United States.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
41



Outlook (Continued)
Real Estate (Continued)

Progress continues on our three major planned development projects in Florida—Town Center, a new downtown for Palm Coast; Palm Coast Park, located in northwest Palm Coast; and Ormond Crossings, located in Ormond Beach along Interstate 95. (See Item 1 – Business - Real Estate.) Other ongoing land sales and rental income at the retail shopping center in Winter Haven provide us with additional revenue.

Summary of Development Projects
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2007
Ownership
Total
Acres (a)
Residential
Units (b)
Non-residential
Sq. Ft. (b, c)
     
Town Center80%   
At December 31, 2006 1,3562,2222,705,310
Property Sold (99)(130)(540,059)
Change in Estimate (a)
 (266)19762,949
  9912,2892,228,200
     
Palm Coast Park100%   
At December 31, 2006 4,3373,7603,156,800
Property Sold (888)(606)(40,000)
Change in Estimate (a)
 (13)
  3,4363,1543,116,800
     
Ormond Crossings100%   
At December 31, 2006 5,960(d)(d)
Change in Estimate (a)
 8  
  5,968  
  10,3955,4435,345,000
Summary of Development Projects TotalResidentialNon-residential
Land Available-for-SaleOwnership
Acres (a)
Units (b)
Sq. Ft. (b, c)
Current Development Projects    
Town Center80%8542,2642,238,400
 Palm Coast Park100%3,1433,1543,555,000
Total Current Development Projects 3,9975,4185,793,400
Proposed Development Project    
 Ormond Crossings100%2,924(d)(d)
Other    
Lake Swamp Wetland Mitigation Project100%3,034(e)(e)
Total of Development Projects 9,9555,4185,793,400

(a)Acreage amounts are approximate and shown on a gross basis, including wetlands and minoritynon-controlling interest.
(b)Estimated and includes minoritynon-controlling interest. Density at build out may differ from these estimates.
(c)Depending on the project, non-residential includes retail commercial, non-retail commercial, office, industrial, warehouse, storage and institutional.
(d)
A development order that was approved by the City of Ormond Beach includes upis being replaced by a development agreement to 3,700 residential units and 5 million square feet of non-residential space. We estimate the first two phasesfacilitate development of Ormond Crossings willas currently planned. At build-out, we expect the project to include 2,500-3,2002,950 residential units, and 2.5-3.54.87 million square feet of various types of non-residential space.Density of the residentialspace and non-residential components of the project will be determined based upon market and trafficpublic facilities.
(e)Lake Swamp wetland mitigation cost considerations. Approximately 2,000 acres will be devoted tobank is a regionally significant wetlands mitigation bank.bank that was permitted by the St. Johns River Water Management District in 2008 and by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in December 2009. Wetland mitigation credits will be used at Ormond Crossings and will also be available for sale to developers of other projects that are located in the bank’s service area.


Summary of Other Land Inventories
For the Year Ended
December 31, 2007
OwnershipTotalMixed UseResidentialNon-residentialAgricultural
Acres (a)
      
       
Palm Coast Holdings80%     
At December 31, 2006 2,1361,404346247139
Property Sold (111)(78)(14)(19)
Change in Estimate (a)
 (1,160)(964)(239)96(53)
  86536210732967
       
Lehigh80%     
At December 31, 2006 223140749
Change in Estimate (a)
 66
  2291407415
       
Cape Coral100%     
At December 31, 2006 30129
Property Sold (8)(8)
  22121
       
Other (b)
100%     
At December 31, 2006 934 –934
Property Sold (364)(364)
Change in Estimate (a)
 (113)(113)
  457 – –457
  1,573362248424539
ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
41


Outlook (Continued)
Investments and Other (Continued)

Other Land Available-for-Sale (a)
TotalMixed UseResidentialNon-residentialAgricultural
Acres (b)
     
Other Land1,277394113267503

(a)Other land includes land located in Palm Coast, Lehigh, and Cape Coral, Florida.
(b)Acreage amounts are approximate and shown on a gross basis, including wetlands and minoritynon-controlling interest.
(b)Includes land located in Palm Coast, Florida not included in development projects.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
42


Outlook (Continued)
Real Estate (Continued)

Town Center. Major construction continues at Town Center. In April 2007, Palm Coast Center, LLC and Target Corporation closed on a 52 acre commercial site and immediately began construction on a 424,000 square foot retail power center. An 85,000 square foot Publix grocery store anchored retail center opened in 2007, and an 84,000 square foot medical center is under construction along with a Hilton Garden Inn and a residential condominium project. Several other projects are in the permitting stage including a charter school, independent living facility, movie theater, office buildings and banks.

At build-out, Town Center is expected to include approximately 3,200 residential units including lodging rooms and assisted living units, and 3.8 million square feet of various types of non-residential space. Market conditions will determine how quickly Town Center builds out.

Palm Coast Park. Major infrastructure construction at Palm Coast Park was substantially complete by the end of 2007. At build-out, Palm Coast Park is expected to include approximately 4,000 residential units, 3.2 million square feet of various types of non-residential space and certain public facilities. Market conditions will determine how quickly Palm Coast Park builds out.

Ormond Crossings. Planning, engineering design and permitting of the master infrastructure are ongoing. Density of the residential and non-residential components of the project will be determined based upon market and traffic mitigation cost considerations. We estimate the first two phases of Ormond Crossing will include 2,500-3,200 residential units and 2.5–3.5 million square feet of various types of non-residential space.

Ormond Crossings will also include an approximately 2,000 acre regionally significant wetlands mitigation bank that is expected to be fully permitted by the St. Johns River Water Management District and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers by mid-2009. Wetland mitigation credits will be used at Ormond Crossings and will be available for sale to other developers. Market conditions will determine how quickly Ormond Crossings builds out.

We have a diversified mix of residential and non-residential property under contract and available for sale. At December 31, 2007, total pending land sales under contract were $55.2 million ($113.8 million at December 31, 2006) and are anticipated to close at various times through 2012. Prices on these contracts range from $20 to $42 per non-residential square foot, $15,000 to $27,200 per residential unit and $11,200 to $660,000 per acre for all other properties. Prices per acre are stated on a gross acreage basis and are dependent on the type and location of the properties sold. The majority of the other properties under contract are zoned non-residential or mixed use. Certain contracts allow us to receive participation revenue from land sales to third parties if various formula-based criteria are achieved.

Real Estate  
Pending Contracts (a, b)
 Contract
At December 31, 2007
Quantity (c)
Sales Price
Dollars in Millions  
Town Center  
Non-residential Sq. Ft.304,000$9.6
Residential Units4909.3
Palm Coast Park  
Non-residential Sq. Ft.
Residential Units1,26331.9
Other Land  
Acres1234.4
Total Pending Land Sales Under Contract $55.2

(a)For the year ended December 31, 2007, we had contract cancellations totaling $22.1 million.
(b)Pending contracts are contracts for which the due diligence period has ended, and the contract deposit is non-refundable subject to performance by the seller.
(c)Acreage amounts are approximate and shown on a gross basis, including wetlands and minority interest. Non-residential square feet and residential units are estimated and include minority interest. The actual property densities at build-out may differ from these estimates.

Decreases in pending land sales under contract during 2007 are primarilyLong-term finance receivables as of December 31, 2009, were $12.9 million, which included $7.8 million due to closing two large sales during the second quarter of 2007 and contract cancellations totaling $22.1 million. In April 2007, Palm Coast Center, LLC and Target Corporation closed on a tract at Town Centerfrom an entity which filed for $12.6 million andvoluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in June 2007, LRCF Palm Coast, LLC (Lowe Enterprises) closed2009. The estimated fair value of the collateral relating to these receivables was greater than the $7.8 million amount due at December 31, 2009, and no impairment was recorded on the first phasethese receivables; however, $0.3 million of its Sawmill Creek project at Palm Coast Park for $13.1 million pursuant to revised contract terms.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
43


Outlook (Continued)
Real Estate. (Continued)impairments was recorded on other receivables.

If a purchaser defaults on a sales contract, the legal remedy is usually limited to terminating the contract and retaining the purchaser’s deposit. The property is then available for resale. In many cases, contract purchasers incur significant costs during due diligence, planning, designing and marketing the property before the contract closes, therefore they have substantially more at risk than the deposit.

AsALLETE intends to sell its Florida land assets at reasonable prices when opportunities arise. However, if weak market conditions continue for an extended period of December 31, 2007, we had $2.7 million of deferred profit on sales of real estate, before taxes and minority interest,time, the impact on our balance sheet. Allfuture operations would be the continuation of the deferred profit relateslittle to Town Centerno sales while still incurring operating expenses such as community development district assessments and is expectedproperty taxes. This could result in annual net losses for ALLETE Properties similar to be recognized in 2008 as the remaining development obligations are completed.

Other. We have the potential to recognize gains or losses on the sale of investments in our emerging technology portfolio. We plan to sell investments in our emerging technology portfolio as shares are distributed to us. Some restrictions on sales may apply, including, but not limited to, underwriter lock-up periods that typically extend for 180 days following an initial public offering. We have committed to make up to $1.0 million in additional investments in certain emerging technology holdings. We do not have plans to make any additional investments beyond this commitment.2009.

Income Taxes. Taxes.ALLETE’s aggregate federal and multi-state statutory tax rate is expected to be approximately 4041 percent for 2008.2010. On an ongoing basis, ALLETE has certain tax credits and other tax adjustments that will reduce the statutory rate to the expected effective tax rate. These tax credits and adjustments historically have included items such as investment tax credits, wind production tax credits, AFUDC-Equity, domestic manufacturer’s deduction, depletion, Medicare prescription reimbursement, as well as other items. The annual effective rate can also be impacted by such items as changes in income from operations before minoritynon-controlling interest and income taxes, state and federal tax law changes that become effective during the year, business combinations and configuration changes, tax planning initiatives and resolution of prior years’ tax matters. We expect our effective tax rate to be approximately 35 percent for 2008.2010.


Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flow ActivitiesLiquidity Position. ALLETE is well-positioned to meet the Company’s immediate cash flow needs. At December 31, 2009, we have a cash balance of approximately $26 million, $87.8 million of unused lines of credit ($157.0 million net of $69.2 million drawn down as of December 31, 2009), and a debt-to-capital ratio of 43 percent. In the first quarter 2010, we expect to use proceeds from the sale of $80 million First Mortgage Bonds to repay the amount drawn down on the line of credit.

We believe our financial conditionCapital Structure. ALLETE’s capital structure for each of the last three years is strong, as evidenced by a debt to total capital ratiofollows:

Year Ended December 312009%2008%2007%
Millions      
Common Equity$929.557$827.157$742.663
Non-Controlling Interest9.59.819.31
Long-Term Debt (Including Current Maturities)701.043598.742422.736
Short-Term Debt1.96.0
 $1,641.9100$1,441.6100$1,174.6100



ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
42


Liquidity and Capital Resources (Continued)

Cash Flows. Selected information from ALLETE’s Consolidated Statement of 36 percent at December 31, 2007. Our cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments were $46.4 million at December 31, 2007.Cash Flows is as follows:

Year Ended December 31200920082007
Millions   
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period$102.0$23.3$44.8
Cash Flows from (used for)   
Operating Activities137.4153.6124.2
Investing Activities(320.0)(276.1)(154.1)
Financing Activities106.3201.28.4
    Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents(76.3)78.7(21.5)
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period$25.7$102.0$23.3

Operating Activities. Cash flow from operating activities was $123.1$137.4 million for 20072009 ($142.5153.6 million for 2006; $53.52008; $124.2 million for 2005)2007). Cash flow from operating activities was lower in 2007 than 20062009 primarily due to a decrease in cash flow from operating assets and liabilities. Colder weather in December 2007 resulted inlower net income, an increase in customer receivables of $14.7 million. Cash used for prepaymentsaccounts receivable, and other is higher in 2007 due to an $11.5 million change in deferred fuel costs yet to be recovered through future billings. The increase in deferred fuel costs are a result of higher purchased power expenses due to generation outages relating to the AREA Plan environmental retrofits, lower hydro generation, lower Square Butte entitlement and Square Butte’s major scheduled outage. Other current liabilities decreased primarily due to a reduction in accrued taxes of $8.9 million. The decrease in cash flow from operating activities wasregulatory assets, partially offset by higher deferred tax and depreciation expense. Accounts receivable increased earningsdue a receivable for 2009 income tax refunds primarily resulting from continuing operationssubstantial income tax deductions under the bonus depreciation provision of $11.2 millionthe American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the Act). Deferred regulatory assets increased due to the collection of certain current cost recovery rider revenue attributable to 2009 being deferred into a decreaselater year. Deferred tax expense increased also due to the bonus depreciation provisions of the Act, and depreciation expense increased in cash used for discontinued operations of $13.5 million.conjunction with the increase in property, plant and equipment.

Cash flow from operating activities was higher in 20062008 than 2005, primarily2007 due to an increase in deferred income tax expense and decreased working capital requirements, which was partially offset by lower net income and higher contributions to defined benefit pension and postretirement health plans (included in Other Liabilities on the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows). Working capital requirements decreased mainly due to lower uncollected purchased power costs (included in Prepayments and Other on the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows). Deferred income tax expense increased due to the $77.9Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, and contributions to defined benefit pension and postretirement health plans increased $15.6 million Kendall County Charge in 2005 and related $24.3 million federal tax refund received in 2006. Cash also increased $4.4 million in 2006 due to the collection of customer receivables which were up as a result of colder weather in December 2005. Other differences between 2006 and 2005 include an additional $9 million cash used for inventories in 2006 and the payment of approximately $13 million of 2005 accrued liabilities. Additional inventories primarily reflect coal purchases in anticipation of maintenance on coal handling equipment.during 2008.

Investing Activities. Cash flow used for investing activities was $320.0 million for 2009 ($276.1 million for 2008; $154.1 million for 2007 (cash flow2007). Cash used for investing activities of $154.7 million for 2006; cash flow from investing activities of $3.9 million for 2005). Activity within our short-term investment portfolio reflectedwas higher than 2008 reflecting increased net sales of short-term investments of $81.4 million compared to $12.4 million in 2006. The net proceeds from the sale of short-term investments were used to fund increasedcapital additions to property, plant, and equipment. AdditionsCapital additions to property, plant, and equipment were higher in 2007 than 2006 by $111.7 million primarilyincreased due to increased spending onthe purchase of an existing 250 kV DC transmission line for $69.7 million offset by a decrease in other capital additions because of the completion of some major environmental construction projects. Cash investedcapital projects in ATC decreased2008 and 2009. In addition, 2008 included higher net sales of short-term investments and proceeds from $51.4 millionthe sale of assets (retail shopping center) in 2006 to $8.7 million in 2007.Winter Haven, Florida.

Cash used for investing activities was higher in 20062008 than 2005, primarily due2007 reflecting increased capital additions to $51.4 million invested in ATC and a $43.7 million increase in expenditures for property, plant, and equipment which were partially offset by the proceeds from the sale of assets (retail shopping center) in Winter Haven, Florida. Capital additions to property, plant, and equipment increased due to majorconstruction activity for environmental construction projects. Activity within our short-term investment portfolio reflected net sales of short-termretrofit projects, AREA Plan projects, Taconite Ridge, and additional investments of $12.4 million compared to $32.3 million in 2005.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
44



Liquidity and Capital Resources (Continued)
Cash Flow Activities (Continued)ATC.

Financing Activities. Cash flow from financing activities was $9.5$106.3 million for 2007 (cash used2009 ($201.2 million for 2008; $8.4 million for 2007). Cash from financing activities was $32.6 million for 2006; cash used for financing activities was $13.9 million for 2005). The increaselower in cash flows from financing activities resulted from additional long-term2009 than 2008 due to less debt issued in 2007, which included $50.0and common stock issuance. During 2009, $111.4 million of Senior unsecured notes and $6.0 million in tax exempt bonds at SWL&P. The increase in new long-term debt was offset partially by the retirementissued, while in 2008 $198.7 million of $20.0 in first mortgage bonds and $2.5 million in variable demand revenue refunding bonds. In 2007, $66.5 million in long-term debt was refinanced at lower rates.issued. During 2009, proceeds from common stock issuances totaled $65.2 million, while in 2008, proceeds from common stock issuances totaled $71.1 million. Lower debt and common stock issuance in 2009 was a result of issuing capital in 2008 ahead of the need for this capital.

Cash used forfrom financing activities was higher in 20062008 than 20052007 primarily due to an additional $7.2 million in dividends paid as a resultfrom the issuance of more shares outstanding, a higher dividend rate and fewer shares ofdebt for $198.7 million. In addition, common stock was issued underfor net proceeds of $71.1 million. Financing activities increased to support our long-term incentive compensation plan. In 2006, we refinanced $77.8 million of long-term debt at lower rates.

In 2006, our Town Center development project was financed with tax-exempt bonds issued by the Town Center District and a revolving development loan. In March 2005, the Town Center District issued $26.4 million of tax-exempt, 6% Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 2005, which are payable through property tax assessments on the land owners over 31 years (by May 1, 2036). The bond proceeds (less capitalized interest, a debt service reserve fund and cost of issuance) were used to pay for the construction of a portion of the major infrastructure improvements at Town Center. The bonds are payable from and collateralized by the revenue derived from assessments imposed, levied and collected by the Town Center District. The assessments represent an allocation of the costs of the improvements, including bond financing costs, to the lands within the Town Center District benefiting from the improvements. The assessments were billed to Town Center landowners effective November 2006. To the extent that we still own land at the time of the assessment, we will incur the cost of our portion of these assessments, based upon our ownership of benefited property. At December 31, 2007, we owned approximately 69 percent of the assessable land in the Town Center District (73 percent at December 31, 2006). As we sell property, the obligation to pay special assessments passes to the new landowners. Under current accounting rules, these bonds are not reflected as debt on our consolidated balance sheet.

Our Palm Coast Park development project in Florida is being financed with tax-exempt bonds issued by the Palm Coast Park District. In May 2006, Palm Coast Park District issued $31.8 million of tax-exempt, 5.7% Special Assessment Bonds, Series 2006 which are payable through property tax assessments on the land owners over 31 years (by May 1, 2037). The bond proceeds (less capitalized interest, a debt service reserve fund and cost of issuance) were used to fund the construction of the major infrastructure improvements at Palm Coast Park, and to mitigate traffic and environmental impacts. The bonds are payable from and collateralized by the revenue derived from assessments imposed, levied and collected by the Palm Coast Park District. The assessments represent an allocation of the costs of the improvements, including bond financing costs, to the lands within the Palm Coast Park District benefiting from the improvements. The assessments will be billed to Palm Coast Park landowners effective November 2007. To the extent that we still own land at the time of the assessment, we will incur the cost of our portion of these assessments, based upon our ownership of benefited property. At December 31, 2007, we owned 86 percent of the assessable land in the Palm Coast Park District (97 percent at December 31, 2006). As we sell property, the obligation to pay special assessments passes to the new landowners. Under current accounting rules, these bonds are not reflected as debt on our consolidated balance sheet.capital expenditure program.

Working Capital. Additional working capital, if and when needed, generally is provided by consolidated bank lines of credit or the sale of securities or commercial paper. We have 0.2available consolidated bank lines of credit aggregating $87.8 million, the majority of which expire in January 2012. In addition, we have 0.4 million original issue shares of our common stock available for issuance through Invest Direct,, our direct stock purchase and dividend reinvestment plan. We have bank linesplan, and 3.3 million original issue shares of credit aggregating $170.0 million, the majority of which expire in January 2012. In January 2006, we renewed, increased and extendedcommon stock available for issuance through a committed, syndicated, unsecured revolving credit facilityDistribution Agreement with LaSalle Bank National Association, as Agent, for $150 million (Line) with a maturity date of January 11, 2011. The Line was subsequently extended for an additional year in December 2006 and currently matures on January 11, 2012. At our request and subject to certain conditions, the Line may be increased to $200 million and extended for two additional 12-month periods. We may prepay amounts outstanding under the Line in whole or in part at our discretion. Additionally, we may irrevocably terminate or reduce the size of the Line prior to maturity. The Line may be used for general corporate purposes, working capital and to provide liquidity in support of our commercial paper program.KCCI, Inc. The amount and timing of future sales of our securities will depend upon market conditions and our specific needs. We may sell securities to meet capital requirements, to provide for the retirement or early redemption of issues of long-term debt, to reduce short-term debt and for other corporate purposes.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
4543

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources (Continued)

Securities

On December 10, 2007, ALLETE filed a registration statement with the SEC, pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, relating to the possible issuance from time to time of ALLETE common stock or first mortgage bonds. The amount of securities issuable by ALLETE is established from time to time by its board of directors. We may sell all or a portion of the above-described registered securities if warranted by market conditions and our capital requirements. Any offer and sale of the above-mentioned securities will be made only by means of a prospectus meeting the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933 and the rules and regulations there under.

On February 1, 2007,. In January 2009, we issued $60$42.0 million in principal amount of unregistered First Mortgage Bonds (Bonds), 5.99% Series due February 1, 2027, in the private placement market. The Bonds mature January 15, 2019, and carry a coupon rate of 8.17 percent. We have the option to prepay all or a portion of the Bonds at our discretion, subject to a make-whole provision. Proceeds were used to retire $60 million in principal amount of First MortgageThe Bonds 7% Series on February 15, 2007.

On June 8, 2007, we issued $50 million of senior unsecured notes (Notes) in the private placement market. The Notes bear an interest rate of 5.99 percent and will mature on June 1, 2017. We have the option to prepay all or a portion of the Notes at our discretion,are subject to a make-whole provision.additional terms and conditions which are customary for this type of transaction. We used the proceeds from the sale of the Notes to fund utility capital projects and for general corporate purposes.

On behalf of SWL&P, the City of Superior, Wisconsin, issued $6.4 million in principal amount of Collateralized Utility Revenue Refunding Bonds (Series A Bonds) and $6.1 million of Collateralized Utility Revenue Bonds (Series B Bonds) on October 3, 2007. The Series A Bonds bear an interest rate of 5.375% and will mature on November 1, 2021. The proceeds, together with other funds, were used to redeem $6.5 million of existing 6.125% bonds. The Series B Bonds bear an interest rate of 5.75% and will mature on November 1, 2037. The proceeds will be used to fund qualifying electric and gas projects.

On January 11, 2008, we accepted an offer from certain institutional buyers in the private placement market to purchase $60 million of First Mortgage Bonds (Bonds). The Bonds were issued on February 1, 2008, carry an interest rate of 4.86% and will mature on April 1, 2013. We have the option to prepay all or a portion of the Bonds at our discretion, subject to a make-whole provision. We intend to useare using the proceeds from the sale of the Bonds to fund utility capital expenditures and for general corporate purposes. The Bonds were sold in reliance on exemption from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, to institutional accredited investors.

Financial CovenantsIn December 2009, we agreed to sell $80.0 million in principal amount of First Mortgage Bonds (Bonds) in the private placement market in three series as follows:

Issue Date
(on or about)
MaturityPrincipal AmountCoupon
February 17, 2010April 15, 2021$15 Million4.85%
February 17, 2010April 15, 2025$30 Million5.10%
February 17, 2010April 15, 2040$35 Million6.00%

We expect to use the proceeds from the February 2010 sale of Bonds to pay down the syndicated revolving credit facility, to fund utility capital investments or for general corporate purposes.

We entered into a Distribution Agreement with KCCI, Inc., originating in February 2008 and subsequently amended in February 2009, with respect to the issuance and sale of up to an aggregate of 6.6 million shares of our common stock, without par value. The shares may be offered for sale, from time to time, in accordance with the terms of the agreement pursuant to Registration Statement No. 333-147965. During 2009, 1.7 million shares of common stock were issued under this agreement resulting in net proceeds of $51.9 million. In 2008, 1.6 million shares were issued for net proceeds of $60.8 million.

In March 2009, we contributed 463,000 shares of ALLETE common stock, with an aggregate value of $12.0 million, to our pension plan. On May 19, 2009, we registered the 463,000 shares of ALLETE common stock with the SEC pursuant to Registration Statement No. 333-147965.

In 2009, we issued 0.4 million shares of common stock through Invest Direct, Employee Stock Purchase Plan and Retirement Savings and Stock Ownership Plan resulting in net proceeds of $13.3 million. These shares of common stock were registered under the following Registration Statement Nos. 333-150681, 333-105225, and 333-124455, respectively.

Financial Covenants. Our long-term debt arrangements contain customary covenants. In addition, our lines of credit and letters of credit supporting certain long-term debt arrangements contain financial covenants. The most restrictive covenant requires ALLETE to maintain a quarterly ratio of its Funded Debt to Total Capital (as the amounts are calculated in accordance with the respective long-term debt arrangements) of less than or equal to 0.65 to 1.00 measured quarterly. As of December 31, 2009, our ratio was approximately 0.41 to 1.00. Failure to meet this covenant couldwould give rise to an event of default if not correctedcured after notice from the lender, in which event ALLETE may need to pursue alternative sources of funding. Some of ALLETE’s debt arrangements contain “cross-default” provisions that would result in an event of default if there is a failure under other financing arrangements to meet payment terms or to observe other covenants that would result in an acceleration of payments due. As of December 31, 2007,2009, ALLETE was in compliance with its financial covenants.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

. Off-balance sheet arrangements are discussed in Note 8.11. Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
44


Liquidity and Capital Resources (Continued)

Contractual Obligations and Commercial Commitments. Minnesota Power has contractual obligations and other commitments that will need to be funded in the future, in addition to its capital expenditure programs. The following is a summarized table of contractual obligations and other commercial commitments at December 31, 2009.

 Payments Due by Period
Contractual Obligations Less than1 to 34 to 5After
As of December 31, 2009Total1 YearYearsYears5 Years
Millions     
Long-Term Debt (a)
$1,172.1$41.5$196.6$98.2$835.8
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans194.136.6105.452.1
Operating Lease Obligations89.18.826.415.838.1
Uncertain Tax Positions (b)
Unconditional Purchase Obligations394.0114.1102.730.4146.8
 $1,849.3$201.0$431.1$196.5$1,020.7

(a)Includes interest and assumes variable interest rates in effect at December 31, 2009, remains constant through remaining term.
(b)Excludes $9.5 million of noncurrent unrecognized tax benefits due to uncertainty regarding the timing of future cash payments related to the guidance in accounting for uncertain tax positions.

Long-Term Debt. Our long-term debt obligations, including long-term debt due within one year, represent the principal amount of bonds, notes and loans which are recorded on our consolidated balance sheet, plus interest. The table belowabove assumes the interest rate in effect at December 31, 2007,2009, remains constant through the remaining term. (See Note 7.10. Short-Term and Long-Term Debt.)

Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans. The funded status of the defined pension and other postretirement benefit obligations refers to the difference between plan assets and estimated obligations under the plans. The funded status may change over time due to several factors, including contribution levels, assumed discount rates and actual and assumed rates of return on plan assets.

Management considers various factors when making funding decisions such as regulatory requirements, actuarially determined minimum contribution requirements, and contributions required to avoid benefit restrictions for the pension plans. Estimated defined benefit pension contributions for years 2010 through 2014 are expected to be up to $25 million per year, and are based on estimates and assumptions that are subject to change. Funding for the other postretirement benefit plans is impacted by utility regulatory requirements. Estimated postretirement health and life contributions for years 2010 through 2014 are approximately $11 million per year, and are based on estimates and assumptions that are subject to change.

Unconditional Purchase Obligations. Unconditional purchase obligations represent our Square Butte power purchase agreements, minimum purchase commitments under coal and rail contracts, additional investment commitments in emerging technology funds and purchase obligations for certain capital expenditures related to the Taconite Ridge Wind Facility, AREA and Boswell Unit 3 environmental upgradeexpenditure projects. (See Note 8.11. Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies.)

Under our power purchase agreement with Square Butte that extends through 2026, we are obligated to pay our pro rata share of Square Butte’s costs based on our entitlement to the output of Square Butte’s 455-MW coal-fired generating unit near Center, North Dakota. OurMinnesota Power’s payment obligation iswill be suspended if Square Butte fails to deliver any power, whether produced or purchased, for a period of one year. Square Butte’s fixed costs consist primarily of debt service. The following table above reflects our share of future debt service based on our output entitlement of approximately 55 percent50 percent. This debt service may be reduced if the contingent power sales agreement with Minnkota Power goes into effect in 20082013. For further information on Square Butte see Note 11. Commitments, Guarantees and 50 percent thereafter. (See Note 8.)

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
46


Liquidity and Capital Resources (Continued)
Contractual Obligations and Commercial Commitments (Continued)Contingencies.

We have two wind power purchase agreements with an affiliate of FPLNextEra Energy to purchase the output from two wind facilities, Oliver Wind I and Oliver Wind II located near Center, North Dakota. We began purchasing the output from Oliver Wind I, a 50-MW facility, in December 2006 and the output from Oliver Wind II, a 48-MW facility in November 2007. Each agreement is for 25 years and provides for the purchase of all output from the facilities. There are no fixed capacity charges, and we only pay for energy as it is delivered to us.

 Payments Due by Period
Contractual Obligations Less than1 to 34 to 5After
As of December 31, 2007Total1 YearYearsYears5 Years
Millions     
Long-Term Debt (a)
$760.2$33.7$79.6$47.7$599.2
Operating Lease Obligations86.48.123.012.442.9
FIN 48 – Uncertain Tax Positions4.52.02.5
Unconditional Purchase Obligations407.7114.264.728.8200.0
 $1,258.8$158.0$169.8$88.9$842.1

(a)      Includes interest and assumes variable interest rates in effect at December 31, 2007, remains constant through remaining term.

We expect to contribute approximately $11 million to our defined benefit pension plans and $6 million to our postretirement health and life plans in 2008. We are unable to predict contribution levels to our defined benefit pension or postretirement health and life plans after 2008.

Credit Ratings

. Our securities have been rated by Standard & Poor’s and by Moody’s. Rating agencies use both quantitative and qualitative measures in determining a company’s credit rating. These measures include business risk, liquidity risk, competitive position, capital mix, financial condition, predictability of cash flows, management strength and future direction. Some of the quantitative measures can be analyzed through a few key financial ratios, while the qualitative ones are more subjective. The disclosure of these credit ratings is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold our securities. Ratings are subject to revision or withdrawal at any time by the assigning rating organization. Each rating should be evaluated independently of any other rating.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
45


Liquidity and Capital Resources (Continued)
Credit Ratings (Continued)

Credit RatingsStandard & Poor’sMoody’s
Issuer Credit RatingBBB+Baa2Baa1
Commercial PaperA-2P-2
Senior Secured  
First Mortgage Bonds(a)
A–Baa1
Pollution Control BondsA–Baa1A2
Unsecured Debt  
Collier County Industrial Development Revenue Bonds – Fixed RateBBB

Payout Ratio
(a)Includes collateralized pollution control bonds.

Common Stock Dividends. ALLETE is committed to providing an attractive, secure dividend to its shareholders while, at the same time, funding its growth strategy. The Company’s long-term objective is to maintain a dividend payout ratio similar to our peers and provide for future dividend increases. In 2007,2009, we paid out 93 percent (61 percent in 2008; 53 percent (53 percent in 2006; 259 percent in 2005)2007) of our per share earnings in dividends. The payout ratio in 2005 was impacted by a $1.84 per diluted share charge resulting from our assignment of the Kendall County power purchase agreement to Constellation Energy Commodities in April 2005. (See Note 10.)

On January 24, 2008,21, 2010, our Board of Directors increased the dividend on ALLETE common stock by 5 percent, declaringdeclared a dividend of $0.43$0.44 per share, unchanged from 2009, which is payable on March 1, 2008,2010, to shareholders of record at the close of business on February 15, 2008.2010.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
47


Capital Requirements

Continuing Operations.ALLETE’s projected capital expenditures for the years 20082010 through 20122014 are presented in the table below. In addition to non-regulated energy and real estate estimated capital expenditures (other), the table includes the estimated amount of capital expenditures related to the regulated utility for which we anticipate receiving current cost recovery. Actual capital expenditures may vary from the estimates due to changes in forecasted plant maintenance, regulatory decisions or approvals, future environmental requirements, and base load growth. A significant portion of the environmentalgrowth or capital expenditures and current cost recovery reflected in 2008 include expenditures for the Boswell Unit 3 emission reduction and AREA Plan projects. (See Item 1 - AREA and Boswell Unit 3 Emission Reduction Plans.)market conditions.

Capital Expenditures (a)
Capital Expenditures (a)
20082009201020112012Total
Capital Expenditures (a)
20102011201220132014Total
Regulated Utility OperationsRegulated Utility Operations Regulated Utility Operations 
Base and Other$121$136$173$158$151$739Base and Other$156$82$81$82$89$490
Current Cost Recovery (b)
 
Current Cost Recovery (a)
 
 Environmental130681223233 Environmental22
 Renewable541589710864481 Renewable8166147
 Transmission111715201578 Transmission521274213108
Total Current Cost Recovery195243124128102792 Generation
Total Current Cost Recovery8887274213257
Regulated Utility Capital ExpendituresRegulated Utility Capital Expenditures3163792972862531,531Regulated Utility Capital Expenditures244169108124102747
Other (c)
 715421
OtherOther 61824864
Total Capital ExpendituresTotal Capital Expenditures$323$380$302$290$257$1,552Total Capital Expenditures$250$187$132$110$811

(a)Actual and expected results will vary with time, regulatory requirements and company direction.
(b)Estimated current capital expenditures recoverable outside of a rate case.
(c)Excludes capitalized improvements on our real estate development projects, which are included in inventory. (See Note 6.)

We intend to finance about one-half of this capital expenditure programexpenditures from both internally generated funds about one-third withand incremental debt and the remainder with additional equity.

Discontinued Operations. There were no capital additions for discontinued operations in 2007 (none in 2006; $4.5 million in 2005).

Environmental and Other Matters

As previously mentioned in our Critical Accounting Estimates section, ourOur businesses are subject to regulation of environmental matters by various federal, state and local authorities. Due to future restrictive environmental requirements through legislation and/or rulemaking, we anticipate that potential expenditures for environmental matters will be material and will require significant capital investments. We are unable to predict the outcome of the issues discussed in Note 8.11. Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies. (See Item 11. Business – Environmental Matters.)

Market Risk

Securities Investments

Available-for-Sale Securities. At December 31, 2007,2009, our available-for-sale securities portfolio consisted of securities in a grantor trust established to fund certain employee benefits included in Investments, and various auction rate bonds and variable rate demand notes included as Short-Term Investments.securities. (See Note 6.7. Investments.)

Emerging Technology Portfolio. As part of our emerging technology portfolio, we have several minority investments in venture capital funds and direct investments in privately-held, start-up companies. (See Note 6.)


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
48


Capital Requirements (Continued)
Interest Rate Risk

. We are exposed to risks resulting from changes in interest rates as a result of our issuance of variable rate debt. We manage our interest rate risk by varying the issuance and maturity dates of our fixed rate debt, limiting the amount of variable rate debt, and continually monitoring the effects of market changes in interest rates. The table below presents the long-term debt obligations and the corresponding weighted average interest rate at December 31, 2007.2009.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
46


Market Risk (Continued)
Interest Rate Risk (Continued)

Principal Cash Flow by Expected Maturity DateExpected Maturity Date
Interest Rate Sensitive   Fair   Fair
Financial Instruments20082009201020112012ThereafterTotalValue20102011201220132014ThereafterTotalValue
Dollars in Millions        
    
Long-Term Debt        
Fixed Rate$7.5$2.5$1.4$330.9$345.1$333.2
Fixed Rate (a)
$1.6$71.1$19.6$528.1$623.6$657.3
Average Interest Rate – %7.15.66.35.55.6 5.95.26.95.95.8 
        
Variable Rate$4.3$8.2$3.6$1.7$59.8$77.6$77.7$3.6$12.3$1.7$2.8$57.0$77.4$77.5
Average Interest Rate – % (a)
7.33.53.93.53.7 
Average Interest Rate – % (b)
0.43.61.90.30.30.9 

(a)The $65 million line of credit is included in the fixed rate maturity of $528.1 as it will be refinanced with long-term debt in the first quarter of 2010.
(b)Assumes rate in effect at December 31, 2007,2009, remains constant through remaining term.

The interest rateInterest rates on variable rate long-term debt isare reset on a periodic basis reflecting current market conditions. Based on the variable rate debt outstanding at December 31, 2007,2009, and assuming no other changes to our financial structure, an increase or decrease of 100 basis points in interest rates would impact the amount of pretax interest expense by $0.8 million. This amount was determined by considering the impact of a hypothetical 100 basis point change to the average variable interest rate on the variable rate debt held as of December 31, 2007.

Commodity Price Risk

. Our regulated utility operations in Minnesota and Wisconsin incur costs for fuel (primarily coal)coal and related transportation), power, and natural gas purchased for resale in our regulated service territories, and related transportation.territories. Our regulated utilities’ exposure to price risk for these commodities is significantly mitigated by the current ratemaking process and regulatory environment, which generally allows arecovery of fuel clause surcharge if costs are in excess of those in our lastthe 2008 retail rate case filing. Conversely, costs below those in our lastthe 2008 retail rate case filing result in a rate credit.credit to our ratepayers. We seek to prudently manage our customers’ exposure to price risk by entering into contracts of various durations and terms for the purchase of coal and power (in Minnesota), power and natural gas (in Wisconsin), and related transportation costs.

Power Marketing

. Our power marketing activities consist of (1) purchasing energy in the wholesale market for resale in our regulated service territories when retail energy requirements exceed generation output and (2) selling excess available generationenergy and purchased power.

From time to time, our utility operations may have excess generationenergy that is temporarily not required by retail and municipalwholesale customers in our regulated service territory. We actively sell this generationenergy to the wholesale market to optimize the value of our generating facilities. This generation is generally

In 2009 kilowatt-hour sales to our taconite customers were lower by approximately 54 percent from 2008 levels. During 2009, we sold available power to Other Power Suppliers to partially mitigate the earnings impact of these lower industrial sales. Minnesota Power expects an increase in taconite production in 2010 compared to 2009, although production will still be less than previous years’ levels.

For the MISO marketyear ended December 31, 2009, we have entered into financial derivative instruments to manage price risk for certain power marketing contracts. Outstanding derivative contracts at market prices.December 31, 2009, consist of cash flow hedges for an energy sale that includes pricing based on daily natural gas prices, and FTRs purchased to manage congestion risk for forward power sales contracts. These derivative instruments are recorded on our consolidated balance sheet at fair value. As of December 31, 2009, we recorded approximately $0.7 million of derivatives in other assets on our consolidated balance sheet of which the entire balance relates to our FTRs. These derivative instruments settle monthly throughout the first five months of 2010. (See Note 8. Derivatives.)

Approximately 200 MWMWs of generationcapacity and energy from our Taconite Harbor facility in northern Minnesota has been sold through various long-term capacity and energy contracts. Long-term, we have entered into two capacity and energy sales contracts totaling 175-MW (201-MW175 MWs (201 MWs including a 15 percent reserve), which were effective May 1, 2005, and expire on April 30, 2010. Both contracts contain fixed monthly capacity charges and fixed minimum energy charges. One contract provides for an annual escalator to the energy charge based on increases in our cost of coal,fuel, subject to a small minimum annual escalation. The other contract provides that the energy charge will be the greater of athe fixed minimum charge or an annual amount based on the variable production cost of a combined-cycle, natural gas unit. Our exposure in the event of a full or partial outage at our Taconite Harbor facility is significantly limited under both contracts. When the buyer is notified at least two months prior to an outage, there is no exposure.liability. Outages with less than two months’months notice are subject to an annual duration limitation typical of this type of contract. These contracts qualify for the normal purchase normal sale exception under the guidance for derivative instruments and hedging activities and are not required to be recorded at fair value.

We also have a 50-MWare exposed to credit risk primarily through our power marketing activities. We use credit policies to manage credit risk, which includes utilizing an established credit approval process and monitoring counterparty limits.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
47


Market Risk (Continued)
Power Marketing (Continued)

Power Sales Agreement. On October 29, 2009, Minnesota Power entered into an agreement to sell Basin 100 MWs of capacity and energy for the next ten years. The transaction is scheduled to begin in May 2010, following the expiration of two wholesale power sales contract that extends throughcontracts on April 2008,30, 2010. The Basin agreement contains a fixed monthly schedule of capacity charges with formula pricinga minimum annual escalation provision. The energy charge is based on variable productiona fixed monthly schedule and provides for annual escalation based on our cost of fuel. The agreement allows us to recover a combustion-turbine, natural gas unit.pro-rata share of increased costs related to emissions that may occur during the last five years of the contract.


New Accounting Standards

New accounting standards are discussed in Note 2.1.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
49


Item 7A.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

See Item 77. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and Financial Condition – Market Risk for information related to quantitative and qualitative disclosure about market risk.


Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

See our consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 20072009 and 2006,2008, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007,2009, and supplementary data, also included, which are indexed in Item 15(a).


Item 9.              
Item 9.Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

Not applicable.


Item 9A.Controls and Procedures

Conclusion Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Under the supervision and with the participation of management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of ALLETE’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”)). Based upon those evaluations, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that such disclosure controls and procedures are effective to provide assurance that information required to be disclosed in ALLETE’s reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive and principal financial officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on our evaluation under the framework in Internal Control—Integrated Framework, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2009.

The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which is included herein.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
48


Item 9A.Controls and Procedures (Continued)

Changes in Internal Controls

There has been no change in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during our most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting. Based on our evaluation under the framework in Internal Control—Integrated Framework, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2007.

The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which is included herein.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
50



Item 9B.Other Information

Severance Pay Plan

On February 13, 2008, the Board of Directors approved the ALLETE and Affiliated Companies Change in Control Severance Plan, (the Plan) which provides certain key employees with severance benefits in connection with a change in control of ALLETE. The purpose of the Plan is to enable and encourage the continued dedication and objectivity of members of the Company's management. The Plan will allow the affected individuals to focus their attention on obtaining the best possible transaction and to make an independent evaluation of all possible transactions without being diverted by concerns regarding the impact various transactions may have on the security of their jobs and benefits. A change in control generally includes: (i) acquisition by any person, entity or group acting together of more than 50 percent of the total fair market value or total voting power of the Company’s common stock, (ii) acquisition in any twelve month period of 40 percent or more of the Company’s assets by any person, entity or group acting together, (iii) acquisition in any twelve month period by any person, entity or group acting together of 30 percent or more of the securities entitled to vote in the election of Directors, or (iv) a majority of members of the Board of Directors is replaced during any twelve month period.  All of our named executive officers and four of our senior managers were selected by the Executive Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors to participate in the Plan.
A participant in the Plan is entitled to receive specified benefits in the event of certain involuntary terminations of employment (including terminations by the employee following specified changes in duties, benefits, etc., that are treated as involuntary terminations) occurring during the period that begins six months before and ends two years after a change in control.  Under the Plan, Mr. Shippar, Mr. Schober, Ms. Welty, and Ms. Amberg would be entitled to receive a benefit of 2.5 times their annual compensation. Annual compensation includes base salary, and an amount representing a “target” award under the Annual Incentive Plan and the Results Sharing program, and certain retirement and welfare benefit make up costs. Ms. Holquist and four other members of senior management would receive 1.5 times their annual compensation. Participants are also entitled to receive outplacement benefits up to a value of $25,000. Payments to participants are to be paid in a lump sum generally within 30 days of termination. As a condition of receiving said payment, participants will be required to sign a waiver of potential claims against the Company, and agree to restrictions on recruiting employees, competing with the Company, and confidentiality. If the total payments to any individual would trigger an excise tax under the Internal Revenue Code Section 4999, payments will be reduced to an amount that would result in no portion of such payment being subject to the excise tax, unless the payment would have to be reduced to an amount less than 85 percent of the amount the participant would otherwise have received, absent the imposition of the excise tax. If payments to a participant would need to be reduced to an amount that is less than 85 percent of the amount the participant would otherwise have received, total payments would not be reduced and the participant would instead receive an additional gross-up payment that would provide the participant with the same net after-tax payment the participant would have received if the excise tax had not applied to any of the payments.

The summary description of the Plan set forth above does not purport to be complete and is qualified in its entirety by the ALLETE and Affiliated Companies Change in Control Severance Plan which is filed as Exhibit 10(q).

The ALLETE and Affiliated Companies Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (SERP) was also amended on February 13, 2008 to provide that in the event of certain involuntary terminations of employment (including terminations by the employee following specified changes in duties, benefits, etc., that are treated as involuntary terminations) occurring during the period that begins six months before and ends two years after a change in control, as such term is defined in the SERP, a participant in SERP will receive vested amounts in the participant’s deferral account and retirement benefits, if any, in a single lump sum.None.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
5149

 

Part III

Item 10.Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

Unless otherwise stated, the information required for this Item is incorporated by reference herein from our Proxy Statement for the 20082010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (2008(2010 Proxy Statement) under the following headings:

 ·
Directors. The information regarding directors will be included in the “Election of Directors” section;
 ·
Audit Committee Financial Expert. The information regarding the Audit Committee financial expert will be included in the “Audit Committee Report” section;
 ·
Audit Committee Members. The identity of the Audit Committee members is included in the “Audit Committee Report” section;
 ·
Executive Officers. The information regarding executive officers is included in Part I of this Form 10-K; and
 ·
Section 16(a) Compliance. The information regarding Section 16(a) compliance will be included in the “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” section.

Our 20082010 Proxy Statement will be filed with the SEC within 120 days after the end of our 20072009 fiscal year.

Code of Ethics. We have adopted a written Code of Ethics that applies to all of our employees, including our chief executive officer, chief financial officer and controller. A copy of our Code of Ethics is available on our Websitewebsite at www.allete.com and print copies are available without charge upon request to ALLETE, Inc., Attention: Secretary, 30 West Superior St. Duluth, Minnesota 55802. Any amendment to the Code of Ethics or any waiver of the Code of Ethics will be disclosed on our Websitewebsite at www.allete.com promptly following the date of such amendment or waiver.

Corporate Governance. The following documents are available on our Websitewebsite at www.allete.com and print copies are available upon request:

 ·Corporate Governance Guidelines;
 ·Audit Committee Charter;
 ·Executive Compensation Committee Charter; and
 ·Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee Charter.

Any amendment to these documents will be disclosed on our Websitewebsite at www.allete.com promptly following the date of such amendment.


Item 11.Executive Compensation

The information required for this Item is incorporated by reference herein from the “Compensation of Executive Officers,” the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis”, the “Executive Compensation Committee Report” and the “Director Compensation – 2007”2009” sections in our 20082010 Proxy Statement.


Item 12.Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

The information required for this Item is incorporated by reference herein from the “Security Ownership of“Securities Owned by Certain Beneficial Owners,” the “Security Ownership of“Securities owned by Directors and Management” and the “Equity Compensation Plan Information” sections in our 20082010 Proxy Statement.


Item 13.Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

The information required for this Item is incorporated by reference herein from the “Corporate Governance” section in our 20082010 Proxy Statement.

We have adopted a Related Person Transaction Policy which is available on our Websitewebsite at www.allete.com. Print copies are available free ofwithout charge, upon request. Any amendment to this policy will be disclosed on our Websitewebsite at www.allete.com promptly following the date of such amendment.


Item 14.Principal AccountantAccounting Fees and Services

The information required by this Item is incorporated by reference herein from the “Audit Committee Report” section in our 20082010 Proxy Statement.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
5250

 

Part IV

Item 15.                      
Item 15.Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

(a)Certain Documents Filed as Part of this Form 10-K. 
(1)Financial StatementsPage
  ALLETE 
  Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm………………………………………………….........Firm5857
  Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 20072009 and 2006……………………………………………..........20085958
  For the Three Years Ended December 31, 20072009 
   Consolidated Statement of Income……………………………………………………………………………….Income59
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows60
   Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows………………………………………………………………………….Shareholders’ Equity61
Consolidated Statement of Shareholders’ Equity……………………………………………………………….62
  Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements………………………………………………………………………..Statements6362
(2)Financial Statement Schedules 
  Schedule II – ALLETE Valuation and Qualifying Accounts and Reserves……………………………………….Reserves9597
 All other schedules have been omitted either because the information is not required to be reported by ALLETE or because the information is included in the consolidated financial statements or the notes.
(3)Exhibits including those incorporated by reference. 

Exhibit Number
 *3(a)1-Articles of Incorporation, amended and restated as of May 8, 2001, (filed as Exhibit 3(b) to the March 31, 2001, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 *3(a)2-Amendment to Articles of Incorporation, effective 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 20, 2004dated as of May 12, 2009, (filed as Exhibit 3 to the September 21, 2004,June 30, 2009, Form 8-K,10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 *3(a)3-Amendment to Certificate of Assumed Name, filed with the Minnesota Secretary of State on May 8, 2001, (filed as Exhibit 3(a) to the March 31, 2001, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 *3(b)-Bylaws, as amended effective August 24, 2004, (filed as Exhibit 3 to the August 25, 2004, Form 8-K, File No. 1-3548).
 *4(a)1-Mortgage and Deed of Trust, dated as of September 1, 1945, between Minnesota Power & Light Company (now ALLETE) and The Bank of New York Mellon (formerly Irving Trust Company) and Douglas J. MacInnes (successor to Richard H. West), Trustees (filed as Exhibit 7(c), File No. 2-5865).
 *4(a)2-Supplemental Indentures to ALLETE’s Mortgage and Deed of Trust:
   NumberDated as ofReference FileExhibit
   FirstMarch 1, 19492-78267(b)
   SecondJuly 1, 19512-90367(c)
   ThirdMarch 1, 19572-130752(c)
   FourthJanuary 1, 19682-277942(c)
   FifthApril 1, 19712-395372(c)
   SixthAugust 1, 19752-541162(c)
   SeventhSeptember 1, 19762-570142(c)
   EighthSeptember 1, 19772-596902(c)
   NinthApril 1, 19782-608662(c)
   TenthAugust 1, 19782-628522(d)2
   EleventhDecember 1, 19822-566494(a)3
   TwelfthApril 1, 198733-302244(a)3
   ThirteenthMarch 1, 199233-474384(b)
   FourteenthJune 1, 199233-552404(b)
   FifteenthJuly 1, 199233-552404(c)
   SixteenthJuly 1, 199233-552404(d)
   SeventeenthFebruary 1, 199333-501434(b)
   EighteenthJuly 1, 199333-501434(c)
   NineteenthFebruary 1, 19971-3548 (1996 Form 10-K)4(a)3
   TwentiethNovember 1, 19971-3548 (1997 Form 10-K)4(a)3
   Twenty-firstOctober 1, 2000333-543304(c)3
   Twenty-secondJuly 1, 20031-3548 (June 30, 2003 Form 10-Q)4
   Twenty-thirdAugust 1, 20041-3548 (Sept. 30, 2004 Form 10-Q)4(a)
   Twenty-fourthMarch 1, 20051-3548 (March 31, 2005 Form 10-Q)4
   Twenty-fifthDecember 1, 20051-3548 (March 31, 2006 Form 10-Q)4
   Twenty-sixthOctober 1, 20061-3548 (2006 Form 10-K)4
Twenty-seventhFebruary 1, 20081-3548 (2007 Form 10-K)4(a)3
Twenty-eighthMay 1, 20081-3548 (June 30, 2008 Form 10-Q)4
Twenty-ninthNovember 1, 20081-3548 (2008 Form 10-K)4(a)3
ThirtiethJanuary 1, 20091-3548 (2008 Form 10-K)4(a)4

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
5351

 

Exhibit Number
4(a)3-Twenty-Seventh Supplemental Indenture, dated as of February 1, 2008, between ALLETE and The Bank of New York and Douglas J. MacInnes, as Trustees.
 *4(b)1-Indenture of Trust, dated as of August 1, 2004, between the City of Cohasset, Minnesota and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee relating to $111 Million Collateralized Pollution Control Refunding Revenue Bonds (filed as Exhibit 4(b) to the September 30, 2004, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 *4(b)2-Loan Agreement, dated as of August 1, 2004, between the City of Cohasset, Minnesota and ALLETE relating to $111 Million Collateralized Pollution Control Refunding Revenue Bonds (filed as Exhibit 4(c) to the September 30, 2004, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 *4(c)1-Mortgage and Deed of Trust, dated as of March 1, 1943, between Superior Water, Light and Power Company and Chemical Bank & Trust Company and Howard B. Smith, as Trustees, both succeeded by U.S. Bank Trust N.A.,National Association, as Trustee (filed as Exhibit 7(c), File No. 2-8668).
 *4(c)2-Supplemental Indentures to Superior Water, Light and Power Company’s Mortgage and Deed of Trust:
   NumberDated as ofReference FileExhibit
   FirstMarch 1, 19512-596902(d)(1)
   SecondMarch 1, 19622-277942(d)1
   ThirdJuly 1, 19762-574782(e)1
   FourthMarch 1, 19852-786414(b)
   FifthDecember 1, 19921-3548 (1992 Form 10-K)4(b)1
   SixthMarch 24, 19941-3548 (1996 Form 10-K)4(b)1
   SeventhNovember 1, 19941-3548 (1996 Form 10-K)4(b)2
   EighthJanuary 1, 19971-3548 (1996 Form 10-K)4(b)3
 4(c)3-Ninth Supplemental Indenture, dated as of October 1, 2007 between Superior Water, Light and Power Company and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustees.1-3548 (2007 Form 10-K)4(c)3
 4(c)4-Tenth Supplemental Indenture, dated as of October 1, 2007 between Superior Water, Light and Power Company and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustees.1-3548 (2007 Form 10-K)4(c)4
 *4(d)-Amended and Restated Rights Agreement, dated as of July 12, 2006, between ALLETE and the Corporate Secretary of ALLETE, as Rights Agent (filed as Exhibit 4 to the July 14, 2006,EleventhDecember 1, 20081-3548 (2008 Form 8-K, File No. 1-3548).10-K)4(c)3
 *10(a)-Power Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated as of May 29, 1998, between Minnesota Power, Inc. (now ALLETE) and Square Butte Electric Cooperative (filed as Exhibit 10 to the June 30, 1998, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 *10(c)Master Agreement (without Appendices and Exhibits), dated December 28, 2004, by and between Rainy River Energy Corporation and Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc. (filed as Exhibit 10(c) to the 2004 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
*10(d)1-
 *10(d)2-First Amendment to Fourth Amended and Restated Committed Facility Letter dated June 19, 2006, by and among ALLETE and LaSalle Bank National Association, as Agent (filed as Exhibit 10(a) to the June 30, 2006, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 *10(d)3-Second Amendment to Fourth Amended and Restated Committed Facility Letter dated December 14, 2006, by and among ALLETE and LaSalle Bank National Association, as Agent.Agent (filed as Exhibit 10(d)3 to the 2006 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 *10(e)1-Financing Agreement between Collier County Industrial Development Authority and ALLETE dated as of July 1, 2006, (filed as Exhibit 10(b)1 to the June 30, 2006, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 *10(e)2-Letter of Credit Agreement, dated as of July 5, 2006, among ALLETE, the Participating Banks and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Administrative Agent and Issuing Bank (filed as Exhibit 10(b)2 to the June 30, 2006, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 *
 Minnesota Power (now ALLETE)
 +*10(h)2-November 2003 Amendment to the ALLETE Executive Annual Incentive Plan (filed as Exhibit 10(t)2 to the 2003 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
+*10(h)3-July 2004 Amendment to the ALLETE Executive Annual Incentive Plan (filed as Exhibit 10(a) to the June 30, 2004, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
54



Exhibit Number
+10(h)4-January 2007 Amendment to the ALLETE Executive Annual Incentive Plan.
+*10(h)5-Form of ALLETE Executive Annual Incentive Plan 2006 Award – PresidentForm of ALLETE PropertiesAwards Effective 2009 (filed as Exhibit 10(b)10(h)7 to the January 30, 2006,2008 Form 8-K,10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 
+10(h)7-Form of ALLETE Executive Annual Incentive Plan Awards Effective 2007.2010.
 +*10(i)1-ALLETE and Affiliated Companies Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan I (SERP I), as amended and restated, effective January 1, 20042009, (filed as Exhibit 10(u)10(i)4 to the 20032008 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(i)2-ALLETE and Affiliated Companies Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan II (SERP II), effective January 20051, 2009, (filed as Exhibit 10(i)5 to the 2008 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
+*10(i)3-January 2009 Amendment to the ALLETE and Affiliated Companies Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan II (SERP II), effective January 20, 2009, (filed as Exhibit 10(b)10(i)6 to the March 31, 2005,2008 Form 10-Q,10-K, File No. 1-3548).
+*10(i)3-August 2006 Amendments to the ALLETE and Affiliated Companies Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (filed as Exhibit 10(a) to the September 30, 2006, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
+10(i)4-December 2006 Amendments to the ALLETE and Affiliated Companies Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan.
 +*10(j)1-Minnesota Power and Affiliated Companies Executive Investment Plan I, as amended and restated, effective November 1, 1988, (filed as Exhibit 10(c) to the 1988 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(j)2-Amendments through December 2003 to the Minnesota Power and Affiliated Companies Executive Investment Plan I (filed as Exhibit 10(v)2 to the 2003 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
52


Exhibit Number
 +*10(j)3-July 2004 Amendment to the Minnesota Power and Affiliated Companies Executive Investment Plan I (filed as Exhibit 10(b) to the June 30, 2004, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(j)4-August 2006 Amendment to the Minnesota Power and Affiliated Companies Executive Investment Plan I (filed as Exhibit 10(b) to the September 30, 2006, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(k)1-Minnesota Power and Affiliated Companies Executive Investment Plan II, as amended and restated, effective November 1, 1988, (filed as Exhibit 10(d) to the 1988 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(k)2-Amendments through December 2003 to the Minnesota Power and Affiliated Companies Executive Investment Plan II (filed as Exhibit 10(w)2 to the 2003 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(k)3-July 2004 Amendment to the Minnesota Power and Affiliated Companies Executive Investment Plan II (filed as Exhibit 10(c) to the June 30, 2004, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(k)4-August 2006 Amendment to the Minnesota Power and Affiliated Companies Executive Investment Plan II (filed as Exhibit 10(c) to the September 30, 2006, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(l)-Deferred Compensation Trust Agreement, as amended and restated, effective January 1, 1989 (filed as Exhibit 10(f) to the 1988 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(m)1-ALLETE Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan as amended and restated effective January 1, 2006, (filed as Exhibit 10 to the May 16, 2005, Form 8-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(m)2-Form of ALLETE Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan 2006 Nonqualified Stock Option Grant (filed as Exhibit 10(a)1 to the January 30, 2006, Form 8-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(m)3-Form of ALLETE Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan 2006 Performance ShareNonqualified Stock Option Grant Effective 2007 (filed as Exhibit 10(a)210(m)6 to the January 30, 2006 Form 8-K,10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(m)4-Form of ALLETE Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan 2006 Long-Term Cash Incentive Award – President of ALLETE PropertiesPerformance Share Grant Effective 2007 (filed as Exhibit 10(a)310(m)7 to the January 30, 2006 Form 8-K,10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(m)5-Form of ALLETE Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan 2006 StockPerformance Share Grant – President of ALLETE PropertiesEffective 2008 (filed as Exhibit 10(a)410(m)10 to the January 30, 2006,2007 Form 8-K,10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(m)6-Form of ALLETE Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan Nonqualified Stock Option Grant Effective 2007.
+10(m)7-Form of ALLETE Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan Performance Share Grant Effective 2007.2009 (filed as Exhibit 10(m)11 to the 2008 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(m)8-Form of ALLETE Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan Long-Term Cash Incentive Award– Restricted Stock Unit Grant Effective 2007.2009 (filed as Exhibit 10(m)12 to the 2008 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 Form of ALLETE Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan Stock Grant Effective 2007.
+10(m)10-
 +*10(n)1-Minnesota Power (now ALLETE) Director Stock Plan, effective January 1, 1995 (filed as Exhibit 10 to the March 31, 1995, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
55


Exhibit Number
 +*10(n)2-Amendments through December 2003 to the Minnesota Power (now ALLETE) Director Stock Plan (filed as Exhibit 10(z)2 to the 2003 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(n)3-July 2004 Amendment to the ALLETE Director Stock Plan (filed as Exhibit 10(e) to the June 30, 2004, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(n)4-January 2007 Amendment to the ALLETE Director Stock Plan.Plan (filed as Exhibit 10(n)4 to the 2006 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(n)5-May 2009 Amendment to the ALLETE Director Compensation Summary Effective May 1, 2005Stock Plan (filed as Exhibit 1010(b) to the June 30, 2005,2009, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(n)6-ALLETE Non-Management Director Compensation Summary Effective February 15, 2007.2007 (filed as Exhibit 10(n)6 to the 2006 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(o)1-Minnesota Power (now ALLETE) Director Compensation Deferral Plan Amended and Restated, effective January 1, 1990, (filed as Exhibit 10(ac) to the 2002 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(o)2-October 2003 Amendment to the Minnesota Power (now ALLETE) Director Compensation Deferral Plan (filed as Exhibit 10(aa)2 to the 2003 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(o)3-January 2005 Amendment to the ALLETE Director Compensation Deferral Plan (filed as Exhibit 10(c) to the March 31, 2005, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(o)4-August 2006 Amendment to the ALLETE Director Compensation Deferral Plan (filed as Exhibit 10(d) to the September 30, 2006, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
53


Exhibit Number
 +*10(o)5-ALLETE Non-Employee Director Compensation Deferral Plan II, effective May 1, 2009 (filed as Exhibit 10(a) to the June 30, 2009, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(p)-ALLETE Director Compensation Trust Agreement, effective October 11, 2004, (filed as Exhibit 10(a) to the September 30, 2004, Form 10-Q, File No. 1-3548).
 +*10(q)-ALLETE Change of Control Severance Pay Plan Effective February 13, 2008.2008, (filed as Exhibit 10(q) to the 2007 Form 10-K, File No. 1-3548).
 
 
 
 23(b)Consent of General Counsel.
31(a)-
 
 
 -

SWL&P is a party to other long-term debt instruments, $6,370,000 of City of Superior, Wisconsin, Collateralized Utility Revenue Refunding Bonds Series 2007A and $6,130,000 of City of Superior, Wisconsin, Collateralized Utility Revenue Bonds Series 2007B, that, pursuant to Regulation S-K, Item 601(b)(4)(iii), are not filed as exhibits since the total amount of debt authorized under each of these omitted instruments does not exceed 10 percent of our total consolidated assets. We will furnish copies of these instruments to the SEC upon its request.

We are a party to another long-term debt instrument, $38,995,000 of City of Cohasset, Minnesota, Variable Rate Demand Revenue Refunding Bonds (ALLETE, formerly Minnesota Power & Light Company, Project) Series 1997A, Series 1997B Series 1997C and Series 1997D1997C that, pursuant to Regulation S-K, Item 601(b)(4)(iii), is not filed as an exhibit since the total amount of debt authorized under this omitted instrument does not exceed 10 percent of our total consolidated assets. We will furnish copies of this instrument to the SEC upon its request.

*Incorporated herein by reference as indicated.
+Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement required to be filed as an exhibit to this report pursuant to Item 15(c) of Form 10-K.15(b).


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
5654

 

Signatures

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

 ALLETE, Inc.
 
 
Dated: February 15, 200812, 2010By/s/ Donald J. Shippar
 Donald J. Shippar
 Chairman President and Chief Executive Officer



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

Signature Title Date
     
/s/ Donald J. Shippar Chairman, President, Chief Executive Officer February 15, 200812, 2010
Donald J. Shippar 
and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
  
     
/s/ Alan R. HodnikPresident and DirectorFebruary 12, 2010
Alan R. Hodnik
Mark A. Schober Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer February 15, 200812, 2010
Mark A. Schober (Principal Financial Officer)  
     
/s/ Steven Q. DeVinck Controller and Vice President – Business Support February 15, 200812, 2010
Steven Q. DeVinck (Principal Accounting Officer)  

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
55


Signatures (Continued)



SignatureTitleDate
     
/s/ Kathleen A. Brekken Director February 15, 200812, 2010
Kathleen A. Brekken    
     
/s/ Kathryn W. DindoDirectorFebruary 12, 2010
Kathryn W. Dindo
Heidi J. Eddins Director February 15, 200812, 2010
Heidi J. Eddins    
     
/s/ Sidney W. Emery, Jr.DirectorFebruary 12, 2010
Sidney W. Emery, Jr.
James S. Haines, Jr Director February 15, 200812, 2010
Sidney W. Emery,James S. Haines, Jr    
     
/s/ James J. Hoolihan Director February 15, 200812, 2010
James J. Hoolihan    
     
/s/ Madeleine W. Ludlow Director February 15, 200812, 2010
Madeleine W. Ludlow    
     
/s/ George L. Mayer Director February 15, 200812, 2010
George L. Mayer    
     
/s/ Douglas C. Neve Director February 15, 200812, 2010
Douglas C. Neve    
     
/s/ Roger D. PeirceDirectorFebruary 15, 2008
Roger D. Peirce
/s/ Jack I. Rajala Director February 15, 200812, 2010
Jack I. Rajala    
     
/s/ Leonard C. RodmanDirectorFebruary 12, 2010
Leonard C. Rodman
Bruce W. Stender Director February 15, 200812, 2010
Bruce W. Stender    


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
5756

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm


To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of ALLETE, Inc.

Inc,

In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of ALLETE, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the Company) at December 31, 20072009 and 2006,2008, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007,2009 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007,2009, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’sCompany's management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management’sManagement's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9A. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’sCompany's internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the auditaudits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.opinions.

As discussed in Note 121 to the consolidated financial statements, in 2007, the Company adopted the provisions of FIN 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109.” As discussed in Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements, in 2006 the Company adopted SFAS 158, “Employer’s Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans.” As discussed in Note 16 to the consolidated financial statements, in 2006 the Company changed the manner in which it accounts for share-based compensation.

uncertain tax positions in 2007.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Minneapolis, Minnesota
February 11, 2008


12, 2010

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
5857

 

Consolidated Financial Statements


ALLETE Consolidated Balance Sheet

December 3120072006
As of December 3120092008
Millions   
 
Assets   
Current Assets   
Cash and Cash Equivalents$23.3$44.8$25.7$102.0
Short-Term Investments23.1104.5
Accounts Receivable (Less Allowance of $1.0 and $1.1)79.570.9
Accounts Receivable (Less Allowance of $0.9 and $0.7)118.576.3
Inventories49.543.457.049.7
Prepayments and Other39.123.824.324.3
Deferred Income Taxes0.3
Total Current Assets214.5287.7225.5252.3
Property, Plant and Equipment – Net1,104.5921.61,622.71,387.3
Investments213.8189.1
Regulatory Assets293.2249.3
Investment in ATC88.476.9
Other Investments130.5136.9
Other Assets111.4135.032.832.1
Total Assets$1,644.2$1,533.4$2,393.1$2,134.8
   
Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity 
Liabilities and Equity  
Liabilities   
Current Liabilities   
Accounts Payable$72.7$53.5$62.1$75.7
Accrued Taxes14.823.320.612.9
Accrued Interest7.88.611.18.9
Long-Term Debt Due Within One Year11.829.75.210.4
Deferred Profit on Sales of Real Estate2.74.1
Notes Payable1.96.0
Other27.324.332.236.8
Total Current Liabilities137.1143.5133.1150.7
Long-Term Debt410.9359.8695.8588.3
Deferred Income Taxes144.2130.8253.1169.6
Regulatory Liabilities47.150.0
Other Liabilities200.1226.1325.0339.3
Minority Interest9.37.4
Total Liabilities901.6867.61,454.11,297.9
   
Commitments and Contingencies 
Commitments and Contingencies (Note 11)  
   
Shareholders’ Equity 
Common Stock Without Par Value, 43.3 Shares Authorized 
30.8 and 30.4 Shares Outstanding461.2438.7
Equity  
ALLETE’s Equity  
Common Stock Without Par Value, 80.0 Shares Authorized, 35.2 and 32.6  
Shares Outstanding613.4534.1
Unearned ESOP Shares(64.5)(71.9)(45.3)(54.9)
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss(4.5)(8.8)(24.0)(33.0)
Retained Earnings350.4307.8385.4380.9
Total Shareholders’ Equity742.6665.8
Total Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity$1,644.2$1,533.4
Total ALLETE Equity929.5827.1
Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries9.59.8
Total Equity939.0836.9
Total Liabilities and Equity$2,393.1$2,134.8

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
5958

 

ALLETE Consolidated Statement of Income
For the Year Ended December 31200720062005
Year Ended December 31200920082007
Millions Except Per Share Amounts      
   
Operating Revenue$841.7$767.1$737.4   
Operating Revenue$766.7$801.0$841.7
Prior Year Rate Refunds(7.6)
Total Operating Revenue759.1801.0841.7
Operating Expenses      
Fuel and Purchased Power347.6281.7273.1279.5305.6347.6
Operating and Maintenance311.9296.0293.5308.9318.1313.9
Kendall County Charge77.9
Depreciation48.548.747.864.755.548.5
Total Operating Expenses708.0626.4692.3653.1679.2710.0
Operating Income from Continuing Operations133.7140.745.1
Operating Income106.0121.8131.7
Other Income (Expense)      
Interest Expense(24.6)(27.4)(26.4)(33.8)(26.3)(22.6)
Equity Earnings in ATC12.63.017.515.312.6
Other15.511.91.11.815.615.5
Total Other Income (Expense)3.5(12.5)(25.3)(14.5)4.65.5
Income from Continuing Operations Before Minority   
Interest and Income Taxes137.2128.219.8
Income Tax Expense (Benefit)47.746.3(0.5)
Minority Interest1.94.62.7
Income from Continuing Operations87.677.317.6
Loss from Discontinued Operations – Net of Tax(0.9)(4.3)
   
Income Before Non-Controlling Interest and Income Taxes91.5126.4137.2
Income Tax Expense30.843.447.7
Net Income$87.6$76.4$13.360.783.089.5
Less: Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries(0.3)0.51.9
Net Income Attributable to ALLETE$61.0$82.5$87.6
      
Average Shares of Common Stock      
Basic28.327.827.332.229.228.3
Diluted28.427.927.432.229.328.4
      
Basic Earnings (Loss) Per Share of Common Stock   
Continuing Operations$3.09$2.78$0.65
Discontinued Operations(0.03)(0.16)
$3.09$2.75$0.49
Diluted Earnings (Loss) Per Share of Common Stock   
Continuing Operations$3.08$2.77$0.64
Discontinued Operations(0.03)(0.16)
$3.08$2.74$0.48
Basic Earnings Per Share of Common Stock$1.89$2.82$3.09
Diluted Earnings Per Share of Common Stock$1.89$2.82$3.08
      
Dividends Per Share of Common Stock$1.640$1.450$1.245$1.76$1.72$1.64

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
59


ALLETE Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows

Year Ended December 31
        2009
        2008
       2007
Millions   
Operating Activities   
Net Income$60.7$83.0$89.5
Allowance for Funds Used During Construction(5.8)(3.3)(3.8)
Loss (Income) from Equity Investments, Net of Dividends0.1(3.1)(2.7)
Gain on Sale of Assets(0.2)(4.8)(2.2)
Gain on Sale of Available-for-sale Securities(6.4)
Loss on Impairment of Assets3.10.3
Depreciation Expense64.755.548.5
Amortization of Debt Issuance Costs0.90.81.0
Deferred Income Tax Expense75.238.814.0
Stock Compensation Expense2.11.82.0
Bad Debt Expense1.30.71.0
Changes in Operating Assets and Liabilities   
Accounts Receivable(43.5)2.4(6.6)
Inventories(7.3)(0.2)(6.1)
Prepayments and Other11.2(11.7)
Accounts Payable10.5(14.1)9.4
Other Current Liabilities5.35.9(10.0)
Regulatory and Other Assets(18.3)(1.8)0.9
Regulatory and Other Liabilities(11.4)(12.8)0.7
Cash from Operating Activities137.4153.6124.2
Investing Activities   
Proceeds from Sale of Available-for-sale Securities8.962.3449.7
Payments for Purchase of Available-for-sale Securities(2.2)(44.8)(368.3)
Investment in ATC(7.8)(7.4)(8.7)
Changes to Other Investments(0.7)(9.2)(12.4)
Additions to Property, Plant and Equipment(318.5)(301.1)(210.2)
Proceeds from Sale of Assets0.320.41.5
Other3.7(5.7)
Cash for Investing Activities(320.0)(276.1)(154.1)
Financing Activities   
Proceeds from Issuance of Common Stock65.271.120.6
Proceeds from Issuance of Long-Term Debt111.4198.7123.9
Changes in Notes Payable(4.1)6.0
Reductions of Long-Term Debt(9.1)(22.7)(90.7)
Debt Issuance Costs(0.6)(1.5)(1.1)
Dividends on Common Stock(56.5)(50.4)(44.3)
Cash from Financing Activities106.3201.28.4
Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents(76.3)78.7(21.5)
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period102.023.344.8
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period$25.7$102.0$23.3

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
 
60

 

ALLETE Consolidated Statement of Cash FlowsShareholders’ Equity

For the Year Ended December 31200720062005
Millions   
    
Operating Activities   
Net Income$87.6$76.4$13.3
Loss from Discontinued Operations0.94.3
AFUDC - Equity(3.8)
Income from Equity Investments, Net of Dividends(2.7)(1.8)
Gain on Sale of Assets(2.2)
Loss on Impairment of Investments0.35.1
Depreciation48.548.747.8
Deferred Income Taxes (Benefit)14.027.8(34.2)
Minority Interest1.94.62.7
Stock Compensation Expense2.01.81.5
Bad Debt Expense1.00.71.1
Changes in Operating Assets and Liabilities   
Accounts Receivable(6.6)7.5(1.4)
Inventories(6.1)(10.3)(1.3)
Prepayments and Other(11.7)(2.3)(2.5)
Accounts Payable9.45.14.9
Other Current Liabilities(10.0)0.25.8
Other Assets0.8(4.3)8.2
Other Liabilities0.71.0(4.1)
Net Operating Activities from (for) Discontinued Operations(13.5)2.3
Cash from Operating Activities123.1142.553.5
Investing Activities   
Proceeds from Sale of Available-For-Sale Securities449.7608.8376.0
Payments for Purchase of Available-For-Sale Securities(368.3)(596.4)(343.7)
Changes to Investments(19.6)(52.0)(1.1)
Additions to Property, Plant and Equipment(210.2)(102.3)(58.6)
Proceeds from Sale of Assets1.5
Other(7.2)(15.0)0.6
Net Investing Activities from Discontinued Operations2.230.7
Cash from (for) Investing Activities(154.1)(154.7)3.9
Financing Activities   
Issuance of Common Stock20.615.821.0
Issuance of Long-Term Debt123.977.835.0
Reductions of Long-Term Debt(90.7)(78.9)(35.7)
Dividends on Common Stock and Distributions to Minority Shareholders(44.3)(43.9)(36.7)
Net Increase (Decrease) in Book Overdrafts(3.4)3.4
Net Financing Activities for Discontinued Operations(0.9)
Cash from (for) Financing Activities9.5(32.6)(13.9)
Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents(21.5)(44.8)43.5
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period44.889.646.1
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period$23.3$44.8$89.6
    Accumulated  
 Total OtherUnearned 
 Shareholders’RetainedComprehensiveESOPCommon
 EquityEarningsIncome (Loss)SharesStock
Millions     
Balance as of December 31, 2006$665.8$307.8$(8.8)$(71.9)$438.7
Comprehensive Income     
Net Income89.589.5   
Other Comprehensive Income – Net of Tax     
Unrealized Gains on Securities – Net1.1 1.1  
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans3.2 3.2  
Total Comprehensive Income93.8    
   Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries (1.9)(1.9)   
Comprehensive Income Attributable to ALLETE91.9    
Adjustment to apply accounting standards for Income Taxes(0.7)(0.7)   
Common Stock Issued – Net22.5   22.5
Dividends Declared(44.3)(44.3)   
ESOP Shares Earned7.4  7.4 
Balance as of December 31, 2007742.6350.4(4.5)(64.5)461.2
Comprehensive Income     
Net Income83.083.0   
Other Comprehensive Income – Net of Tax     
Unrealized Loss on Securities – Net(6.0) (6.0)  
Reclassification Adjustment for Gains Included in Income(3.7) (3.7)  
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans(18.8) (18.8)  
Total Comprehensive Income54.5    
   Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries(0.5)(0.5)   
Comprehensive Income Attributable to ALLETE54.0    
Adjustment to apply change in Pension and Postretirement measurement date(1.6)(1.6)   
Common Stock Issued – Net72.9   72.9
Dividends Declared(50.4)(50.4)   
ESOP Shares Earned9.6  9.6 
Balance as of December 31, 2008827.1380.9(33.0)(54.9)534.1
Comprehensive Income     
Net Income60.760.7   
Other Comprehensive Income – Net of Tax     
Unrealized Gain on Securities – Net2.8 2.8  
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans6.2 6.2  
Total Comprehensive Income69.7    
   Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries0.30.3   
Comprehensive Income Attributable to ALLETE70.0    
Common Stock Issued – Net79.3   79.3
Dividends Declared(56.5)(56.5)   
ESOP Shares Earned9.6  9.6 
Balance as of December 31, 2009$929.5$385.4$(24.0)$(45.3)$613.4

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
61


ALLETE Consolidated Statement of Shareholders’ Equity

   Accumulated  
 Total OtherUnearned 
 Shareholders’RetainedComprehensiveESOPCommon
 EquityEarningsIncome (Loss)SharesStock
Millions     
Balance at December 31, 2004$630.5$293.2$(11.4)$(51.4)$400.1
      
Comprehensive Income     
Net Income13.313.3   
Other Comprehensive Income – Net of Tax     
Unrealized Gains on Securities – Net0.6 0.6  
Additional Pension Liability(2.0) (2.0)  
Total Comprehensive Income11.9    
Common Stock Issued – Net21.0   21.0
Dividends Declared(34.4)(34.4)   
Purchase of ALLETE Shares by ESOP(30.3)  (30.3) 
ESOP Shares Earned4.1  4.1 
Balance at December 31, 2005602.8272.1(12.8)(77.6)421.1
      
Comprehensive Income     
Net Income76.476.4   
Other Comprehensive Income – Net of Tax     
Unrealized Gains on Securities – Net1.9 1.9  
Additional Pension Liability6.4 6.4  
Total Comprehensive Income84.7    
Adjustment to initially apply SFAS 158 – Net of Tax(4.3) (4.3)  
Common Stock Issued – Net17.6   17.6
Dividends Declared(40.7)(40.7)   
ESOP Shares Earned5.7  5.7 
Balance at December 31, 2006665.8307.8(8.8)(71.9)438.7
      
Comprehensive Income     
Net Income87.687.6   
Other Comprehensive Income – Net of Tax     
Unrealized Gains on Securities – Net1.1 1.1  
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans3.2 3.2  
Total Comprehensive Income91.9    
Adjustment to initially apply FIN 48(0.7)(0.7)   
Common Stock Issued – Net22.5   22.5
Dividends Declared(44.3)(44.3)   
ESOP Shares Earned7.4  7.4 
Balance at December 31, 2007$742.6$350.4$(4.5)$(64.5)$461.2

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
62

 

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements


Note 1.Business SegmentsOperations and Significant Accounting Policies

Presented belowFinancial Statement Preparation. References in this report to “we,” “us” and “our” are to ALLETE and its subsidiaries, collectively. We prepare our financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the operatingUnited States of America. These principles require management to make informed judgments, best estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Subsequent Events. The Company performed an evaluation of subsequent events for potential recognition and otherdisclosure through the time of issuing the financial information related to our reporting segments. For a descriptionstatements on February 12, 2010.

Principles of Consolidation. Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of ALLETE and all of our reporting segments, see Note 2.majority-owned subsidiary companies. All material intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Financial resultsBusiness Segments. Our Regulated Operations and Investments and Other segments were determined in accordance with the guidance on segment reporting. Segmentation is based on the manner in which we operate, assess, and allocate resources to the business. We measure performance of our operations through budgeting and monitoring of contributions to consolidated net income by segmenteach business segment.

Regulated Operations includes retail and wholesale rate-regulated electric, natural gas, and water services in northeastern Minnesota and northwestern Wisconsin along with our Investment in ATC. Minnesota Power provides regulated utility electric service to 144,000 retail customers in northeastern Minnesota. SWL&P, a wholly-owned subsidiary, provides regulated utility electric, natural gas and water service in northwestern Wisconsin to 15,000 electric customers, 12,000 natural gas customers and 10,000 water customers. Regulated utility rates are under the jurisdiction of Minnesota, Wisconsin and federal regulatory authorities. Billings are rendered on a cycle basis. Revenue is accrued for service provided but not billed. Regulated utility electric rates include adjustment clauses that: (1) bill or credit customers for fuel and purchased energy costs above or below the base levels in rate schedules; (2) bill retail customers for the periods presented were impactedrecovery of conservation improvement program expenditures not collected in base rates; and (3) bill customers for the recovery of certain environmental and renewable energy expenditures. Fuel and purchased power expense is deferred to match the period in which the revenue for fuel and purchased power expense is collected from customers pursuant to the fuel adjustment clause. Our Investment in ATC includes our approximate 8 percent equity ownership interest in ATC, a Wisconsin-based utility that owns and maintains electric transmission assets in parts of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Illinois. ATC provides transmission service under rates regulated by the integrationFERC that are set in accordance with the FERC’s policy of establishing the independent operation and ownership of, and investment in, transmission facilities. (See Note 6. Investment in ATC.)

Investments and Other is comprised primarily of BNI Coal, our Taconite Harbor facility intocoal mining operations in North Dakota, and ALLETE Properties, our Florida real estate investment. This segment also includes a small amount of non-rate base generation, approximately 7,000 acres of land available-for-sale in Minnesota, and earnings on cash and investments.

BNI Coal, a wholly-owned subsidiary, mines and sells lignite coal to two North Dakota mine-mouth generating units, one of which is Square Butte. In 2009, Square Butte supplied approximately 50 percent (227.5 MWs) of its output to Minnesota Power under a long-term contract. (See Note 11. Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies.) Coal sales are recognized when delivered at the Regulated Utility segment, effective January 1, 2006. We have operatedcost of production plus a specified profit per ton of coal delivered.

ALLETE Properties represents our Florida real estate investment. Our current strategy for the Taconite Harbor facilityassets is to complete and maintain key entitlements and infrastructure improvements without requiring significant additional investment, and sell the portfolio over time or in bulk transactions.

Full profit recognition is recorded on sales upon closing, provided that cash collections are at least 20 percent of the contract price and the other requirements under the guidance for sales of real estate, are met. In certain cases, where there are obligations to perform significant development activities after the date of sale, we recognize profit on a percentage-of-completion basis. Pursuant to this method of accounting, gross profit is recognized based upon the relationship of development costs incurred as of that date to the total estimated development costs of the parcels, including related amenities or common costs of the entire project. Revenue and cost of real estate sold in excess of the amount recognized based on the percentage-of-completion method is deferred and recognized as revenue and cost of real estate sold during the period in which the related development costs are incurred. Deferred revenue and cost of real estate sold are recorded net as Deferred Profit on Sales of Real Estate on our consolidated balance sheet. On December 31, 2009 and 2008, we had no deferred profit recorded on our consolidated balance sheet. Certain contracts with customers allow us to receive participation revenue from land sales to third parties if various formula-based criteria are achieved.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
62


Note 1.Operations and Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

In certain cases, we pay fees or construct improvements to mitigate offsite traffic impacts. In return, we receive traffic impact fee credits as a rate-based asset withinresult of some of these expenditures. We recognize revenue from the Minnesota retail jurisdiction since January 1, 2006. Prior to January 1, 2006, we operatedsale of traffic impact fee credits when payment is received.

Land held-for-sale is recorded at the lower of cost or fair value determined by the evaluation of individual land parcels and is included in Other Investments on our Taconite Harbor facility as nonregulated generation (non-rate base generation sold at market-based rates primarilyconsolidated balance sheet. Real estate costs include the cost of land acquired, subsequent development costs and costs of improvements, capitalized development period interest, real estate taxes and payroll costs of certain employees devoted directly to the wholesale market). Historical financial results of Taconite Harbor for periods priordevelopment effort. These real estate costs incurred are capitalized to the 2006 redirectioncost of real estate parcels based upon the relative sales value of parcels within each development project in accordance with the accounting guidance for Real Estate. The cost of real estate includes the actual costs incurred and the estimate of future completion costs allocated to the real estate sold based upon the relative sales value method. Whenever events or circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the real estate may not be recoverable, impairments would be recorded and the related assets would be adjusted to their estimated fair value, less costs to sell. (See Note 7. Investments.)

Property, Plant and Equipment. Property, plant and equipment are includedrecorded at original cost and are reported on the balance sheet net of accumulated depreciation. Expenditures for additions and significant replacements and improvements are capitalized; maintenance and repair costs are expensed as incurred. Expenditures for major plant overhauls are also accounted for using this same policy. Gains or losses on non-rate base property, plant and equipment are recognized when they are retired or otherwise disposed. When regulated utility property, plant and equipment are retired or otherwise disposed, no gain or loss is recognized, pursuant to guidance on accounting for Regulated Operations. Our Regulated Operations capitalize AFUDC, which includes both an interest and equity component. (See Note 3. Property, Plant and Equipment.)

Long-Lived Asset Impairments. We account for our long-lived assets at depreciated historical cost. A long-lived asset is tested for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that its carrying amount may not be recoverable. We conduct this assessment using the accounting guidance for impairment or disposal of long-lived assets. Judgments and uncertainties affecting the application of accounting for asset impairment include economic conditions affecting market valuations, changes in our Nonregulated Energy Operations segment.business strategy, and changes in our forecast of future operating cash flows and earnings. We would recognize an impairment loss only if the carrying amount of a long-lived asset is not recoverable from its undiscounted future cash flows. Management judgment is involved in both deciding if testing for recoverability is necessary and in estimating undiscounted future cash flows.

 Energy 
  Nonregulated  
 RegulatedEnergyInvestmentReal 
 ConsolidatedUtilityOperationsIn ATCEstateOther
Millions      
       
2007      
       
Operating Revenue$841.7$723.8$67.0$50.5$0.4
Fuel and Purchased Power347.6347.6
Operating and Maintenance311.9229.361.220.11.3
Depreciation Expense48.543.84.50.10.1
       
Operating Income (Loss) from Continuing Operations133.7103.11.330.3(1.0)
Interest Expense(24.6)(21.0)(2.0)(0.5)(1.1)
Equity Earnings in ATC12.6$12.6
Other Income15.54.13.91.46.1
       
Income from Continuing Operations Before Minority Interest and Income Taxes137.286.23.212.631.24.0
Income Tax Expense (Benefit)47.731.3(0.3)5.111.6
Minority Interest1.91.9
 
Income from Continuing Operations
87.6$54.9$3.5$7.5$17.7$4.0
 
Loss from Discontinued Operations – Net of Tax
     
       
Net Income$87.6     
       
Total Assets$1,644.2$1,330.9$84.2$65.7$91.3$72.1
Capital Additions$223.9$220.6$3.3
Accounts Receivable. Accounts receivable are reported on the balance sheet net of an allowance for doubtful accounts. The allowance is based on our evaluation of the receivable portfolio under current conditions, overall portfolio quality, review of specific problems and such other factors that, in our judgment, deserve recognition in estimating losses.

Accounts Receivable 
As of December 31
             2009
2008
Millions  
Trade Accounts Receivable  
Billed$56.5$61.1
Unbilled15.115.9
Less: Allowance for Doubtful Accounts0.90.7
Total Trade Accounts Receivable70.776.3
Income Taxes Receivable47.8
Total Accounts Receivable – Net$118.5$76.3


Concentration of Credit Risk. Financial instruments that subject us to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of accounts receivable. Minnesota Power sells electricity to 12 large industrial customers. Receivables from these customers totaled approximately $10 million at December 31, 2009 ($11 million at December 2008). Minnesota Power does not obtain collateral to support utility receivables, but monitors the credit standing of major customers. In addition, our taconite-producing Large Power Customers are on a weekly billing cycle, which allows us to closely manage collection of amounts due.

Inventories. Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Amounts removed from inventory are recorded on an average cost basis.

Inventories 
As of December 31
        2009
        2008
Millions  
Fuel$23.0$16.6
Materials and Supplies34.033.1
Total Inventories$57.0$49.7


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
63

 

Note 1.                      Business Segments (Continued)

  Energy  
   Nonregulated   
  RegulatedEnergyInvestmentReal 
 ConsolidatedUtilityOperationsin ATCEstateOther
Millions      
       
2006      
Operating Revenue$767.1$639.2$65.0$62.6$0.3
Fuel and Purchased Power281.7281.7
Operating and Maintenance296.0217.957.119.51.5
Depreciation Expense48.744.24.30.10.1
       
Operating Income (Loss) from Continuing
Operations
140.795.43.643.0(1.3)
Interest Expense(27.4)(20.2)(3.3)(3.9)
Equity Earnings in ATC3.0$3.0
Other Income11.90.92.21.37.5
       
Income from Continuing Operations Before Minority Interest and Income Taxes128.276.12.53.044.32.3
Income Tax Expense (Benefit)46.329.3(1.2)1.116.90.2
Minority Interest4.64.6
Income from Continuing Operations77.3$46.8$3.7$1.9$22.8$2.1
Loss from Discontinued Operations – Net of Tax(0.9)     
       
Net Income$76.4     
       
Total Assets$1,533.4$1,143.3$81.3$53.7$89.8$165.3
Capital Additions$109.4$107.5$1.9
 
 
 
2005      
Operating Revenue$737.4$575.6$113.9$47.5$0.4
Fuel and Purchased Power273.1243.729.4
Operating and Maintenance293.5202.971.216.62.8
Kendall County Charge77.977.9
Depreciation Expense47.839.48.10.10.2
       
Operating Income (Loss) from Continuing
Operations
45.189.6(72.7)30.8(2.6)
Interest Expense(26.4)(17.4)(6.6)(0.1)(2.3)
Other Income (Expense)1.10.71.71.1(2.4)
Income (Loss) from Continuing Operations Before Minority Interest and Income Taxes19.872.9(77.6)31.8(7.3)
Income Tax Expense (Benefit)(0.5)27.2(29.1)11.6(10.2)
Minority Interest2.72.7
Income (Loss) from Continuing Operations17.6$45.7$(48.5)$17.5 $2.9
Loss from Discontinued Operations – Net of Tax(4.3)     
       
Net Income$13.3     
       
Total Assets
$1,398.8 (a)
$909.5$185.2$73.7$227.8
Capital Additions
$63.1 (a)
$46.5$12.1

(a)Note 1.Discontinued Operations represented $2.6 million of total assets in 2005 and $4.5 million of capital additions in 2005.Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Unamortized Discount and Premium on Debt. Discount and premium on debt are deferred and amortized over the terms of the related debt instruments using the effective interest method.

Cash and Cash Equivalents. We consider all investments purchased with original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

Supplemental Statement of Cash Flow Information

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows 
Supplemental Disclosure 
Year Ended December 31200920082007
Millions   
Cash Paid During the Period for   
Interest – Net of Amounts Capitalized$29.8$25.2$26.3
Income Taxes$1.1$6.5$34.2
    
Noncash Investing and Financing Activities   
Changes in Accounts Payable for Capital Additions to Property, Plant and Equipment$24.1$17.1$9.8
AFUDC – Equity$5.8$3.3$3.8
ALLETE Common Stock contributed to the Pension Plan$(12.0)


Available-for-Sale Securities. Available-for-sale securities are recorded at fair value with unrealized gains and losses included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax. Unrealized losses that are other than temporary are recognized in earnings. Our auction rate securities (ARS), classified as available-for-sale securities, are recorded at cost because their cost approximates fair market value. We use the specific identification method as the basis for determining the cost of securities sold. Our policy is to review available-for-sale securities for other than temporary impairment on a quarterly basis by assessing such factors as the share price trends and the impact of overall market conditions. (See Note 7. Investments.)

Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. We apply the fair value recognition guidance for share-based payments. Under this method, we recognize stock-based compensation expense for all share-based payments granted, net of an estimated forfeiture rate and only for those shares expected to vest over the required service period of the award. (See Note 17. Employee Stock and Incentive Plans.)


Prepayments and Other Current Assets  
As of December 3120092008
Millions  
Deferred Fuel Adjustment Clause$15.5$13.1
Other8.811.2
Total Prepayments and Other Current Assets$24.3$24.3


Other Liabilities  
As of December 3120092008
Millions  
Future Benefit Obligation Under Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans$231.2$251.8
Asset Retirement Obligation (See Note 3. Property, Plant and Equipment)44.639.5
Other49.248.0
Total Other Liabilities$325.0$339.3

Environmental Liabilities. We review environmental matters for disclosure on a quarterly basis. Accruals for environmental matters are recorded when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated, based on current law and existing technologies. These accruals are adjusted periodically as assessment and remediation efforts progress or as additional technical or legal information becomes available. Accruals for environmental liabilities are included in the balance sheet at undiscounted amounts and exclude claims for recoveries from insurance or other third parties. Costs related to environmental contamination treatment and cleanup are charged to operating expense unless recoverable in rates from customers. (See Note 11. Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies.)

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
64

 

Note 1.Operations and Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Derivatives. We review all material power purchase and sales contracts for derivative treatment to determine if they qualify for the normal purchase normal sale exception under the guidance for derivatives and hedging. (See Note 8. Derivatives.)

Income Taxes. We file a consolidated federal income tax return. We account for income taxes using the liability method as prescribed by the guidance in accounting for income taxes. Under the liability method, deferred income tax assets and liabilities are established for all temporary differences in the book and tax basis of assets and liabilities, based upon enacted tax laws and rates applicable to the periods in which the taxes become payable. Due to the effects of regulation on Minnesota Power, certain adjustments made to deferred income taxes are, in turn, recorded as regulatory assets or liabilities. Investment tax credits have been recorded as deferred credits and are being amortized to income tax expense over the service lives of the related property. Effective January 1, 2007, we adopted the guidance for uncertainty in income taxes. Under this guidance we are required to recognize in our financial statements the largest tax benefit of a tax position that is “more-likely-than-not” to be sustained, on audit, based solely on the technical merits of the position as of the reporting date. The term “more-likely-than-not” means more than 50 percent. (See Note 14. Income Tax Expense.)

Excise Taxes. We collect excise taxes from our customers levied by government entities. These taxes are stated separately on the billing to the customer and recorded as a liability to be remitted to the government entity. We account for the collection and payment of these taxes on the net basis.


New Accounting Standards.

Codification. In June 2009, the FASB approved the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (Codification) as the single source of authoritative nongovernmental GAAP. The Codification is an online research system that reorganizes the thousands of GAAP pronouncements into a topical structure. The Codification was launched on July 1, 2009, at which time all existing accounting standards documents were superseded and all existing accounting literature not included in the Codification was considered non-authoritative, except for guidance issued by the SEC, which remains a source of authoritative GAAP. The Codification was effective September 30, 2009.

Subsequent Events. In May 2009, the FASB issued guidance on accounting for, and disclosure of, events that occur after the balance sheet date but before financial statements are issued or are available to be issued. Entities are required to disclose the date through which subsequent events have been evaluated and the basis for that date. The guidance on subsequent events was adopted on June 30, 2009, and did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

Non-controlling Interests. In December 2007, the FASB issued amended guidance to improve the relevance, comparability, and transparency of the financial information a reporting entity provides in its consolidated financial statements with regards to non-controlling interests. Non-controlling interest in a subsidiary is defined as an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements. The amended guidance changes the presentation of the consolidated income statement by requiring consolidated net income to include amounts attributable to the parent and the non-controlling interest. A single method of accounting was established for changes in a parent’s ownership interest in a subsidiary which do not result in deconsolidation. Expanded disclosures that clearly identify and distinguish between the interests of the parent and the interests of the non-controlling owners of a subsidiary are also required. The guidance for non-controlling interests was adopted on January 1, 2009. ALLETE Properties does have certain non-controlling interests in consolidated subsidiaries. The presentation of our consolidated financial statements was impacted, but the adoption of the guidance for non-controlling interests did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Derivatives and Hedging. In March 2008, the FASB issued guidance that amends and expands the disclosure requirements for derivatives and hedging. The guidance requires enhanced disclosures about how and why an entity uses derivative instruments, how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted for and how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. Qualitative disclosures about objectives and strategies for using derivatives, quantitative disclosures about fair value amounts of and gains and losses on derivative instruments and disclosures about credit-risk-related contingent features in derivative agreements are also required. The guidance on derivatives and hedging was adopted on January 1, 2009. As the amended guidance provides only disclosure requirements, the adoption of this standard did not have an impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. (See Note 8. Derivatives.)

Financial Instruments. In April 2009, the FASB issued amended guidance to require disclosure about fair value of financial instruments for interim reporting periods of publicly traded companies in addition to annual financial statements. This amended guidance was adopted on June 30, 2009. As the amended guidance provided only disclosure requirements, the adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. (See Note 9. Fair Value.)

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
65


Note 1.Operations and Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Fair Value. In April 2009, the FASB issued additional guidance for applying the provisions of fair value. Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants under current market conditions. This guidance requires an evaluation of whether there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability in relation to normal market activity for the asset or liability. If there has, transactions or quoted prices may not be indicative of fair value and a significant adjustment may need to be made to those prices to estimate fair value. Additionally, an entity must consider whether the observed transaction was orderly (that is, not distressed or forced). If the transaction was orderly, the obtained price can be considered a relevant observable input for determining fair value. If the transaction is not orderly, other valuation techniques must be used when estimating fair value. This additional guidance on fair value was adopted on June 30, 2009, and did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In August 2009, the FASB issued an amendment to the guidance for fair value measurement and disclosure of liabilities. This amendment provides clarification for measuring the fair value of liabilities in circumstances in which a quoted price in an active market for the identical liability is not available. The adoption of this standard on September 30, 2009, did not have an impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In September 2009, the FASB issued an amendment to the fair value measurement and disclosure of investments in certain entities that calculate net asset value per share. This amendment requires disclosures, by major category of investment, about the attributes of investments, such as the nature of any restrictions on the investor’s ability to redeem its investments at the measurement date, any unfunded commitments, and the investment strategies of the investees. The amended guidance was adopted on December 31, 2009. As the amended guidance provides only disclosure requirements, the adoption of this standard did not have an impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In January 2010, FASB issued an amendment to the fair value measurement and disclosure standard improving disclosures about fair value measurements. This amendment requires disclosure about recurring or nonrecurring fair value measurements, such as transfers in and out of Levels 1 and 2 and activity in Level 3 fair value measurements. Separate disclosures on amounts of significant transfers in and out and reasons for the transfers for Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements are required. In Level 3 reconciliations, the activity, such as information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements, must be presented separately. The guidance for the Level 1 and Level 2 disclosures and clarifications is effective on January 1, 2010. The guidance for the activity in Level 3 disclosures is effective January 1, 2011. As the amended guidance provides only disclosure requirements, the adoption of the amendments will not have an impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Other-Than-Temporary Impairments. In April 2009, the FASB issued amended guidance on other-than-temporary impairments. If it is more likely than not that an impaired security will be sold before the recovery of its cost basis, either due to the investor’s intent to sell or because it will be required to sell the security, the entire impairment is recognized in earnings. Otherwise, only the portion of the impaired debt security related to estimated credit losses is recognized in earnings, while the remainder of the impairment is recorded in other comprehensive income and recognized over the remaining life of the debt security. In addition, the guidance expands the presentation and disclosure requirements for other-than-temporary impairments for both debt and equity securities. The amended guidance for other-than-temporary impairments was adopted on June 30, 2009, and did not have an impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Pensions and Other Postretirement Benefits. In December 2008, the FASB issued guidance that amends employers’ disclosures about pensions and other postretirement benefits. These changes provide guidance on disclosures about plan assets, investment strategies, major categories of plan assets, concentrations of risk within plan assets, and valuation techniques used to measure the fair value of plan assets. These disclosure requirements will be effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2009. Upon initial adoption, the requirements within this guidance are not required for earlier periods that are presented for comparative purposes. This amended guidance was adopted on December 31, 2009. As the amended guidance provides only disclosure requirements, the adoption of this standard did not have an impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. (See Note 16. Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans.)

Transfers of Financial Assets. In June 2009, the FASB issued amended guidance for the transfers of financial assets. The guidance was issued with the objective of improving the relevance, representational faithfulness, and comparability of the information that a reporting entity provides in its financial statements about a transfer of financial assets; the effects of a transfer on its financial position, financial performance, and cash flows; and a transferor’s continuing involvement, if any, in transferred financial assets. Key provisions of the amended guidance include (1) the removal of the concept of qualifying special purpose entities, (2) the introduction of the concept of a participating interest, in circumstances in which a portion of a financial asset has been transferred, and (3) the requirement that to qualify for sale accounting, the transferor must evaluate whether it maintains effective control over transferred financial assets either directly or indirectly. The amended guidance also requires enhanced disclosures about transfers of financial assets and a transferor’s continuing involvement. The amended guidance is effective January 1, 2010, and is required to be applied prospectively. We are currently assessing the impact of the adoption on our consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows, but we do not believe it will have a material impact on the Company.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
66


Note 1.Operations and Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Variable Interest Entities. In June 2009, the FASB issued guidance amending the manner in which entities evaluate whether consolidation is required for variable interest entities (VIEs). A company must first perform a qualitative analysis in determining whether it must consolidate a VIE, and if the qualitative analysis is not determinative, must perform a quantitative analysis. The guidance requires continuous evaluation of VIEs for consolidation, rather than upon the occurrence of triggering events. Additional enhanced disclosures about how an entity’s involvement with a VIE affects its financial statements and exposure to risk will also be required. This guidance is effective January 1, 2010. We are currently assessing the impact of this amended guidance on our consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows, but we do not believe it will have a material impact on the Company.


Note 2.                      Operations and Significant Accounting Policies
Note 2.Business Segments

Financial Statement Preparation. References in this report to “we,” “us” and “our” are to ALLETE and its subsidiaries, collectively. We prepare our financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. These principles require management to make informed judgments, best estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Principles of Consolidation. Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of ALLETE and all of our majority-owned subsidiary companies. All material intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Business Segments. Our Regulated Utility, Nonregulated Energy Operations, Real Estate, Investment in ATC and Other segments were determined in accordance with SFAS 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information.” Segmentation is based on the manner in which we operate, assess, and allocate resources to the business. We measure performance of our operations through budgeting and monitoring of contributions to consolidated net income by each business segment. Discontinued Operations includes our telecommunications business, which we sold in December 2005, and our Water Services businesses, the majority of which were sold in 2003 (See Note 13.)

Regulated Utility includes retail and wholesale rate-regulated electric, natural gas and water services in northeastern Minnesota and northwestern Wisconsin.regulated utilities, Minnesota Power provides regulated utility electric service to 141,000 retail customers in northeastern Minnesota.and SWL&P, a wholly-owned subsidiary, provides regulated utility electric, natural gas and water service in northwestern Wisconsin to 15,000 electric customers, 12,000 natural gas customers and 10,000 water customers. Approximately 39 percent of regulated utility electric revenue is from Large Power Customers (34 percent of consolidated revenue). Large Power Customers consist of five taconite producers, four paper and pulp mills, two pipeline companies and one manufacturer under all-requirements contracts with expiration dates extending from February 2009 through October 2014. Revenue of $100.6 million (12.0 percent of consolidated revenue) was received from one taconite producer in 2007 (11.6 percent in 2006; 11.3 percent in 2005). Regulated utility rates are under the jurisdiction of Minnesota and Wisconsin, and federal regulatory authorities. Billings are rendered on a cycle basis. Revenue is accrued for service provided but not billed. Regulated utility electric rates include adjustment clauses that: (1) bill or credit customers for fuel and purchased energy costs above or below the base levels in rate schedules; (2) bill retail customers for the recovery of conservation improvement program expenditures not collected in base rates; and (3) bill customers for the recovery of certain environmental expenditures. Fuel and purchased power expense is deferred to match the period in which the revenue for fuel and purchased power expense is collected from customers pursuant to the fuel adjustment clause.

Nonregulated Energy Operations includesas well as our coal mining activities in North Dakota, approximately 50 MW of nonregulated generation and Minnesota land sales. BNI Coal, a wholly-owned subsidiary, mines and sells lignite coal to two North Dakota mine-mouth generating units, one of which is Square Butte. In 2007, Square Butte supplied approximately 60 percent (273 MW) of its output to Minnesota Power under a long-term contract. (See Note 8.) Coal sales are recognized when delivered at the cost of production plus a specified profit per ton of coal delivered.

In 2005, Nonregulated Energy Operations included nonregulated generation (non-rate base generation sold at market-based rates to the wholesale market) from our Taconite Harbor facility in northern Minnesota and generation secured through the Kendall County power purchase agreement. To help meet forecasted base load energy requirements effective January 1, 2006, Taconite Harbor was integrated into our Regulated Utility, as approved by the MPUC. The Kendall County power purchase agreement was assigned to Constellation Energy Commodities in April 2005. (See Note 10.)

Investment in ATC includes our approximate 8 percent equity ownership interestinvestment in ATC, a Wisconsin-based public utility that owns and maintains electric transmission assets in parts of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, and Illinois. ATC provides transmission service under rates regulated by the FERC that are setInvestments and Other is comprised primarily of BNI Coal, our coal mining operations in accordance with the FERC’s policyNorth Dakota, and ALLETE Properties, our Florida real estate investment. This segment also includes a small amount of establishing the independent operationnon-rate base generation, approximately 7,000 acres of land available-for-sale in Minnesota, and ownershipearnings on cash and investments. For a description of and investment in, transmission facilities. (See Note 6.)our reportable business segments, see Item 1. Business.

 RegulatedInvestments
 ConsolidatedOperationsand Other
Millions   
2009   
Operating Revenue$766.7$689.4$77.3
Prior Year Rate Refunds(7.6)(7.6)
Total Operating Revenue759.1681.877.3
Fuel and Purchased Power279.5279.5
Operating and Maintenance308.9235.873.1
Depreciation Expense64.760.24.5
Operating Income (Loss)106.0106.3(0.3)
Interest Expense(33.8)(28.3)(5.5)
Equity Earnings in ATC17.517.5
Other Income (Expense)1.85.8(4.0)
Income (Loss) Before Non-Controlling Interest and Income Taxes91.5101.3(9.8)
Income Tax Expense (Benefit)30.835.4(4.6)
Net Income (Loss)60.765.9 (5.2)
Less: Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries(0.3)(0.3)
Net Income (Loss) Attributable to ALLETE$61.0$65.9$(4.9)
    
Total Assets$2,393.1$2,184.0$209.1
Capital Additions$303.7$299.2$4.5


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
65


Note 2.                      Operations and Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Real Estate includes our Florida real estate operations. Our real estate operations include several wholly-owned subsidiaries and an 80 percent ownership in Lehigh Acquisition Corporation, which are consolidated in ALLETE’s financial statements. Our Florida real estate companies are principally engaged in real estate acquisitions, development and sales.

Full profit recognition is recorded on sales upon closing, provided cash collections are at least 20 percent of the contract price and the other requirements of SFAS 66, “Accounting for Sales of Real Estate,” are met. In certain cases, where there are obligations to perform significant development activities after the date of sale, we recognize profit on a percentage-of-completion basis in accordance with SFAS 66. Pursuant to this method of accounting, gross profit is recognized based upon the relationship of development costs incurred as of that date to the total estimated development costs of the parcels, including related amenities or common costs of the entire project. Revenue and cost of real estate sold in excess of the amount recognized based on the percentage-of-completion method is deferred and recognized as revenue and cost of real estate sold during the period in which the related development costs are incurred. Deferred revenue and cost of real estate sold are recorded net as Deferred Profit on Sales of Real Estate on our consolidated balance sheet. Certain contracts allow us to receive participation revenue from land sales to third parties if various formula-based criteria are achieved.

In certain cases, we pay fees or construct improvements to mitigate offsite traffic impacts. In return, we receive traffic impact fee credits as a result of some of these expenditures. We recognize revenue from the sale of traffic impact fee credits when payment is received.

Land held for sale is recorded at the lower of cost or fair value determined by the evaluation of individual land parcels and is included in Investments on our consolidated balance sheet. Real estate costs include the cost of land acquired, subsequent development costs and costs of improvements, capitalized development period interest, real estate taxes and payroll costs of certain employees devoted directly to the development effort. These real estate costs incurred are capitalized to the cost of real estate parcels based upon the relative sales value of parcels within each development project in accordance with SFAS 67, “Accounting for Costs and Initial Rental Operations of Real Estate Projects.” When real estate is sold, the cost of real estate sold includes the actual costs incurred and the estimate of future completion costs allocated to the real estate sold based upon the relative sales value method.

Whenever events or circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the real estate may not be recoverable, impairments would be recorded and the related assets would be adjusted to their estimated fair value, less costs to sell.

Other includes investments in emerging technologies, and earnings on cash and short-term investments. As part of our emerging technology portfolio, we have several minority investments in venture capital funds and direct investments in privately-held, start-up companies. We account for our investment in venture capital funds under the equity method and account for our direct investments in privately-held companies under the cost method because of our ownership percentage. Short-term investments consist of auction rate bonds and variable rate demand notes, and are classified as available-for-sale securities. All income generated from these short-term investments is recorded as interest income. (See Note 6.)

Property, Plant and Equipment. Property, plant and equipment are recorded at original cost and are reported on the balance sheet net of accumulated depreciation. Expenditures for additions and significant replacements and improvements are capitalized; maintenance and repair costs are expensed as incurred. Expenditures for major plant overhauls are also accounted for using this same policy. Gains or losses on nonregulated property, plant and equipment are recognized when they are retired or otherwise disposed. When regulated utility property, plant and equipment are retired or otherwise disposed, no gain or loss is recognized, pursuant to SFAS 71, “Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulations.” Our Regulated Utility operations capitalize AFUDC, which includes both an interest and equity component. (See Note 3.)

Long-Lived Asset Impairments. We account for our long-lived assets at depreciated historical cost. A long-lived asset is tested for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that its carrying amount may not be recoverable. We conduct this assessment using SFAS 144, “Accounting for the Impairment and Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.” Judgments and uncertainties affecting the application of accounting for asset impairment include economic conditions affecting market valuations, changes in our business strategy, and changes in our forecast of future operating cash flows and earnings. We would recognize an impairment loss only if the carrying amount of a long-lived asset is not recoverable from its undiscounted future cash flows. Management judgment is involved in both deciding if testing for recoverability is necessary and in estimating undiscounted future cash flows.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
66


Note 2.                      Operations and Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Accounts Receivable. Accounts receivable are reported on the balance sheet net of an allowance for doubtful accounts. The allowance is based on our evaluation of the receivable portfolio under current conditions, overall portfolio quality, review of specific problems and such other factors that, in our judgment, deserve recognition in estimating losses.

Accounts Receivable 
December 3120072006
Millions  
   
Trade Accounts Receivable  
Billed$63.9$58.5
Unbilled16.613.5
Less: Allowance for Doubtful Accounts1.01.1
Total Accounts Receivable – Net$79.5$70.9

Inventories. Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Amounts removed from inventory are recorded on an average cost basis.

Inventories 
December 3120072006
Millions  
   
Fuel$22.1$18.9
Materials and Supplies27.424.5
Total Inventories$49.5$43.4

Unamortized Discount and Premium on Debt. Discount and premium on debt are deferred and amortized over the terms of the related debt instruments using the effective interest method.

Cash and Cash Equivalents. We consider all investments purchased with original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

Supplemental Statement of Cash Flow Information.

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows 
Supplemental Disclosure 
For the Year Ended December 31200720062005
Millions   
    
Cash Paid During the Period for   
Interest – Net of Amounts Capitalized$26.3$25.3$24.6
Income Taxes$34.2
$32.4 (a)
$27.1
    
Noncash Investing Activities   
Accounts Payable for Capital Additions to Property, Plant and Equipment$9.8$7.1
AFUDC - Equity$3.8

(a)Net of a $24.3 million cash refund.

Available-for-Sale Securities. Available-for-sale securities are recorded at fair value with unrealized gains and losses included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax. Unrealized losses that are other than temporary are recognized in earnings. Our auction rate securities and variable rate demand notes, classified as available-for-sale securities, are recorded at cost because their cost approximates fair market value as they typically reset every 7 to 35 days. Despite the long-term nature of their stated contractual maturities, we have the ability to quickly liquidate these securities. We use the specific identification method as the basis for determining the cost of securities sold. Our policy is to review on a quarterly basis available-for-sale securities for other than temporary impairment by assessing such factors as the share price trends and the impact of overall market conditions.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
67

 

Note 2.                      Operations and Significant Accounting PoliciesBusiness Segments (Continued)

Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS 123R, “Share-Based Payment,” using the modified prospective transition method. Under this method, we recognize compensation expense for all share-based payments granted after January 1, 2006, and those granted prior to but not yet vested as of January 1, 2006. Under the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS 123R, we recognize stock-based compensation net of an estimated forfeiture rate and only recognize compensation expense for those shares expected to vest over the required service period of the award. Prior to our adoption of SFAS 123R, we accounted for share-based payments under Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees” and related interpretations. (See Note 16.)
 RegulatedInvestments
 ConsolidatedOperationsand Other
Millions   
2008   
Operating Revenue$801.0$712.2$88.8
Fuel and Purchased Power305.6305.6
Operating and Maintenance318.1239.378.8
Depreciation Expense55.550.74.8
Operating Income121.8116.65.2
Interest Expense(26.3)(24.0)(2.3)
Equity Earnings in ATC15.315.3
Other Income15.63.612.0
Income Before Non-Controlling Interest and Income Taxes126.4111.514.9
Income Tax Expense (Benefit)43.443.6(0.2)
Net Income83.067.915.1
Less: Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries0.50.5
Net Income Attributable to ALLETE$82.5$67.9$14.6
    
Total Assets$2,134.8$1,832.1$302.7
Capital Additions$322.9$317.0$5.9

Prepayments and Other Current Assets  
December 3120072006
Millions  
Deferred Fuel Adjustment Clause$26.5$15.1
Other12.68.7
Total Prepayments and Other Current Assets$39.1$23.8

 RegulatedInvestments
 ConsolidatedOperationsand Other
Millions   
2007   
Operating Revenue$841.7$723.8$117.9
Fuel and Purchased Power347.6347.6
Operating and Maintenance313.9229.384.6
Depreciation Expense48.543.84.7
Operating Income131.7103.128.6
Interest Expense(22.6)(21.0)(1.6)
Equity Earnings in ATC12.612.6
Other Income15.54.111.4
Income Before Non-Controlling Interest and Income Taxes137.298.838.4
Income Tax Expense47.736.411.3
Net Income89.562.427.1
Less: Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries1.91.9
Net Income Attributable to ALLETE$87.6$62.4$25.2
    
Total Assets$1,644.2$1,396.6$247.6
Capital Additions$223.9$220.6$3.3

Other Assets  
December 3120072006
Millions  
Deferred Regulatory Charges (See Note 5)  
Future Benefit Obligations Under Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans$53.7$86.1
Other Deferred Regulatory Charges22.917.5
Total Deferred Regulatory Charges76.6103.6
Other34.831.4
Total Other Assets$111.4$135.0
   
Other Liabilities  
December 3120072006
Millions  
Future Benefit Obligation Under Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans$71.6$108.2
Deferred Regulatory Credits (See Note 5)31.333.8
Asset Retirement Obligation (See Note 3)36.527.2
Other60.756.9
Total Other Liabilities$200.1$226.1

Environmental Liabilities. We review environmental matters on a quarterly basis. Accruals for environmental matters are recorded when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated, based on current law and existing technologies. These accruals are adjusted periodically as assessment and remediation efforts progress or as additional technical or legal information becomes available. Accruals for environmental liabilities are included in the balance sheet at undiscounted amounts and exclude claims for recoveries from insurance or other third parties. Costs related to environmental contamination treatment and cleanup are charged to operating expense unless recoverable in rates from customers. (See Note 8.)

Income Taxes. We file a consolidated federal income tax return. We account for income taxes using the liability method as prescribed by SFAS 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes.” Under the liability method, deferred income tax assets and liabilities are established for all temporary differences in the book and tax basis of assets and liabilities, based upon enacted tax laws and rates applicable to the periods in which the taxes become payable. Due to the effects of regulation on Minnesota Power, certain adjustments made to deferred income taxes are, in turn, recorded as regulatory assets or liabilities. Investment tax credits have been recorded as deferred credits and are being amortized to income tax expense over the service lives of the related property. Effective January 1, 2007, we adopted the provisions of FIN 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109.” Under this provision we are required to recognize in our financial statements the largest tax benefit of a tax position that is “more-likely-than-not” to be sustained, on audit, based solely on the technical merits of the position as of the reporting date. Only tax positions that meet the “more-likely-than-not’ threshold may be recognized, and the term “more-likely-than-not” means more than 50 percent. (See Note 12.)

Excise Taxes. We collect excise taxes from our customers levied by government entities. These taxes are stated separately on the billing to the customer and recorded as a liability to be remitted to the government entity. We account for the collection and payment of these taxes on the net basis.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
68


Note 2.                      Operations and Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

New Accounting Standards. SFAS 157. In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS 157, “Fair Value Measurements,” to increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements by defining fair value, establishing a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles, and expanding disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS 157 emphasizes that fair value is a market-based measurement, not an entity-specific measurement. It clarifies the extent to which fair value is used to measure recognized assets and liabilities, the inputs used to develop the measurements, and the effect of certain measurements on earnings for the period. SFAS 157 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and is applied on a prospective basis. On February 6, 2008, the FASB announced it will issue a FASB Staff Position (FSP) to allow a one-year deferral of adoption of SFAS 157 for nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities that are recognized at fair value on a nonrecurring basis. The FSP will also amend SFAS 157 to exclude SFAS 13, “Accounting for Leases,” and its related interpretive accounting pronouncements. The FSP is expected to be issued in the near future. We have determined that the adoption of SFAS 157 will not have a material impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

SFAS 159. In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities,” which is an elective, irrevocable election to measure eligible financial instruments and certain other assets and liabilities at fair value on an instrument-by-instrument basis. The election may only be applied at specified election dates and to instruments in their entirety rather than to portions of instruments. Upon initial election, the entity reports the difference between the instruments’ carrying value and their fair value as a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings. At each subsequent reporting date, an entity reports in earnings, unrealized gains and losses on items for which the fair value option has been elected. SFAS 159 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and is applied on a prospective basis. Early adoption of SFAS 159 is permitted provided the entity also elects to adopt the provisions of SFAS 157 as of the early adoption date selected for SFAS 159. We have elected not to adopt the provisions of SFAS 159 at this time.

SFAS 141R. In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 141(revised 2007), “Business Combinations,” to increase the relevance, representational faithfulness, and comparability of the information a reporting entity provides in its financial reports about a business combination and its effects. SFAS 141R replaces SFAS 141, “Business Combinations” but, retains the fundamental requirements of SFAS 141 that the acquisition method of accounting be used and an acquirer be identified for all business combinations. SFAS 141R expands the definition of a business and of a business combination and establishes how the acquirer is to: (1) recognize and measure in its financial statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interest in the acquiree; (2) recognize and measure the goodwill acquired in the business combination or a gain from a bargain purchase; and (3) determine what information to disclose to enable users of the financial statements to evaluate the nature and financial effects of the business combination. SFAS 141R is applicable to business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008, and is to be applied prospectively. Early adoption is prohibited. SFAS 141R will impact ALLETE if we elect to enter into a business combination subsequent to December 31, 2008.

SFAS 160. In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 160, “Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements – an amendment of ARB No. 51,” to improve the relevance, comparability, and transparency of the financial information a reporting entity provides in its consolidated financial statements. SFAS 160 amends ARB 51 to establish accounting and reporting standards for noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries and to make certain consolidation procedures consistent with the requirements of SFAS 141R. It defines a noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary as an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements. SFAS 160 changes the way the consolidated income statement is presented by requiring consolidated net income to include amounts attributable to the parent and the noncontrolling interest. SFAS 160 establishes a single method of accounting for changes in a parent’s ownership interest in a subsidiary which do not result in deconsolidation. SFAS 160 also requires expanded disclosures that clearly identify and distinguish between the interests of the parent and the interests of the noncontrolling owners of a subsidiary. SFAS 160 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is prohibited. SFAS 160 shall be applied prospectively, with the exception of the presentation and disclosure requirements which shall be applied retrospectively for all periods presented. We are currently evaluating the effect that the adoption of SFAS 160 will have on our consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows; however ALLETE Properties does have certain noncontrolling interests in consolidated subsidiaries. If SFAS 160 had been applied as of December 31, 2007, the $9.3 million reported as Minority Interest in the Liabilities section on our Consolidated Balance Sheet would have been reported as $9.3 million of Noncontrolling Interest in Subsidiaries in the Equity section of our Consolidated Balance Sheet.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
69


Note 3.                      
Note 3.Property, Plant and Equipment

Property, Plant and Equipment   
December 3120072006
As of December 31
       2009
          2008
Millions   
Regulated Utility$1,683.0$1,575.8$2,415.7$1,837.2
Construction Work in Progress165.871.489.6303.0
Accumulated Depreciation(796.8)(781.3)(928.8)(806.8)
Regulated Utility Plant – Net1,052.0865.91,576.51,333.4
Nonregulated Energy Operations89.988.5
Non-Rate Base Energy Operations87.094.0
Construction Work in Progress2.52.63.63.9
Accumulated Depreciation(43.2)(40.1)(45.5)(47.2)
Nonregulated Energy Operations Plant – Net49.251.0
Non-Rate Base Energy Operations Plant – Net45.150.7
Other Plant – Net3.34.71.13.2
Property, Plant and Equipment – Net$1,104.5$921.6$1,622.7$1,387.3


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
 
68


Note 3.Property, Plant and Equipment (Continued)

Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the various classes of assets. The MPUC and the PSCW have approved depreciation rates for our Regulated Utility plant.

Estimated Useful Lives of Property, Plant and Equipment
     
Regulated Utility  –Generation42 to 2934 yearsNonregulated EnergyNon-Rate Base Operations43 to 4061 years
 Transmission4042 to 6061 yearsOther Plant5 to 25 years
 Distribution3014 to 7065 years  

Asset Retirement Obligations. Pursuant to SFAS 143, “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations,” weWe recognize, at fair value, obligations associated with the retirement of certain tangible, long-lived assets that result from the acquisition, construction or development and/or normal operation of the asset. The associated retirement costs are capitalized as part of the related long-lived asset and depreciated over the useful life of the asset. Asset retirement obligations (ARO) relate primarily to the decommissioning of our utility steam generating facilities and land reclamation at BNI Coal, and are included in Other Liabilities on our consolidated balance sheet. Removal costs associated with certain distribution and transmission assets have not been recognized, as these facilities have been determined to have indeterminate useful lives. Prior toThe associated retirement costs are capitalized as part of the adoptionrelated long-lived asset and depreciated over the useful life of SFAS 143, utility decommissioning obligations were accrued through depreciation expense at depreciation rates approved by the MPUC.asset. Conditional asset retirement obligations have been identified for treated wood poles and remaining polychlorinated biphenyl and asbestos-containing assets; however, removal costs have not been recognized because they are considered immaterial to our consolidated financial statements.

Long-standing ratemaking practices approved by applicable state and federal regulatory commissions have allowed provisions for future plant removal costs in depreciation rates. These plant removal cost recoveries were included in accumulated depreciation. With the adoption of ARO guidance, accumulated plant removal costs were reclassified either as AROs or as a regulatory liability for non-ARO obligations. To the extent annual accruals for plant removal costs differ from accruals under approved depreciation rates, a regulatory asset has been established in accordance with the guidance for AROs. (See Note 5. Regulatory Matters.)

Asset Retirement Obligation 
Millions 
Obligation atas of December 31, 20052007$25.336.5
Accretion Expense1.82.0
Additional Liabilities Incurred in 200620080.11.0
Obligation atas of December 31, 2006200827.239.5
Accretion Expense2.12.3
Additional Liabilities Incurred in 200720097.22.8
Obligation atas of December 31, 20072009$36.544.6


Note 4.Jointly-Owned Electric Facility

We own 80 percent of the 536-MW Boswell Energy Center Unit 4 (Boswell Unit 4). While we operate the plant, certain decisions about the operations of Boswell Unit 4 are subject to the oversight of a committee on which we and Wisconsin Public Power, Inc., the owner of the otherremaining 20 percent of Boswell Unit 4, have equal representation and voting rights. Each of us must provide our own financing and is obligated to pay our ownership share of operating costs. Our share of direct operating expenses of Boswell Unit 4 is included in operating expense on our consolidated statement of income. Our 80 percent share of the original cost of Boswell Unit 4, which is included in property, plant and equipment at December 31, 2007,2009, was $316$331 million ($314328 million at December 31, 2006)2008). The corresponding accumulated depreciation balance was $170$178 million at December 31, 20072009 ($168173 million at December 31, 2006)2008).



ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
70


Note 5.Regulatory Matters

Electric Rates. Entities within our Regulated UtilityOperations segment file for periodic rate revisions with the MPUC, the FERC or the PSCW. On February 8,

2008 Rate Case. In May 2008, Minnesota Power filed a retail rate increase request with the FERCMPUC seeking additional revenues of approximately $40 million annually; the request also sought an 11.15 percent return on equity, and a capital structure consisting of 54.8 percent equity and 45.2 percent debt. As a result of a May 2009 Order and an August 2009 Reconsideration Order, the MPUC granted Minnesota Power a revenue increase of approximately $20 million, including a return on equity of 10.74 percent and a capital structure consisting of 54.79 percent equity and 45.21 percent debt. Rates went into effect on November 1, 2009.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
69


Note 5.Regulatory Matters (Continued)

Interim rates, subject to refund, were in effect from August 1, 2008 through October 31, 2009. During 2009, Minnesota Power recorded a $21.7 million liability for refunds of interim rates, including interest, required to be made as a result of the May 2009 Order and the August 2009 Reconsideration Order. In 2009, $21.4 million was refunded, with a remaining $0.3 million balance to be refunded in early 2010; $7.6 million of the refunds required to be made were related to interim rates charged in 2008.

With the May 2009 Order, the MPUC also approved our wholesalethe stipulation and settlement agreement that affirmed the Company’s continued recovery of fuel and purchased power costs under the former base cost of fuel that was in effect prior to the retail rate filing. Our wholesaleThe transition to the former base cost of fuel began with the implementation of final rates on November 1, 2009. Any revenue impact associated with this transition will be identified in a future filing related to the Company’s fuel clause operation.

2010 Rate Case. Minnesota Power previously stated its intention to file for additional revenues to recover the costs of significant investments to ensure current and future system reliability, enhance environmental performance and bring new renewable energy to northeastern Minnesota. As a result, Minnesota Power filed a retail rate increase request with the MPUC on November 2, 2009, seeking a return on equity of 11.50 percent, a capital structure consisting of 54.29 percent equity and 45.71 percent debt, and on an annualized basis, an $81.0 million net increase in electric retail revenue.

Minnesota law allows the collection of interim rates while the MPUC processes the rate filing. On December 30, 2009, the MPUC issued an Order (the Order) authorizing $48.5 million of Minnesota Power’s November 2, 2009, interim rate increase request of $73.0 million. The MPUC cited exigent circumstances in reducing Minnesota Power’s interim rate request. Because the scope and depth of this reduction in interim rates was unprecedented, and because Minnesota law does not allow Minnesota Power to formally challenge the MPUC’s action until a final decision in the case is rendered, on January 6, 2010, Minnesota Power sent a letter to the MPUC expressing its concerns about the Order and requested that the MPUC reconsider its decision on its own motion. Minnesota Power described its belief that the MPUC’s decision violates the law by prejudging the merits of the rate request prior to an evidentiary hearing and results in the confiscation of utility property. Further, the Company is concerned that the decision will have negative consequences on the environmental policy directions of the State of Minnesota by denying recovery for statutory mandates during the pendency of the rate proceeding. The MPUC has not acted in response to Minnesota Power’s letter.

The rate case process requires public hearings and an evidentiary hearing before an administrative law judge, both of which are scheduled for the second quarter of 2010. A final decision on the rate request is expected in the fourth quarter. We cannot predict the final level of rates that may be approved by the MPUC, and we cannot predict whether a legal challenge to the MPUC’s interim rate decision will be forthcoming or successful.

FERC-Approved Wholesale Rates. Minnesota Power’s non-affiliated municipal customers consist of 16 municipalities in Minnesota and two1 private utilitiesutility in Wisconsin. SWL&P, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ALLETE, is also a private utility in Wisconsin including SWL&P. Theand a customer of Minnesota Power. In 2008, Minnesota Power entered into new contracts with these customers which transitioned customers to formula-based rates, allowing rates to be adjusted annually based on changes in cost. In February 2009, the FERC authorized an average 10 percent increase forapproved our municipal contracts which expire December 31, 2013. Under the formula-based rates provision, wholesale municipal customers, a 12.5 percent increase for SWL&P, and an overall return on equity of 11.25 percent. The rate increase will go into effect on March 1, 2008, and on an annualized basis, the filing will generate approximately $7.5 million in additional revenue. Minnesota Power’s retail rates are set at the beginning of the year based on expected costs and provide for a 1994 MPUC retailtrue-up calculation for actual costs. Wholesale rate order that allows for an 11.6 percent returnincreases totaling approximately $6 million and $10 million annually were implemented on common equity dedicated to utility plant.February 1, 2009 and January 1, 2010, respectively, with approximately $6 million of additional revenues under the true-up provision accrued in 2009, which will be billed in 2010.

2009 Wisconsin Rate Increase. SWL&P’s current retail rates are based on a 2006December 2008 PSCW retail rate order that became effective January 1, 2007. In 2007, 762009, and allows for an 11.1 percent of our consolidated operating revenue was under regulatory authority (72return on equity. The new rates reflected a 3.5 percent average increase in 2006retail utility rates for SWL&P customers (a 13.4 percent increase in water rates, a 4.7 percent increase in electric rates, and 2005)a 0.6 percent decrease in natural gas rates). The MPUC had regulatory authority overOn an annualized basis, the rate increase will generate approximately 58 percent of our consolidated operating revenue$3 million in 2007 (56 percent in 2006 and 2005).additional revenue.

Deferred Regulatory ChargesAssets and Credits.Liabilities. Our regulated utility operations are subject to the provisions of SFAS 71, “Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation.”accounting guidance on Regulated Operations. We capitalize as deferred regulatory charges incurred costs, as regulatory assets, which are probable of recovery in future utility rates. Deferred regulatory creditsRegulatory liabilities represent amounts expected to be credited to customers in rates. DeferredNo regulatory charges and credits are included in Other Assets and Other Liabilities on our consolidated balance sheet except for deferred fuel adjustment clause charges which are included in Prepayments and Other Current Assets (See Note 2). No deferred regulatory chargesassets or creditsliabilities are currently earning a return.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
70


Note 5.Regulatory Matters (Continued)

Deferred Regulatory Charges and Credits  
December 3120072006
Deferred Regulatory Assets and Liabilities  
As of December 31
       2009
       2008
Millions    
Deferred Regulatory Assets  
Future Benefit Obligations Under  
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans (a)
235.8216.5
Boswell Unit 3 Environmental Rider (b)
20.93.8
Deferred Fuel (c)
20.813.1
Income Taxes15.712.2
Asset Retirement Obligation6.35.1
Deferred MISO Costs2.43.9
Premium on Reacquired Debt2.02.2
Other4.85.6
Total Deferred Regulatory Assets$308.7$262.4
    
Deferred Charges  
Deferred Regulatory Liabilities  
Income Taxes$11.3$11.6$25.9$28.7
Premium on Reacquired Debt2.32.8
Future Benefit Obligations Under  
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans (See Note 15)53.786.1
Deferred MISO Costs3.7
Asset Retirement Obligation3.62.3
Plant Removal Obligations16.915.9
Accrued MISO Refund4.7
Other2.00.84.30.7
76.6103.6
Deferred Credits – Income Taxes31.333.8
Net Deferred Regulatory Assets$45.3$69.8
Total Deferred Regulatory Liabilities$47.1$50.0

(a)See Note 16. Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans.
(b)MPUC-approved current cost recovery rider. Our 2010 rate case proposes to move this project from a current cost recovery rider to base rates.
(c)As of December 31, 2009, $5 million of this balance relates to deferred fuel costs incurred under the former base cost of fuel calculation. Any revenue impact associated with this transition will be identified in a future filing related to the Company’s fuel clause operation.

Current and Non-Current Deferred Regulatory Assets and Liabilities  
As of December 31
       2009
       2008
Millions  
Total Current Deferred Regulatory Assets (a)
$15.5$13.1
Total Non-Current Deferred Regulatory Assets293.2249.3
Total Deferred Regulatory Assets308.7262.4
Total Current Deferred Regulatory Liabilities
Total Non-Current Deferred Regulatory Liabilities47.150.0
Total Deferred Regulatory Liabilities$47.1$50.0

(a)Current deferred regulatory assets are included in prepayments and other on the consolidated balance sheet.


Note 6.InvestmentsInvestment in ATC

Available-for-Sale Investments. We account for our available-for-sale portfolio in accordance with SFAS 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities.” Our available-for-sale securities portfolio consisted of securities in a grantor trust established to fund certain employee benefits included in Investments and various auction rate municipal bonds and variable rate municipal demand notes included as Short-Term Investments (see below). As a result of our periodic assessments, we did not record an impairment charge on our available for sale securities in the last three years.

Available-For-Sale Securities
Millions   
  Gross Unrealized 
At December 31CostGain(Loss)Fair Value
     
2007$45.3$8.4$(0.1)$53.6
2006$123.2$7.0$(0.1)$130.1
2005$135.2$4.4$(0.1)$139.5

   Net
   Unrealized
   Gain (Loss)
   in Other
Year EndedSalesGross RealizedComprehensive
December 31ProceedsGain(Loss)Income
     
2007$81.4$1.4
2006$12.4$2.5
2005$32.3$1.3


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
71


Note 6.                      Investments (Continued)

Short-Term Investments. At December 31, 2007, we held $23.1 million of short-term investments ($104.5 million at December 31, 2006) consisting of various auction rate municipal bonds and variable rate municipal demand notes. Substantially all of these securities consisted of guaranteed student loans, insured or reinsured by the federal government. The credit markets are currently experiencing significant uncertainty, and some of this uncertainty has impacted the markets where our auction rate securities would be offered. We are unable to estimate the impact, if any, which emerging credit market conditions may have on the liquidity of our auction rate securities. Any reduction in liquidity of our auction rate securities will not have a material impact on our overall liquidity needs. We believe the $23.1 million carrying value is not impaired, but we may have to reclassify the investment from short-term to long-term investments if future liquidity conditions mandate.

Investments. At December 31, 2007, our long-term investment portfolio included the real estate assets of ALLETE Properties, our investment in ATC, debt and equity securities consisting primarily of securities held to fund employee benefits, and our emerging technology portfolio.

Investments  
December 3120072006
Millions  
Real Estate Assets$91.3$89.8
Debt and Equity Securities48.936.4
Investment in ATC65.753.7
Emerging Technology Portfolio7.99.2
Total Investments$213.8$189.1
   
   
Real Estate Assets20072006
Millions  
Land Held for Sale Beginning Balance$58.0$48.0
Additions during period: Capitalized Improvements12.818.8
      Purchases1.4
Deductions during period: Cost of Real Estate Sold(8.2)(10.2)
Land Held for Sale Ending Balance62.658.0
Long-Term Finance Receivables15.318.3
Other (a)
13.413.5
Total Real Estate Assets$91.3$89.8
(a)Consisted primarily of a shopping center.

Finance receivables, which are collateralized by property sold, accrue interest at market-based rates and are net of an allowance for doubtful accounts of $0.2 million at December 31, 2007 ($0.2 million at December 31, 2006). The majority are receivables having maturities up to 5 years. Minority interest associated with real estate operations was $9.3 million at December 31, 2007 ($7.4 million at December 31, 2006).

Investment in ATC. Our Wisconsinwholly-owned subsidiary Rainy River Energy Corporation - Wisconsin, has invested $60 million inowns approximately 8 percent of ATC, a Wisconsin-based public utility that owns and maintains electric transmission assets in parts of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, and Illinois. ATC provides transmission service under rates regulated by the FERC that are set in accordance with the FERC’s policy of establishing the independent operation and ownership of, and investment in, transmission facilities. We account for our investment in ATC under the equity method of accounting, pursuant to EITF 03-16, “Accounting for Investments in Limited Liability Companies.”accounting. As of December 31, 2007,2009, our equity investment balance in ATC was $65.7$88.4 million ($53.776.9 million at December 31, 2006), representing2008). On January 29, 2010, we invested an approximate 8.0 percent ownership interest.additional $1.2 million in ATC. In total, we expect to invest approximately $2 million throughout 2010.

ALLETE’s Interest in ATC
For the Year Ended December 31, 2007
Millions
Equity Investment Balance at December 31, 2006$53.7
2007 Cash Investments8.7
Equity in ATC Earnings12.6
Distributed ATC Earnings(9.3)
Equity Investment Balance at December 31, 2007$65.7
ALLETE’s Interest in ATC  
Year Ended December 31
       2009
       2008
Millions  
Equity Investment Beginning Balance$76.9$65.7
Cash Investments7.87.4
Equity in ATC Earnings17.515.3
Distributed ATC Earnings(13.8)(11.5)
Equity Investment Ending Balance$88.4$76.9


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
71


Note 6.Investment in ATC (Continued)

ATC Summarized Financial Data   
Year Ended December 31   
Income Statement Data
       2009
       2008
       2007
Millions   
Revenue$521.5$466.6$408.0
Operating Expense230.3209.0198.2
Other Expense77.869.655.7
Net Income$213.4$188.0$154.1
ALLETE’s Equity in Net Income$17.5$15.3$12.6


Balance Sheet Data   
Millions   
Current Assets$51.1$50.8$48.3
Non-Current Assets2,767.32,480.02,189.0
Total Assets2,818.42,530.82,237.3
    
Current Liabilities285.5252.0317.1
Long-Term Debt1,259.61,109.4899.1
Other Non-Current Liabilities76.9120.2108.5
Members’ Equity1,196.41,049.2912.6
Total Liabilities and Members’ Equity$2,818.4$2,530.8$2,237.3


Note 7.Investments

Investments. At December 31, 2009, our long-term investment portfolio included the real estate assets of ALLETE Properties, debt and equity securities consisting primarily of securities held to fund employee benefits, ARS, and land held-for-sale in Minnesota.

Investments  
As of December 31
          2009
          2008
Millions  
ALLETE Properties$93.1$84.9
Available-for-sale Securities29.532.6
Other7.919.4
Total Investments$130.5$136.9



ALLETE Properties  
As of December 31
          2009
          2008
Millions  
Land Held-for-Sale Beginning Balance$71.2$62.6
Additions during period: Capitalized Improvements5.610.5
Deductions during period: Cost of Real Estate Sold(1.9)(1.9)
Land Held-for-Sale Ending Balance74.971.2
Long-Term Finance Receivables12.913.6
Other5.30.1
Total Real Estate Assets$93.1$84.9

Land Held-for-Sale. Land held-for-sale is recorded at the lower of cost or fair value determined by the evaluation of individual land parcels. Land values are reviewed for impairment and no impairments were recorded for the year ended December 31, 2009 (none in 2008).

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
 
72

 

Note 6.                      
Note 7.Investments (Continued)

Emerging Technology Portfolio. Long-Term Finance Receivables.As part Long-term finance receivables, which are collateralized by property sold, accrue interest at market-based rates and are net of our emerging technology portfolio,an allowance for doubtful accounts of $0.4 million at December 31, 2009 ($0.1 million at December 31, 2008). The allowance for doubtful accounts includes $0.3 million of impairments that were recorded for other receivables during the year ended December 31, 2009. The majority are receivables having maturities up to four years. Finance receivables totaling $7.8 million at December 31, 2009, were due from an entity which filed for voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in June 2009. The estimated fair value of the collateral relating to these receivables was greater than the $7.8 million amount due at December 31, 2009 and no impairment was recorded on these receivables. Due to the lack of recent market activity, we have several minority investments in venture capital funds and direct investments in privately-held, start-up companies.estimated fair value based primarily on recent property tax assessed values. This valuation technique constitutes a Level 3 non-recurring fair value measurement.

Available-for-Sale Investments. We account for our investmentavailable-for-sale portfolio in venture capital funds underaccordance with the equity method and accountguidance for our directcertain investments in privately-held companies under the cost method becausedebt and equity securities. Our available-for-sale securities portfolio consisted of our ownership percentage. The total carrying valuesecurities established to fund certain employee benefits and auction rate securities.

Available-For-Sale Securities
Millions Gross Unrealized 
As of December 31
 Cost
Gain(Loss)Fair Value
     
2009$33.1$0.1$(3.7)$29.5
2008$40.5$(7.9)$32.6
2007$45.3$8.4$(0.1)$53.6


   Net Unrealized
 NetGross RealizedGain (Loss) in Other
Year Ended December 31ProceedsGain(Loss)Comprehensive Income
     
2009$6.7$4.5
2008$17.5$6.5$(0.1)$(9.7)
2007$81.4$1.4

Auction Rate Securities. Included in Available-for-Sale Securities as of our emerging technology portfolio was $7.9December 31, 2009, is an auction rate municipal bond of $6.7 million ($15.2 million at December 31, 2007 ($9.22008) with a stated maturity date of March 1, 2024. The ARS consists of guaranteed student loans insured or reinsured by the federal government. ARS were historically auctioned every 35 days to set new rates and provided a liquidating event in which investors could either buy or sell securities. Beginning in 2008, the auctions have been unable to sustain themselves due to the overall lack of market liquidity and we have been unable to liquidate all of our ARS. As a result, we have classified our ARS as long-term investments and have the ability to hold these securities to maturity, until called by the issuer, or until liquidity returns to this market.

The Company used a discounted cash flow model to determine the estimated fair value of its investment in the ARS as of December 31, 2009. The assumptions used in preparing the discounted cash flow model include the following: the effective interest rate, amount of cash flows, and expected holding periods of the ARS. These inputs reflect the Company’s judgments about assumptions that market participants would use in pricing ARS including assumptions about risk.

Of the remaining ARS outstanding as of December 31, 2009, approximately $0.3 million was called at par value effective March 1, 2010. We anticipate the remainder of our ARS will be redeemed in the second quarter of 2010, as we received a Notice of Contemplated Refunding on January 29, 2010. The investment remains classified as long-term until officially called by the bondholders.


Note 8.Derivatives

During 2009 we entered into financial derivative instruments to manage price risk for certain power marketing contracts. Outstanding derivative contracts at December 31, 2006). Our policy is to review these investments quarterly for impairment by assessing such factors as continued commercial viability2009, consist of products, cash flow hedges for an energy sale that includes pricing based on daily natural gas prices, and earnings. Any impairment would reduceFinancial Transmission Rights (FTRs) purchased to manage congestion risk for forward power sales contracts. These derivative instruments are recorded on our consolidated balance sheet at fair value. During 2009, we purchased $2.4 million of FTRs and expensed $1.7 million through our consolidated statement of income. As of December 31, 2009, approximately $0.7 million remains in other assets on our consolidated balance sheet. These derivative instruments settle monthly throughout the carryingfirst five months of 2010.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
73


Note 8.Derivatives (Continued)

Changes in the derivatives’ fair value are recognized currently in earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria is met. Favorable changes in fair value of $0.3 million and $0.1 million were recorded in operating revenue in the investment. Duefirst and second quarters of 2009, respectively; and a $0.4 million decrease was recorded in the third quarter of 2009 when the corresponding energy swap contract ended.

The mark-to-market fluctuations on the cash flow hedge were recorded in other comprehensive income on the consolidated balance sheet; a $0.1 million increase in fair value was recorded in the first quarter of 2009, and a decrease of $0.1 million was recorded in the second quarter of 2009. There were no mark-to-market changes in the third or fourth quarters of 2009.


Note 9.Fair Value

Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (exit price). We utilize market data or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, including assumptions about risk and the risks inherent in the inputs to the distributionvaluation technique. These inputs can be readily observable, market corroborated, or generally unobservable. We primarily apply the market approach for recurring fair value measurements and endeavor to utilize the best available information. Accordingly, we utilize valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. These inputs, which are used to measure fair value, are prioritized through the fair value hierarchy. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurement). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are as follows:

Level 1 — Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reported date. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis. This category includes primarily mutual fund investments from matured venture capital funds, our basisheld to fund employee benefits.

Level 2 — Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in direct investments in privately-held companiesactive markets, but are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reported date. The types of assets and liabilities included in Level 2 are typically either comparable to actively traded securities or contracts, such as treasury securities with pricing interpolated from recent trades of similar securities, or priced with models using highly observable inputs, such as commodity options priced using observable forward prices and volatilities. This category includes deferred compensation, fixed income securities, and derivative instruments consisting of cash flow hedges.

Level 3 — Significant inputs that are generally less observable from objective sources. The types of assets and liabilities included in Level 3 are those with inputs requiring significant management judgment or estimation, such as the emerging technology portfolio was $1.2 millioncomplex and subjective models and forecasts used to determine the fair value. This category includes ARS consisting of guaranteed student loans and derivative instruments consisting of FTRs.

The following tables set forth by level within the fair value hierarchy our assets and liabilities that were accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2007 (zero at2009 and December 31, 2006). In 2007, we recorded $0.5 million ($0.3 million after tax)2008. Each asset and liability is classified based on the lowest level of impairments relatedinput that is significant to our venture capital funds whose future business prospects had significantly diminished. Developments at these companies indicated that future commercial viability was unlikely, as was new financing necessarythe fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to continue development. We did not record any impairments in 2006. In 2005, we recorded $5.1 million ($3.3 million after tax)the fair value measurement requires judgment, and may affect the valuation of impairments related to our direct investments in certain privately-held, start-up companies.fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.


 At Fair Value as of December 31, 2009
Recurring Fair Value MeasuresLevel 1Level 2Level 3Total
Millions    
Assets:    
Equity Securities$17.8$17.8
Corporate Debt Securities$6.46.4
Derivatives$0.70.7
Debt Securities Issued by States of the United States (ARS)6.76.7
Money Market Funds1.41.4
Total Fair Value of Assets$19.2$6.4$7.4$33.0
     
Liabilities:    
Deferred Compensation$14.6$14.6
Total Fair Value of Liabilities$14.6$14.6
     
Total Net Fair Value of Assets (Liabilities)$19.2$(8.2)$7.4$18.4


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
74


Note 9.Fair Value (Continued)

  Debt Securities
  Issued by the States
Recurring Fair Value Measures of the United States
Activity in Level 3Derivatives(ARS)
Millions  
Balance as of December 31, 2008$15.2
Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements, net (a)
$0.7(8.5)     
Level 3 transfers in
Balance as of December 31, 2009$0.7$6.7

(a)ARS called during 2009 at par value.


 At Fair Value as of December 31, 2008
Recurring Fair Value MeasuresLevel 1Level 2Level 3Total
Millions    
Assets:    
Equity Securities$13.5$13.5
Corporate Debt Securities$3.33.3
Debt Securities Issued by States of the United States (ARS)$15.215.2
Money Market Funds10.610.6
Total Fair Value of Assets$24.1$3.3$15.2$42.6
     
Liabilities:    
Deferred Compensation$13.5$13.5
Total Fair Value of Liabilities$13.5$13.5
     
Total Net Fair Value of Assets (Liabilities)$24.1$(10.2)$15.2$29.1


Debt Securities
Issued by the States
Recurring Fair Value Measuresof the United States
Activity in Level 3(ARS)
Millions
Balance as of December 31, 2007
Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements, net (a)
$(10.0)
Level 3 transfers in25.2
Balance as of December 31, 2008$15.2

(a)2008 includes a $5.2 million transfer of ARS to our Voluntary Employee Benefit Association trust used to fund postretirement health and life benefits.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments. With the exception of the items listed below, the estimated fair value of all financial instruments approximates the carrying amount. The fair value for the items below were based on quoted market prices for the same or similar instruments.

Financial Instruments  
December 31Carrying AmountFair Value
Millions  
Long-Term Debt, Including Current Portion  
2007$422.7$410.9
2006$389.5$387.6

Concentration of Credit Risk. Financial instruments that subject us to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of accounts receivable. Minnesota Power sells electricity to 12 Large Power Customers. Receivables from these customers totaled approximately $14 million at December 31, 2007 ($9 million at December 31, 2006). Minnesota Power does not obtain collateral to support utility receivables, but monitors the credit standing of major customers. In addition, our taconite-producing Large Power Customers are on a weekly billing cycle, which allows us to closely manage collection of amounts due.
Financial InstrumentsCarrying AmountFair Value
Millions  
Long-Term Debt, Including Current Portion  
December 31, 2009$701.0$734.8
December 31, 2008$598.7$561.6


Note 7.10.Short-Term and Long-Term Debt

Short-Term Debt. Total short-term debt outstanding atas of December 31, 2007,2009, was $11.8$5.2 million ($29.710.4 million at December 31, 2006)2008) and consisted of Long-Term Debt Due Within One Year.long-term debt due within one year. (See ALLETE consolidated balance sheet.)

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
75


Note 10.Short-Term and Long-Term Debt (Continued)

As of December 31, 2007,2009, we had bank lines of credit aggregating $170.0$157.0 million ($170.0160.5 million at December 31, 2006)2008), the majority of which expire in January 2012. These bank lines of credit mademake financing available through short-term bank loans and providedprovide credit support for commercial paper. At December 31, 2007, $4.32009, $69.2 million ($2.97.3 million at December 31, 2006)2008) was drawn on our lines of credit leaving a $165.7$87.8 million balance available for use ($167.1153.2 million at December 31, 2006)2008). TheIn December 2009, we drew $65.0 million on our $150.0 million syndicated revolving credit facility to temporarily fund the purchase of the 250 kV DC transmission line. In December 2009, we agreed to sell $80.0 million of First Mortgage Bonds in February 2010 (see Long-Term Debt, below). We intend to use proceeds from these bonds to repay the amount drawn amountson the line, resulting in $65.0 million of our line of credit being classified as long-term at December 31, 2007, related to an $8.52009.

On November 12, 2009, BNI Coal replaced a $6.0 million revolving developmentPromissory Note and Supplement (Line of Credit) with CoBANK, ACB with a $3.0 million Line of Credit and a $3.0 million term loan with CypressCoquina Bank that we entered into in March 2005.CoBANK, ACB. The revolving development loanLine of Credit has ana variable interest rate equalwith the option to fix the prime rate with an initial term of 36 months.based on LIBOR plus a certain spread. The term of the loan may be extendedLine of Credit is 24 months if certain conditions are met. The loan is guaranteed by Lehigh Acquisition Corporation, an 80 percent owned subsidiary of ALLETE Properties. There was no commercial paper issued as of December 31, 2007 and 2006.

In January 2006, we renewed, increased and extended a committed, syndicated, unsecured revolving credit facility (Line) with LaSalle Bank National Association, as Agent, for $150 million.months. The Line was subsequently extended for an additional year in December 2006 and currently matures in January 2012. At our request and subject to certain conditions, the Line may be increased to $200 million and extended for two additional 12-month periods. The Line may beof Credit is being used for general corporate purposes and working capital, and to provide liquidity in supportpurposes. As of our commercial paper program. We may prepay amounts outstanding underDecember 31, 2009, $1.9 million was drawn on the Line of Credit. The $3.0 million term loan has a fixed interest rate of 5.19 percent and is payable in whole or in part at our discretion without premium or penalty. Additionally, we may irrevocably terminate or reduce the size of the Line prior to maturity without premium or penalty. No funds were drawn under this Line at December 31, 200728 equal quarterly installments commencing January 20, 2010, and 2006.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
73


Note 7.Short-Term and Long-Term Debt (Continued)
ending on October 20, 2016.

Long-Term Debt. The aggregate amount of long-term debt maturing during 20082010 is $11.8$5.2 million ($10.7 million in 2009; $5.0 million in 2010; $1.413.9 million in 2011; $3.1$3.3 million in 2012; $73.9 million in 2013; $19.6 million in 2014; and $390.7$520.1 million thereafter). Substantially all of our electric plant is subject to the lien of the mortgages collateralizing various first mortgage bonds. The mortgages contain non-financial covenants customary in utility mortgages, including restrictions on our ability to incur liens, dispose of assets, and merge with other entities.

On February 1, 2007,In January 2009, we issued $60$42.0 million in principal amount of unregistered First Mortgage Bonds (Bonds) in the private placement market. The Bonds mature January 15, 2019, and carry a coupon rate of 8.17 percent. We used the proceeds from the sale of the Bonds to fund utility capital investments and for general corporate purposes.

In December 2009, we agreed to sell $80.0 million in principal amount of First Mortgage Bonds (Bonds), 5.99% Series due February 1, 2027, in the private placement market. The Company has the option to prepay all or a portion of the Bonds at its discretion, subject to a make-whole provision. Proceeds were used to retire $60 millionmarket in principal amount of First Mortgage Bonds, 7% Series on February 15, 2007.three series as follows:

On June 8, 2007, we issued $50 million of senior unsecured notes (Notes) in the private placement market. The Notes bear an interest rate of 5.99% and will mature on June 1, 2017. The Company has the option
Issue Date
(on or about)
MaturityPrincipal AmountCoupon
February 17, 2010April 15, 2021$15 Million4.85%
February 17, 2010April 15, 2025$30 Million5.10%
February 17, 2010April 15, 2040$35 Million6.00%

We expect to prepay all or a portion of the Notes at its discretion, subject to a make-whole provision. The Company useduse the proceeds from the February 2010 sale of Bonds to pay down the Notessyndicated revolving credit facility, to fund utility capital projects andinvestments or for general corporate purposes.

On behalf of SWL&P,For the City of Superior, Wisconsin, issued $6.4 million in principal amount of Collateralized Utility Revenue Refunding Bonds (Series AJanuary 2009 and the February 2010 bond issuances (the Bonds) and $6.1 million of Collateralized Utility Revenue Bonds (Series B Bonds) on October 3, 2007. The Series A Bonds bear an interest rate of 5.375% and will mature on November 1, 2021. The proceeds, together with other funds, were used to redeem $6.5 million of existing 6.125% bonds. The Series B Bonds bear an interest rate of 5.75% and will mature on November 1, 2037. The proceeds from the Series B Bonds will be used to fund qualifying electric and gas projects.

On February 1, 2008,, we issued $60 million in principal amount of First Mortgage Bonds (Bonds), 4.86% Series due April 1, 2013, in the private placement market. We have the option to prepay all or a portion of the Bonds at our discretion, subject to a make-whole provision. We intendThe Bonds are subject to use the proceedsterms and conditions of our utility mortgage. The Bonds were sold or will be sold in reliance on an exemption from the saleregistration under Section 4(2) of the BondsSecurities Act of 1933, as amended, to fund utility capital expenditures and for general corporate purposes.institutional accredited investors.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
76


Note 10.Short-Term and Long-Term Debt (Continued)

Long-Term Debt  
December 3120072006
As of December 3120092008
Millions  
 
First Mortgage Bonds  
6.68% Series Due 2007$20.0
7.00% Series Due 200760.0
4.86% Series Due 2013$60.0$60.0
6.94% Series Due 201418.0
7.70% Series Due 201620.0
8.17% Series Due 201942.0
5.28% Series Due 2020$35.035.035.0
4.95% Pollution Control Series F Due 2022111.0111.0
6.02% Series Due 202375.0
5.99% Series Due 202760.060.0
5.69% Series Due 203650.050.0
SWL&P First Mortgage Bonds 
7.25% Series Due 201310.0
Senior Unsecured Notes 5.99% Due 201750.050.0
Variable Demand Revenue Refunding Bonds
Series 1997 A, B, and C Due 2009 – 2020
36.539.028.3
Industrial Development Revenue Bonds 6.5% Due 20256.06.0
Industrial Development Variable Rate Demand Refunding  
Revenue Bonds Series 2006 Due 202527.827.8
Other Long-Term Debt, 2.0% – 8.0% Due 2008 – 203746.440.7
Line of Credit Facility (a)
65.0
Other Long-Term Debt, 2.0% – 8.0% Due 2009 – 203742.947.6
Total Long-Term Debt422.7389.5701.0598.7
Less: Due Within One Year11.829.75.210.4
Net Long-Term Debt$410.9$359.8$695.8$588.3

 (a)The $80 million First Mortgage Bonds due in 2021, 2025 and 2040 to be issued on or about February 17, 2010, will replace the balance due on the Line of Credit Facility as of December 31, 2009.

Financial Covenants. Our long-term debt arrangements contain customary covenants. In addition, our lines of credit and letters of credit supporting certain long-term debt arrangements contain financial covenants. The most restrictive covenant requires ALLETE to maintain a quarterly ratio of its fundedFunded Debt to Total Capital (as the amounts are calculated in accordance with the respective long-term debt to total capitalarrangements) of less than or equal to .650.65 to 1.00, measured quarterly. As of December 31, 2009, our ratio was approximately 0.41 to 1.00. Failure to meet this covenant couldwould give rise to an event of default, if not correctedcured after notice from the lender, in which event ALLETE may need to pursue alternative sources of funding. Some of ALLETE’s debt arrangements contain “cross-default” provisions that would result in an event of default if there is a failure under other financing arrangements to meet payment terms or to observe other covenants that would result in an acceleration of payments due. None of ALLETE’s long-term debt arrangements or credit facilities contain credit rating triggers that would cause an event of default or acceleration of repayment of outstanding balances. As of December 31, 2009, ALLETE was in compliance with its financial covenants.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
74


Note 8.                      
Note 11.Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements.Power Purchase Agreements. Our long-term power purchase agreements (PPA) have been evaluated under the accounting guidance for variable interest entities. We have determined that either we have no variable interest in the PPA, or where we do have variable interests, we are not the primary beneficiary; therefore, consolidation is not required. These conclusions are based on the following factors: we have no equity investment in these facilities and do not incur actual or expected losses related to the loss of facility value, and we do not have significant control over the operations of each of these facilities. Our financial exposure relating to these PPAs is limited to our fixed capacity and energy payments.

Square Butte Power Purchase Agreement. Minnesota Power has a power purchase agreement with Square Butte that extends through 2026 (Agreement). It provides a long-term supply of low-cost energy to customers in our electric service territory and enables Minnesota Power to meet power pool reserve requirements. Square Butte, a North Dakota cooperative corporation, owns a 455-MW coal-fired generating unit (Unit) near Center, North Dakota. The Unit is adjacent to a generating unit owned by Minnkota Power, a North Dakota cooperative corporation whose Class A members are also members of Square Butte. Minnkota Power serves as the operator of the Unit and also purchases power from Square Butte.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
Minnesota Power was entitled to approximately 71 percent of the Unit’s output under the Agreement prior to 2006. Minnkota Power exercised its option to reduce Minnesota Power’s entitlement by approximately 5 percent annually to 66 percent in 2006
77


Note 11.                      Commitments, Guarantees and 60 percent in 2007. We received notices from Minnkota Power that they further reduced our output entitlement by approximately 5 percent annually to 55 percent on January 1, 2008, and 50 percent on January 1, 2009, and thereafter. Minnkota Power has no further option to reduce Minnesota Power’s entitlement below 50 percent.Contingencies (Continued)

Minnesota Power is obligated to pay its pro rata share of Square Butte’s costs based on Minnesota Power’s entitlement to Unit output. Our output entitlement under the Agreement is 50 percent for the remainder of the contract. Minnesota Power’s payment obligation will be suspended if Square Butte fails to deliver any power, whether produced or purchased, for a period of one year. Square Butte’s fixed costs consist primarily of debt service. At December 31, 2007,2009, Square Butte had total debt outstanding of $323.0$351.0 million. Total annualAnnual debt service for Square Butte is expected to be approximately $29$34 million in each of the five years, 20082010 through 2012.2014. Variable operating costs include the price of coal purchased from BNI Coal, our subsidiary, under a long-term contract.

Minnesota Power’s cost of power purchased from Square Butte during 20072009 was $53.9 million ($56.7 million in 2008; $57.3 million ($57.9 million in 2006; $56.4 million in 2005)2007). This reflects Minnesota Power’s pro rata share of total Square Butte costs, based on the 50 percent output entitlement in 2009, the 55 percent output entitlement in 2008 and the 60 percent output entitlement in 2007, the 66 percent output entitlement in 2006 and the 71 percent output entitlement in 2005.2007. Included in this amount was Minnesota Power’s pro rata share of interest expense of $11.0 million in 20072009 ($12.611.6 million in 2006; $13.62008; $11.0 million in 2005)2007). Minnesota Power’s payments to Square Butte are approved as a purchased power expense for ratemaking purposes by both the MPUC and the FERC.

In conjunction with the DC line purchase in December 2009, Minnesota Power entered into a contingent new Power Sales Agreement with Minnkota Power. Under the new Power Sales Agreement, Minnesota Power will be able to sell a portion of our output from Square Butte to Minnkota, resulting in Minnkota’s net entitlement increasing and Minnesota Power’s net entitlement decreasing until Minnesota Power’s share is eliminated at the end of 2025.

No power will be sold under this agreement until Minnkota Power has placed in service a new AC transmission line, which is anticipated to occur in late 2013. This new AC transmission line will allow Minnkota to transmit their entitlement from Square Butte to their customers, and allow Minnesota Power additional capacity on the recently acquired DC line to transmit new wind generation.

Wind Power Purchase Agreements. We have two wind power purchase agreements with an affiliate of FPLNextEra Energy to purchase the output from two wind facilities, Oliver Wind I (50 MWs) and Oliver Wind II (48 MWs), located near Center, North Dakota. We began purchasing the output from Oliver Wind I, a 50-MW facility, in December 2006 and the output from Oliver Wind II, a 48-MW facility in November 2007. Each agreement is for 25 years and provides for the purchase of all output from the facilities. There

Hydro Power Purchase Agreement. We also have a power purchase agreement with Manitoba Hydro that began in May 2009 and expires in April 2015. Under the agreement with Manitoba Hydro, Minnesota Power will purchase 50 MW of capacity and the energy associated with that capacity. Both the capacity price and the energy price are no fixed capacity charges, andadjusted annually by the change in a governmental inflationary index.

North Dakota Wind Project. On December 31, 2009, we only paypurchased an existing 250 kV DC transmission line from Square Butte for $69.7 million. The 465-mile transmission line runs from Center, North Dakota, to Duluth, Minnesota. We expect to use this line to transport increasing amounts of wind energy as it isfrom North Dakota while gradually phasing out coal-based electricity currently being delivered to us.our system over this transmission line from Square Butte’s lignite coal-fired generating unit. Acquisition of this transmission line was approved by an MPUC order dated December 21, 2009. In addition, the FERC issued an order on November 24, 2009, authorizing acquisition of the transmission facilities and conditionally accepting, upon compliance and other filings, the proposed tariff revisions, interconnection agreement and other related agreements.

On July 7, 2009, the MPUC approved our petition seeking current cost recovery of investments and expenditures related to Bison I and associated transmission upgrades. Bison I is the first portion of several hundred MWs of our North Dakota Wind Project, which upon completion will help fulfill the 2025 renewable energy supply requirement for our retail load. Bison I, located near Center, North Dakota, will be comprised of 33 wind turbines with a total nameplate capacity of 75.9 MWs and will be phased into service in late 2010 and 2011. We anticipate filing a petition with the MPUC in the first quarter 2010 to establish customer billing rates for the approved cost recovery.

On September 29, 2009, the NDPSC authorized site construction for Bison I. On October 2, 2009, Minnesota Power filed a route permit application with the NDPSC for a 22 mile, 230 kV Bison I transmission line that will connect Bison I to the DC transmission line at the Square Butte Substation in Center, North Dakota. An order is expected in the first quarter 2010.

Leasing Agreements. BNI Coal is obligated to make lease payments for a dragline totaling $2.8 million annually for the lease term which expires in 2027. BNI Coal has the option at the end of the lease term to renew the lease at a fair market rental,value, to purchase the dragline at fair market value, or to surrender the dragline and pay a $3.0 million termination fee. We lease other properties and equipment under operating lease agreements with terms expiring through 2016. The aggregate amount of minimum lease payments for all operating leases is $8.1 million in 2008, $8.1 million in 2009, $7.7$8.8 million in 2010, $7.2$8.9 million in 2011, $6.6$9.0 million in 2012, $8.5 million in 2013, $8.2 million in 2014 and $48.7$45.7 million thereafter. Total rent and lease expense was $6.6$9.3 million in 20072009 ($6.88.5 million in 2006; $6.22008; $8.4 million in 2005)2007).

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
78


Note 11.                      Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies (Continued)

Coal, Rail and Shipping Contracts. We have threetwo primary coal supply agreements with various expiration dates ranging from December 2008 tothrough December 2011. We also have rail and shipping agreements for the transportation of all of our coal, with various expiration dates ranging from December 2008through January 2012. Two of our rail and shipping agreements contain options to December 2011.extend the agreements, which options Minnesota Power may exercise unilaterally. The term extensions are for an additional two year term and an additional four year term. Our minimum annual payment obligations under these coal, rail and shipping agreements are currently $44.8 million in 2008, $10.8 million in 2009, $5.3$35.7 million in 2010 $5.4and $7.6 million in 2011, andwith no specific commitments beyond 2011. Our minimum annual payment obligations will increase when annual nominations are made for coal deliveries in future years.
On January 24, 2008, the Company received a letter from BNSF alleging Minnesota Power defaulted on a material obligation under the Company’s Coal Transportation Agreement (CTA). In the notice, BNSF claimed Minnesota Power underpaid approximately $1.6 million for coal transportation services in 2006 and that failure to pay such amounts plus interest within 60 days may result in BNSF’s termination of the CTA. Minnesota Power believes it does not owe the amount claimed, and that BNSF’s claims are wholly without merit. Minnesota Power intends to vigorously defend its position in this dispute.
Fuel Clause Recovery of MISO Day 2 Costs. We filed a petition with the MPUC in February 2005 to amend our fuel clause to accommodate costs and revenue related to the day-ahead and real-time markets through which we engage in wholesale energy transactions in MISO (MISO Day 2). In December 2006, the MPUC issued an order allowing Minnesota Power and the other utilities involved in the MISO Day 2 proceeding to continue recovering MISO Day 2 charges through the Minnesota retail fuel clause except for MISO Day 2 administrative charges. On January 8, 2007, this order was challenged by the Minnesota OAG, through a request for reconsideration. The request was opposed by Minnesota Power and the other utilities, as well as MISO. The reconsideration request effectively was denied by the MPUC. Upon denial of the reconsideration request, the OAG appealed the MPUC Order in a filing with the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Oral argument in the case is scheduled to be held on February 27, 2008, and a decision would be expected approximately 90 days there after. We are unable to predict the outcome of this matter.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
75


Note 8.                      Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies (Continued)

Fuel Clause Recovery of MISO Day 2 Costs (Continued). The December 2006 MPUC order, subject to the rehearing request, granted deferred accounting treatment for three MISO Day 2 charge types that were determined to be administrative charges. Under the order, Minnesota Power refunded, through customer bills, approximately $2 million of administrative charges previously collected through the fuel clause between April 1, 2005, and December 31, 2006, and recorded these administrative charges as a regulatory asset. We were permitted to continue accumulating MISO Day 2 administrative charges after December 31, 2006, as a regulatory asset until we file our next rate case, at which time recovery for such charges will be determined. The balance of this regulatory asset was $3.7 million on December 31, 2007, and we consider regulatory recovery to be probable. This order removed the subject to refund requirement of the two interim orders, and included extensive fuel clause reporting requirements that review our monthly and annual fuel clause filings with the MPUC. There was no impact on earnings as a result of this ruling. As a result of the MPUC’s December 2006 order allowing recovery of nearly all MISO Day 2 charges through the fuel clause, we rescinded our December 2005 Letter of Intent to Withdraw from MISO in December 2006.Environmental Matters.

Emerging Technology Portfolio. We have investments in emerging technologies through minority investments in venture capital funds structured as limited liability companies, and direct investments in privately-held, start-up companies. We have committed to make additional investments in certain emerging technology venture capital funds. The total future commitment was $1.0 million at December 31, 2007, and may be invested in 2008. We do not have plans to make any additional investments beyond this commitment.

Discontinued Operations. Two of our subsidiaries, which were involved in our discontinued water operations, have been named in a claim brought by Capital Resources and Properties, Inc, (CRP). CRP alleges that Georgia Water and ALLETE Water Services are obligated to pay $2 million dollars plus interest and attorney fees pursuant to a contract that was entered into in 2001. The contract provides for payments of certain amounts upon the satisfaction of specified contingencies, which CRP alleges were satisfied in 2005 or were waived, or are otherwise due and owing. We intend to vigorously assert our defenses to the claim, and cannot predict the outcome of this matter. A trial date is expected later this year.

Environmental Matters.Our businesses are subject to regulation of environmental matters by various federal, state and local authorities. Currently, a number of regulatory changes are under consideration by both the Congress and the EPA. Most notably, clean energy technologies and the regulation of GHGs have taken a lead in these discussions. Minnesota Power’s fossil fueled facilities will likely to be subject to regulation under these climate change policies. Our intention is to reduce our exposure to possible future carbon and GHG legislation by reshaping our generation portfolio, over time, to reduce our reliance on coal.

We consider our businesses to be in substantial compliance with currently applicable environmental regulations and believe all necessary permits to conduct such operations have been obtained. Due to future stricterrestrictive environmental requirements through legislation and/or rulemaking, we anticipate that potential expenditures for environmental matters will be material and will require significant capital investments.

We review environmental matters on a quarterly basis. Accruals for environmental matters are recorded when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated, based on current law and existing technologies. These accruals are adjusted periodically as assessment and remediation efforts progress or as additional technical or legal information becomesbecome available. Accruals for environmental liabilities are included in the consolidated balance sheet at undiscounted amounts and exclude claims for recoveries from insurance or other third parties. Costs related to environmental contamination treatment and cleanup are charged to expense unless recoverable in rates from customers.

Clean Air Act. The federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (Clean Air Act) established the acid rain program which created emission allowances for SO2 and system-wide average NOX limits. Minnesota Power’s generating facilities mainly burn low-sulfur western sub-bituminous coal. Square Butte, located in North Dakota, burns lignite coal. All of these facilities are equipped with pollution control equipment such as scrubbers, bag houses, or electrostatic precipitators. Minnesota Power’s generating facilities are currently in compliance with applicable emission requirements.

MR
SWL&P Manufactured Gas PlantNew Source Review. . In May 2001, SWL&POn August 8, 2008, Minnesota Power received noticea Notice of Violation (NOV) from the WDNRUnited States EPA asserting violations of the New Source Review (NSR) requirements of the Clean Air Act at Boswell Units 1-4 and Laskin Unit 2. The NOV also asserts that the CityBoswell Unit 4 Title V permit was violated, and that seven projects undertaken at these coal-fired plants between the years 1981 and 2000 should have been reviewed under the NSR requirements. Minnesota Power believes the projects were in full compliance with the Clean Air Act, NSR requirements and applicable permits.

We are engaged in discussions with the EPA regarding resolution of Superior had found soil contamination on property adjoining a former Manufactured Gas Plant (MGP) site ownedthese matters, but we are unable to predict the outcome of these discussions. Since 2006, Minnesota Power has significantly reduced, and operated by SWL&P from 1889continues to 1904. A report submittedreduce, emissions at Boswell and Laskin. The resolution could result in 2003 identified some MGP-like chemicals that were found in the soil near the former plant site. The final Phase II report was issued in June 2007, confirming our understanding of the issues involved. The final Phase II Report and Risk Assessment were sent to the WDNR for review in June 2007. A remediation plan was developed during the fourth quarter of 2007 and will be submitted to the WDNR during the first quarter of 2008. Although it is not possible to quantify the potential clean-up cost until the investigation is completed, a $0.5 million liability was recorded in December 2003 to address the known areas of contamination. The Company has recorded a corresponding dollar amount as a regulatory asset to offset this liability. The PSCW approved the collection through rates of $0.3 million of site investigation costs that had been incurred through 2005. ALLETE maintains pollution liability insurance coverage that includes coverage for SWL&P. A claim has been filed with respect to this matter. The insurance carrier has issued a reservation of rights lettercivil penalties and the Company continuesinstallation of control technology, some of which is already planned or completed for other regulatory requirements. Any costs of installing pollution control technology would likely be eligible for recovery in rates over time subject to work withMPUC and FERC approval in a rate proceeding. We are unable to predict the insurer to determineultimate financial impact or the availabilityresolution of insurance coverage.these matters at this time.

EPA Clean Air Interstate Rule. In March 2005, the EPA announced the final Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) that reducessought to reduce and permanently capscap emissions of SO2, NOX, and particulates in the eastern United States. The CAIR includes Minnesota was included as one of the 28 states it considersconsidered as “significantly contributing” to air quality standards non-attainment in other downwind states. The CAIR has been challenged in the court system, which may delay implementation or modify provisions in the rules. Minnesota Power is participating in the legal challenge to the CAIR. However, if the CAIR does go into effect, Minnesota Power expects to be required to:

(1)  make emissions reductions;
(2)  purchase mercury, SO2 and NOX allowances through the EPA’s cap-and-trade system; and/or
(3) use a combination of both.



ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
76


Note 8.                      Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies (Continued)

EPA Clean Air Mercury Rule. In March 2005, the EPA also announced the final Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) that would have reduced and permanently capped emissions of electric utility mercury emissions in the continental United States. On February 8,July 11, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturned(Court) vacated the CAIR and remanded the rulemaking to the EPA for reconsideration while also granting our petition that the EPA reconsider including Minnesota as a CAIR state. In September 2008, the EPA and others petitioned the Court for a rehearing or alternatively requested that the CAIR be remanded without a court order. In December 2008, the Court granted the request that the CAIR be remanded without a court order, effectively reinstating a January 1, 2009 compliance date for the CAIR, including Minnesota. However, in the May 12, 2009 Federal Register the EPA issued a proposed rule that would amend the CAIR to stay its effectiveness with respect to Minnesota until completion of the EPA’s determination of whether Minnesota should be included as a CAIR state. The formal administrative stay of CAIR for Minnesota was published in the November 3, 2009, Federal Register with an effective date of December 3, 2009.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
79


Note 11.Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies (Continued)
Environmental Matters (Continued)

Minnesota Regional Haze. The federal regional haze rule requires states to submit state implementation plans (SIPs) to the EPA to address regional haze visibility impairment in 156 federally-protected parks and wilderness areas. Under the regional haze rule, certain large stationary sources, that were put in place between 1962 and 1977 with emissions contributing to visibility impairment are required to install emission controls, known as best available retrofit technology (BART). We have certain steam units, Boswell Unit 3 and Taconite Harbor Unit 3, which are subject to BART requirements.

Pursuant to the regional haze rule, Minnesota was required to develop its SIP by December 2007. As a mechanism for demonstrating progress towards meeting the long-term regional haze goal, in April 2007, the MPCA advanced a draft conceptual SIP which relied on the implementation of CAIR. However, a formal SIP was never filed due to the Court’s review of CAIR as more fully described above under “EPA Clean Air Interstate Rule.” Subsequently, the MPCA requested that companies with BART eligible units complete and submit a BART emissions control retrofit study, which was done on Taconite Harbor Unit 3 in November 2008. The retrofit work completed in 2009 at Boswell Unit 3 meets the BART requirement for that unit. On December 15, 2009, the MPCA approved the SIP for submittal to the EPA for review and approval. It is uncertain what controls will ultimately be required at Taconite Harbor Unit 3 in connection with the regional haze rule.

EPA National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. In March 2005, the EPA also announced the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) that would have reduced and permanently capped electric utility mercury emissions in the continental United States through a cap-and-trade program. In February 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the CAMR and remanded the rulemaking to the EPA for reconsideration. TheIn October 2008, the EPA petitioned the Supreme Court to review the Court’s decision is subject to appeal. It is uncertain howin the CAMR case. In January 2009, the EPA will respond;withdrew its petition, paving the way for possible regulation of mercury and therefore it is also uncertain whether mercury emission reductions expected as a result of implementing AREA Plan expenditures at Taconite Harbor, and implementationother hazardous air pollutant emissions through Section 112 of the 2006Clean Air Act, setting Maximum Achievable Control Technology standards for the utility sector. In December 2009, Minnesota Mercury Emission Reduction LawPower and other utilities received an Information Collection Request from the EPA, requiring that emissions data be provided and stack testing be performed in order to develop an improved database with which applies to Boswell Units 3 and 4, will meet the EPA’s reformed mercurybase future regulations. (See Minnesota Mercury Emission Law.) Cost estimates for complying with potential future mercury and other hazardous air pollutant regulations under the Clean Air Act are therefore prematurecannot be estimated at this time.

Real Estate.Minnesota Mercury Emission Reduction Act. This legislation requires Minnesota Power to file mercury emission reduction plans for Boswell Units 3 and 4, with a goal of 90 percent reduction in mercury emissions. The Boswell Unit 3 emission reduction plan was filed with the MPCA in October 2006. Mercury control equipment has been installed and was placed into service in November 2009. (See Item 1. Business – Regulated Operations – Minnesota Public Utilities Commission – Emission Reduction Plans.) A mercury emissions reduction plan for Boswell Unit 4 is required by July 1, 2011, with implementation no later than December 31, 2014. The legislation calls for an evaluation of a mercury control alternative which provides for environmental and public health benefits without imposing excessive costs on the utility’s customers. Cost estimates for the Boswell Unit 4 emission reduction plan are not available at this time.

Ozone. The EPA is attempting to control, more stringently, emissions that result in ground level ozone. In January 2010, the EPA proposed to reduce the eight-hour ozone standard and to adopt a secondary standard for the protection of sensitive vegetation from ozone-related damage. The EPA projects stating rules to address attainment of these new, more stringent standards will not be required until December 2013.

EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule. On September 22, 2009, the EPA issued the final rule mandating that certain GHG emission sources, including electric generating units, are required to report emission levels. The rule is intended to allow the EPA to collect accurate and timely data on GHG emissions that can be used to form future policy decisions. The rule was effective January 1, 2010, and all GHG emissions must be reported on an annual basis by March 31 of the following year. Currently, we have the equipment and data tools necessary to report our 2010 emissions to comply with this rule.

Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule. On October 27, 2009, the EPA issued the proposed Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring rule. This proposed regulation addresses the six primary greenhouse gases and new thresholds for when permits will be required for new facilities and existing facilities which undergo major modifications. The rule would require large industrial facilities, including power plants, to obtain construction and operating permits that demonstrate Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) are being used at the facility to minimize GHG emissions. The EPA is expected to propose BACT standards for GHG emissions from stationary sources.

For our existing facilities, the proposed rule does not require amending our existing Title V operating permits to include BACT for GHGs. However, modifying or installing units with GHG emissions that trigger the PSD permitting requirements could require amending operating permits to incorporate BACT to control GHG emissions.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
80


Note 11.Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies (Continued)
Environmental Matters (Continued)

EPA Endangerment Findings. On December 15, 2009, the EPA published its findings that the emissions of six GHG, including CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide, endanger human health or welfare. This finding may result in regulations that establish motor vehicle GHG emissions standards in 2010. There is also a possibility that the endangerment finding will enable expansion of the EPA regulation under the Clean Air Act to include GHGs emitted from stationary sources. A petition for review of the EPA’s endangerment findings was filed by the Coalition for Responsible Regulation, et. al. with the United States District Court Circuit Court of Appeals on December 23, 2009.

Coal Ash Management Facilities. Minnesota Power generates coal ash at all five of its steam electric stations. Two facilities store ash in onsite impoundments (ash ponds) with engineered liners and containment dikes. Another facility stores dry ash in a landfill with an engineered liner and leachate collection system. Two facilities generate a combined wood and coal ash that is either land applied as an approved beneficial use, or trucked to state permitted landfills. Minnesota Power continues to monitor state and federal legislative and regulatory activities that may affect its ash management practices. The USEPA is expected to propose new regulations in February 2010, pertaining to the management of coal ash by electric utilities. It is unknown how potential coal ash management rule changes will affect Minnesota Power’s facilities. On March 9, 2009, the EPA requested information from Minnesota Power (and other utilities) on its ash storage impoundments at Boswell and Laskin. On June 22, 2009, Minnesota Power received an additional EPA information request pertaining to Boswell. Minnesota Power responded to both these information requests. On August 19, 2009, Dam Safety officials from the Minnesota DNR visited both the Boswell and Laskin ash ponds. The purpose of the inspection was to assess the structural integrity of the ash ponds, as well as review operational and maintenance procedures. There were no significant findings or concerns from the DNR staff during the inspections.

Manufactured Gas Plant Site. We are reviewing and addressing environmental conditions at a former manufactured gas plant site within the City of Superior, Wisconsin and formerly operated by SWL&P. We have been working with the WDNR to determine the extent of contamination and the remediation of contaminated locations. At December 31, 2009 we have a $0.5 million liability for this site, and a corresponding regulatory asset as we expect recovery of remediation costs to be allowed by the PSCW.

BNI Coal. As of December 31, 2009, BNI Coal had surety bonds outstanding of $18.4 million related to the reclamation liability for closing costs associated with its mine and mine facilities. Although the coal supply agreements obligate the customers to provide for the closing costs, an additional guarantee is required by federal and state regulations. In addition to the surety bonds, BNI has secured a Letter of Credit with CoBANK, ACB for an additional $10.0 million, of which $6.7 million is needed to meet the requirements for BNI’s total reclamation liability currently estimated at $25.1 million.

ALLETE Properties. As of December 31, 2007,2009, ALLETE Properties, through its subsidiaries, had surety bonds outstanding of $35.9$19.1 million primarily related to performance and maintenance obligations to governmental entities to construct improvements in the company’s various projects. The remaining work to be completed on these improvements is estimated to be approximately $6.4$10.2 million, and ALLETE Properties does not believe it is likely that any of these outstanding bonds will be drawn upon.

Community Development District Obligations. Town Center.In March 2005, the Town Center District issued $26.4 million of tax-exempt, 6%6 percent Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds, Series 2005, which2005; and in May 2006, the Palm Coast Park District issued $31.8 million of tax-exempt, 5.7 percent Special Assessment Bonds, Series 2006. The Capital Improvement Revenue Bonds and the Special Assessment Bonds are payable through property tax assessments on the land owners over 31 years (by May 1, 2036)2036, and 2037, respectively). The bond proceeds (less capitalized interest, a debt service reserve fund and cost of issuance) were used to pay for the construction of a portion of the major infrastructure improvements at Town Center. The bonds are payable from and secured by the revenue derived from assessments imposed, levied and collected by the Town Center District. The assessments represent an allocation of the costs of the improvements, including bond financing costs, to the lands within the Town Center District benefiting from the improvements. The assessments were billed to Town Center landowners effective in November 2006. To the extent that we still own land at the time of the assessment, in accordance with EITF 91-10, “Accounting for Special Assessments and Tax Increment Financing Entities,” we will incur the cost of our portion of these assessments, based upon our ownership of benefited property. At December 31, 2007, we owned approximately 69 percent of the assessable land in the Town Center District (73 percent at December 31, 2006). As we sell property, the obligation to pay special assessments will pass to the new landowners. Under current accounting rules, these bonds are not reflected as debt on our consolidated balance sheet.

Palm Coast Park. In May 2006, the Palm Coast Park District issued $31.8 million of tax-exempt, 5.7% Special Assessment Bonds, Series 2006, which are payable through property tax assessments on the land owners over 31 years (by May 1, 2037). The bond proceeds (less capitalized interest, a debt service reserve fund and cost of issuance) were used to pay for the construction of the major infrastructure improvements at Palm Coast Parkeach district, and to mitigate traffic and environmental impacts. The bonds are payable from and secured by the revenue derived from assessments imposed, levied and collected by each district. The assessments were billed to the landowners in November 2006, for Town Center and November 2007, for Palm Coast Park District. The assessments represent an allocation of the costs of the improvements, including bond financing costs, to the lands within the Palm Coast Park District benefiting from the improvements. The assessments will be billed to Palm Coast Park landowners effective in November 2007.Park. To the extent that we still own land at the time of the assessment, in accordance with EITF 91-10, “Accounting for Special Assessments and Tax Increment Financing Entities,” we will incur the cost of our portion of these assessments, based upon our ownership of benefited property. At December 31, 2007,2009, we owned 69 percent of the assessable land in the Town Center District (69 percent at December 31, 2008) and 86 percent of the assessable land in the Palm Coast Park District (97(86 percent at December 31, 2006)2008). At these ownership levels our annual assessments are $1.4 million for Town Center and $1.9 million for Palm Coast Park. As we sell property, the obligation to pay special assessments will pass to the new landowners. Under current accounting rules, these bonds are not reflected as debt on our consolidated balance sheet.

Other. We are involved in litigation arising in the normal course of business. Also in the normal course of business, we are involved in tax, regulatory and other governmental audits, inspections, investigations and other proceedings that involve state and federal taxes, safety, compliance with regulations, rate base and cost of service issues, among other things. While the resolution of such matters could have a material effect on earnings and cash flows in the year of resolution, none of these matters are expected to materially change our present liquidity position, or have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.



ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
7781

 

Note 9.12.Common Stock and Earnings Per Share

Our
Summary of Common StockSharesEquity
 ThousandsMillions
Balance as of December 31, 200630,436$438.7
2007   Employee Stock Purchase Plan170.7
Invest Direct33115.1
Options and Stock Awards436.7
Balance as of December 31, 200730,827$461.2
2008   Employee Stock Purchase Plan170.6
Invest Direct1616.9
Options and Stock Awards244.6
Equity Issuance Program1,55660.8
Balance as of December 31, 200832,585$534.1
2009   Employee Stock Purchase Plan240.7
Invest Direct45613.6
Options and Stock Awards81.1
Equity Issuance Program1,68551.9
Contributions to Pension46312.0
Balance as of December 31, 200935,221$613.4

Equity Issuance Program. We entered into a Distribution Agreement with KCCI, Inc., originating in February 2008 and subsequently amended in February 2009, with respect to the issuance and sale of up to an aggregate of 6.6 million shares of our common stock, without par value. The shares may be offered for sale, from time to time, in accordance with the terms of the agreement pursuant to Registration Statement No. 333-147965. During 2009, 1.7 million shares of common stock were issued under this agreement resulting in net proceeds of $51.9 million. In 2008, 1.6 million shares were issued for net proceeds of $60.8 million. (See Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Liquidity and Capital Resources.)

Contributions to Pension. In March 2009, we contributed 0.5 shares of ALLETE common stock, with an aggregate value of $12.0 million, to our pension plan. On May 19, 2009, we registered the 0.5 shares of ALLETE common stock with the SEC pursuant to Registration Statement No. 333-147965. (See Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Liquidity and Capital Resources.)

Authorized Common Stock. On May 12, 2009, shareholders approved an amendment to the Company’s Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation contains provisions that, under certain circumstances, would restrictto increase the paymentnumber of authorized shares of common stock dividends. As of December 31, 2007, no retained earnings were restricted as a result of these provisions.

Summary of Common StockSharesEquity
 ThousandsMillions
   
Balance at December 31, 200429,651$400.1
2005   Employee Stock Purchase Plan130.5
Invest Direct (a)
23810.5
Options and Stock Awards24110.0
Balance at December 31, 200530,143421.1
2006   Employee Stock Purchase Plan120.5
Invest Direct (a)
21810.0
Options and Stock Awards637.1
Balance at December 31, 200630,436438.7
2007   Employee Stock Purchase Plan170.7
Invest Direct (a)
33115.1
Options and Stock Awards436.7
Balance at December 31, 200730,827$461.2

(a)Invest Direct is ALLETE’s direct stock purchase and dividend reinvestment plan.
from 43.3 million to 80.0 million.

Shareholder Rights Plan. InOn July 25, 1996, weALLETE adopted a shareholder rights plan, that provides for a dividend distribution of one preferred share purchase right (Right)which was amended and restated on July 12, 2006 (collectively, the “Rights Plan”). The amendment to be attached to each share of common stock. In July 2006, we amended the rights plan to extendRights Plan, among other things, extended the final expiration date of the Rights Plan to July 11, 2009. The amendment also provides that the Company may not consolidate, merge, or sellRights Plan expired according to its terms on July 11, 2009. As a majority of its assets or earning power if doing so would be counter to the intended benefits of the Rights or would result, ALLETE’s preferred share purchase rights issued in the distribution of Rights to the shareholders of the other parties to the transaction. Finally, the amendment provides for the creation of a committee of independent directors to annually review the terms and conditions of the amended rights plan (Rights Plan), as well as to consider whether termination or modification ofaccordance with the Rights Plan would be in the best interests of the shareholders and to make a recommendation based on such review to the Board of Directors.

The Rights, which are currently not exercisable or transferable apart from our common stock, entitle the holder to purchase one-and-a-half one-hundredths (three two-hundredths) of a share of ALLETE’s Junior Serial Preferred Stock A, without par value. The purchase price, as defined in the Rights Plan, remains at $90. These Rights would become exercisable if a person or group acquires beneficial ownership of 15 percent or more of our common stock or announces a tender offer which would increase the person’s or group’s beneficial ownership interest to 15 percent or more of our common stock, subject to certain exceptions. If the 15 percent threshold is met, each Right entitles the holder (other than the acquiring person or group) to receive, upon payment of the purchase price, the number of shares of common stock (or, in certain circumstances, cash, property or other securities of ours) having a market value equal to twice the exercise price of the Right. If we are acquired in a merger or business combination, or more than 50 percent of our assets or earning power are sold, each exercisable Right entitles the holder to receive, upon payment of the purchase price, the number of shares of common stock of the acquiring or surviving company having a value equal to twice the exercise price of the Right. Certain stock acquisitions will also trigger a provision permitting the Board of Directors to exchange each Right for one share of our common stock.

The Rights are nonvoting and may be redeemed by us at a price of $0.005 per Right at any time they are not exercisable. One million shares of Junior Serial Preferred Stock A have been authorized and are reserved for issuance under the Rights Plan.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
78


Note 9.                      Common Stock and Earnings Per Share (Continued)no longer outstanding.

Earnings Per Share. The difference between basic and diluted earnings per share arises, if any, from outstanding stock options, non-vested restricted stock, and performance share awards granted under our Executive and Director Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plans. In accordance with SFAS 128, “Earnings Per Share,”accounting standards for 2007, 0.2earnings per share, for 2009, 0.6 million options to purchase shares of common stock were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share because the option exercise prices were greater than the average market prices, and therefore, their effect would be anti-dilutive (no(0.6 million shares were excluded for 20062008 and 2005)0.2 million in 2007).

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
82


Note 12.Common Stock and Earnings Per Share (Continued)

Reconciliation of Basic and Diluted   
Earnings Per Share Dilutive 
For the Year Ended December 31BasicSecuritiesDiluted
Millions Except Per Share Amounts   
    
2007   
    
Income from Continuing Operations$87.6$87.6
Common Shares28.30.128.4
Per Share from Continuing Operations$3.09$3.08
    
2006   
    
Income from Continuing Operations$77.3$77.3
Common Shares27.80.127.9
Per Share from Continuing Operations$2.78$2.77
    
2005   
    
Income from Continuing Operations$17.6$17.6
Common Shares27.30.127.4
Per Share from Continuing Operations$0.65$0.64
Reconciliation of Basic and Diluted   
Earnings Per Share Dilutive 
Year Ended December 31BasicSecuritiesDiluted
Millions Except Per Share Amounts   
    
2009   
Net Income Attributable to ALLETE$61.0$61.0
Common Shares32.232.2
Per Share of Common Stock$1.89$1.89
    
2008   
Net Income Attributable to ALLETE$82.5$82.5
Common Shares29.20.129.3
Per Share of Common Stock$2.82$2.82
    
2007   
Net Income Attributable to ALLETE$87.6$87.6
Common Shares28.30.128.4
Per Share of Common Stock$3.09$3.08


Note 10.13.Kendall County ChargeOther Income (Expense)

On April 1, 2005, Rainy River Energy, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ALLETE, assigned its power purchase agreement with LSP-Kendall Energy, LLC, the owner of an energy generation facility located in Kendall County, Illinois, to Constellation Energy Commodities. Rainy River Energy paid Constellation Energy Commodities $73 million in cash to assume the power purchase agreement that remains in effect through mid-September 2017. The federal tax benefits of the payment were realized through a $24.3 million capital loss carryback refund received in the third quarter of 2006. In addition, consent, advisory and closing costs of $4.9 million were incurred to complete the transaction. As a result of this transaction, ALLETE incurred a charge to operating expenses totaling $77.9 million ($50.4 million after tax, or $1.84 per diluted share) in the second quarter of 2005.
Year Ended December 31200920082007
Millions   
Loss on Emerging Technology Investments$(4.6)$(0.7)$(1.3)
AFUDC - Equity5.83.33.8
Investments and Other Income (a)
0.613.013.0
Total Other Income$1.8$15.6$15.5

Note 11.                      Other Income (Expense)
(a)In 2008, Investment and Other Income included a gain from the sale of certain available-for-sale securities. The gain was triggered when securities were sold to reallocate investments to meet defined investment allocations based upon an approved investment strategy. In 2007, Investment and Other Income primarily included earnings on excess cash and Minnesota land sales.

For the Year Ended December 31200720062005
Millions   
Loss on Emerging Technology Investments$(1.3)$(0.9)$(6.1)
AFUDC - Equity3.80.50.2
Debt Prepayment Premium and Unamortized Debt Issuance Costs(0.6)
Investments and Other Income13.012.97.0
Total Other Income$15.5$11.9$1.1

In August 2006, we redeemed $29.1 million of outstanding Collier County Industrial Development Refunding Revenue Bonds 6.5% Series 1996 due 2025 with proceeds from the issuance of $27.8 million of Collier County Industrial Development Variable Rate Demand Refunding Revenue Bonds Series 2006 due 2025 and internally generated funds. As a result of an early redemption premium, we recognized an expense of $0.6 million in the third quarter of 2006.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
79


Note 12.14.                      Income Tax Expense

Income Tax Expense        
Year Ended December 312007 2006 2005 200920082007
Millions        
      
Current Tax Expense      
Current Tax Expense (Benefit)  
Federal (a)
$(42.6)$6.2$26.5
State(1.8)(1.6)7.2
Total Current Tax Expense (Benefit)(44.4)4.633.7
Deferred Tax Expense  
Federal$26.5 $8.9(a)$27.2(b)66.029.310.7
State7.2 9.6 6.5(b)10.313.44.7
Total Current Tax Expense33.7 18.5 33.7 
Deferred Tax Expense (Benefit)      
Federal10.7 28.0(a)(26.4)(b)
State4.7 2.0 (9.5) 
Total Deferred Tax Expense (Benefit)15.4 30.0 (35.9) 
Change in Valuation Allowance(0.3) (1.1) 3.0 (0.1)(2.9)(0.3)
Investment Tax Credit Amortization(1.1) (1.1) (1.3) (1.0)(1.0)(1.1)
Income Tax Expense (Benefit) for Continuing Operations47.7 46.3 (0.5) 
Income Tax Expense (Benefit) for Discontinued Operations (0.6) 3.4 
Total Deferred Tax Expense75.238.814.0
Total Income Tax Expense$47.7 $45.7 $2.9 $30.8$43.4$47.7

(a)Included a current federal tax benefit of $24.3 million and a deferred federal tax expense of $24.3 million relatedDue to the refund frombonus depreciation provisions in the Kendall County capitalAmerican Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, we are in a net operating loss carryback. (See Note 10.)position for 2009. The loss will be utilized by carrying it back against prior years’ taxable income.


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
83


(b)Note 14.Included a current federal tax benefit of $1.3 million, current state tax benefit of $0.4 million and deferred federal tax benefit of $25.8 million related to the Kendall County charge. (See Note 10.)Income Tax Expense (Continued)

Reconciliation of Taxes from Federal Statutory    
Rate to Total Income Tax Expense for Continuing Operations  
Rate to Total Income Tax Expense  
Year Ended December 31200720062005200920082007
Millions    
Income from Continuing Operations
Before Minority Interest and Income Taxes
$137.2$128.2$19.8
Income Before Non-Controlling Interest and Income Taxes$91.5$126.4$137.2
Statutory Federal Income Tax Rate35%35%35%35%35%
Income Taxes Computed at 35% Statutory Federal Rate$48.0$44.9$6.9
Income Taxes Computed at 35 percent Statutory Federal Rate$32.0$44.2$48.0
Increase (Decrease) in Tax Due to:    
Amortization of Deferred Investment Tax Credits(1.1)(1.1)(1.3)(1.0)(1.1)
State Income Taxes – Net of Federal Income Tax Benefit7.46.5 1.15.44.87.4
Depletion(0.9)(1.1)(1.0)(0.9)(0.8)(0.9)
Employee Benefits0.40.1(0.5)
Domestic Manufacturing Deduction(1.1)(0.6)(0.4)
Regulatory Differences for Utility Plant(2.2)(0.9)(0.6)(2.5)(1.6)(2.2)
Production Tax Credit(1.2)(0.4)
Positive Resolution of Audit Issues(1.6)(3.7)(1.6)
Other(1.2)(1.5)(1.0)(1.0)(1.8)(1.9)
Total Income Tax Expense (Benefit) for Continuing Operations$47.7$46.3$(0.5)
Total Income Tax Expense$30.8$43.4$47.7

The effective tax rate on income from continuing operations before minoritynon-controlling interest was a33.7 percent for 2009; (34.3 percent for 2008; 34.8 percent expense for 2007; (36.1 percent expense for 2006; 2.5 percent benefit for 2005)2007). The 20072009 effective tax rate was primarily impacted by state income tax audit settlements ($1.6 million), deductions for Medicare health subsidies (included in Employee Benefits, above), domestic manufacturing deduction, AFUDC-Equity (included in Regulatory Differences for Utility Plant, above), investment tax credits, wind production tax credits and depletion. The 20062008 effective tax rate was impacted by deductions for AFUDC-Equity (included in Regulatory Differences for Utility Plant, above), investment tax credits, deductions for Medicare health subsidies,wind production tax credits, depletion, andrecognition of a benefit on the expected usereversal of state capital loss carryforwards, of which a $1.1previously uncertain tax position ($1.7 million benefit was included in Other, above) and a benefit for the reversal of a state income tax provision.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
80


Note 12.valuation allowance ($2.9 million included in State Income Tax Expense (Continued)Taxes, above).

Deferred Tax Assets and Liabilities   
December 3120072006
As of December 3120092008
Millions   
 
Deferred Tax Assets   
Employee Benefits and Compensation (a)
$80.5$95.5$118.2$125.2
Property Related26.532.846.536.4
Investment Tax Credits11.412.110.010.7
Other13.417.914.416.3
Gross Deferred Tax Assets131.8158.3189.1188.6
Deferred Tax Asset Valuation Allowance(3.3)(3.6)(0.3)(0.4)
Total Deferred Tax Assets$128.5$154.7$188.8$188.2
Deferred Tax Liabilities   
Property Related$201.7$204.7$294.1$235.6
Regulatory Asset for Benefit Obligations21.634.896.587.7
Unamortized Investment Tax Credits16.117.214.115.1
Employee Benefits and Compensation19.513.2
Fuel Clause Adjustment10.76.0
Partnership Basis Differences14.63.7
Other8.19.328.216.8
Total Deferred Tax Liabilities$277.7$285.2$447.5$358.9
Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes$149.2$130.5
Net Deferred Income Taxes$258.7$170.7
   
Recorded as:   
Net Current Deferred Tax Liabilities (Assets)$5.0$(0.3)
Net Current Deferred Tax Liabilities (b)
$5.6$1.1
Net Long-Term Deferred Tax Liabilities144.2130.8253.1169.6
Net Deferred Tax Liabilities$149.2$130.5
Net Deferred Income Taxes$258.7$170.7

(a)Includes Unfunded Employee Benefits
(b)Included in Other Current Liabilities.

Uncertain Tax Positions. Effective January 1, 2007,As of December 31, 2009 we adoptedhad a federal net operating loss of $85.7 million primarily due to the bonus depreciation provisions of FIN 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109.” As a result of the implementation of FIN 48, we recognized a $1.0 million increase in the liability for unrecognizedAmerican Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. In 2010, this federal net operating loss will be fully utilized by carrying it back against prior years’ taxable income. We also have various state net operating loss carryforwards totaling $23.8 million available to reduce future taxable income. We expect to fully utilize the tax benefits. benefit of these losses prior to their expirations in 2024 through 2029.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
84


Note 14.Income Tax Expense (Continued)

Gross Unrecognized Income Tax Benefits200920082007
Millions   
Balance at January 1$8.0$5.3$10.4
Additions for Tax Positions Related to the Current Year0.50.70.8
Reductions for Tax Positions Related to the Current Year
Additions for Tax Positions Related to Prior Years1.04.5
Reduction for Tax Positions Related to Prior Years(2.5)(2.4)
Settlements(3.5)
Balance as of December 31$9.5$8.0$5.3

The adoptiongross amount of FIN 48 also resulted in a reduction in retained earnings of $0.7 million, a reduction of deferred tax liabilities of $0.8 million and an increase in accrued interest of $0.5 million. Subsequent to the implementation of FIN 48, ALLETE’s gross unrecognized tax benefits were $10.4 million. Of this total, $6.8as of December 31, 2009, includes $1.5 million (net of federal tax benefit on state issues) represents the amount ofnet unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized, would favorably affect the annual effective income tax rate.

Uncertain Tax Positions
December 31, 2007
MillionsGross Unrecognized Income Tax Benefits
Balance at January 1, 2007$10.4
Additions for Tax Positions Related to the Current Year0.8
Reductions for Tax Positions Related to the Current Year
Additions for Tax Positions Related to Prior Years
Reduction for Tax Positions Related to Prior Years(2.4)
Settlements(3.5)
Balance at December 31, 2007$5.3
Less: Tax Attributable to Temporary Items and Federal Benefit on State Tax(2.3)
Total Unrecognized Tax Benefits that, if Recognized, Would Impact the Effective Tax Rate as of December 31, 2007
$3.0

We recognize interest related to unrecognized tax benefits in interest expense and penalties in operating expenses in the Consolidated Statement of Income. As of January 1, 2007, the CompanyDecember 31, 2009, we had $1.3$0.9 million ($0.6 million for 2008) of accrued interest and no accrued penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits included in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Asconsolidated balance sheet. We classify interest related to unrecognized tax benefits as interest expense and tax-related penalties in operating expenses in the consolidated statement of December 31, 2007, the liability for the payment of interest is $0.9 million with no penalties. Due to the settlement of audits, $0.1income. In 2009, we recognized $0.4 million of interest benefitexpense ($0.4 million for 2008 and $0.1 million for 2007). There were no penalties were recognized in the Consolidated Statement of Income for the year ended December 31,2009, 2008 or 2007.

We file a consolidated federal income tax returnsreturn in the U.S. federalUnited States and various state jurisdictions. With few exceptions, ALLETE is no longer subject to federal examination for years before 20032005 or state examinations for years before 2004.

We expect thatDuring the totalnext 12 months it is reasonably possible the amount of unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2007, will changecould be reduced by less than $2.0$3.6 million in the next 12 months due to statute expirations.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
81


Note 13.                      Discontinued Operations

Enventis Telecom. In December 2005, we sold all the stock of our telecommunications subsidiary, Enventis Telecom,expirations and anticipated audit settlements. This amount is primarily due to Hickory Tech Corporation of Mankato, Minnesota, for $35.5 million. The transaction resulted in an after-tax loss of $3.6 million, which was included in our 2005 loss from discontinued operations. Net cash proceeds realized from the sale were approximately $29 million after transaction costs, repayment of debt and payment of income taxes. In accordance with SFAS 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” we have reported our telecommunications business in discontinued operations for all periods presented.

Water Services. During 2003, we sold, under condemnation or imminent threat of condemnation, substantially all of our water assets in Florida for a total sales price of approximately $445 million. In 2004, we essentially concluded our strategy to exit our Water Services businesses with the sale of our North Carolina water assets and the sale of the remaining 72 water and wastewater systems in Florida. Aqua Utilities Florida, Inc. (Aqua Utilities) purchased our North Carolina water assets for $48 million and assumed approximately $28 million in debt. Aqua Utilities also purchased 63 of our water and wastewater systems in Florida for $14 million. Seminole County purchased the remaining 9 Florida systems for a total of $4 million. The FPSC approved the Seminole County transaction in September 2004. In December 2005, the FPSC ordered a $1.7 million reduction to plant investment, which the Company reserved for in 2005, and approved the transfer of the remaining 63 water and wastewater systems from Florida Water to Aqua Utilities. In March 2006, the Company paid Aqua Utilities the adjustment refund amount of $1.7 million.

In February 2005, we completed the exit from our Water Services businesses in Georgia with the sale of our wastewater assets for an immaterial gain. In 2005, we also incurred administrative and other expenses to support Florida Water transfer proceedings and recorded the $1.7 million rate-base settlement charge related to the sale by Florida Water of 63 systems to Aqua Utilities mentioned above.

Financial results for 2006 reflected additional legal and administrative expenses incurred by the Company to exit the Water Services businesses. There were no discontinued operations in 2007.

Discontinued Operations  
Summary Income Statement  
For the Year Ended December 3120062005
Millions  
   
Operating Revenue  
Enventis Telecom$50.7
Total Operating Revenue$50.7
   
Pre-Tax Income from Operations  
Enventis Telecom$3.0
 3.0
Income Tax Expense  
Enventis Telecom1.2
 1.2
Total Income from Operations1.8
Loss on Disposal  
Water Services$(1.5)(4.5)
Enventis Telecom0.6
 (1.5)(3.9)
Income Tax Expense (Benefit)  
Water Services(0.6)(2.0)
Enventis Telecom4.2
 (0.6)2.2
Net Loss on Disposal(0.9)(6.1)
Loss from Discontinued Operations$(0.9)$(4.3)


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
82


Note 14.                      Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)Pre-TaxTax ExpenseNet-of-Tax
Year Ended December 31Amount(Benefit)Amount
Millions   
    
2007   
Unrealized Gain on Securities During the Year$1.4$0.3$1.1
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans5.52.33.2
Other Comprehensive Income$6.9$2.6$4.3
    
2006   
Unrealized Gain on Securities During the Year$2.5$0.6$1.9
Additional Pension Liability11.04.66.4
Other Comprehensive Income$13.5$5.2$8.3
    
2005   
Unrealized Gain on Securities During the Year$1.3$0.7$0.6
Additional Pension Liability(3.4)(1.4)(2.0)
Other Comprehensive Loss$(2.1)$(0.7)$(1.4)
timing issues.


Accumulated
Note 15.Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
December 3120072006
Millions  
   
Unrealized Gain on Securities$5.1$4.0
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans(9.6)(12.8)
Total Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss$(4.5)$(8.8)

Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)   
Year Ended December 31200920082007
Millions   
Net Income$60.7$83.0$89.5
Other Comprehensive Income   
    Unrealized Gain on Securities
   Net of income taxes of $1.7, $(3.7), and $0.3
2.8(6.0)1.1
    Reclassification Adjustment for Losses Included in Income
      Net of income taxes of $–, $(2.7), and $–
(3.7)
    Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans
   Net of income taxes of $4.1, $(13.3), and $2.3
6.2(18.8)3.2
Total Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)9.0(28.5)4.3
Total Comprehensive Income$69.7$54.5$93.8
Less: Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries(0.3)0.51.9
Comprehensive Income Attributable to ALLETE$70.0$54.0$91.9


Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)  
As of December 3120092008
Millions  
Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Securities$(1.8)$(4.6)
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans(22.2)(28.4)
Total Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss$(24.0)$(33.0)


Note 15.16.                Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans

We have noncontributory union and non-union defined benefit pension plans covering eligible employees. The plans provide defined benefits based on years of service and final average pay. In 2009, we made a total of $32.9 million ($10.9 million in 2008) in contributions to ALLETE’s defined benefit pension plans of which $12.0 million was contributed in shares of ALLETE common stock. We also have defined contribution pension plans covering substantially all employees;employees. The 2009 plan year employer contributions, which are made through our employee stock ownership plan, (seetotaled $9.1 million ($7.1 million for the 2008 plan year.) (See Note 16), except for BNI Coal, which12. Common Stock and Earnings Per Share and Note 17. Employee Stock and Incentive Plans)

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
85


Note 16.Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans (Continued)

In 2006, amendments were made cash contributions of $0.4 million in 2007 ($0.7 million in 2006 and 2005). In 2007, we made no contributions to ALLETE’sthe non-union defined benefit pension plan ($8.3 million in 2006).

On August 9, 2006, ALLETE’s Board of Directors approved amendments to the Minnesota Power and Affiliated Companies Retirement Plan A (Retirement Plan A) and the Minnesota Power and Affiliated Companies Retirement Savings and Stockstock Ownership Plan (RSOP). Retirement Plan AThe non-union defined benefit pension plan was amended to suspend further crediting of service pursuant to the plan effective as of September 30, 2006, and to close Retirement Plan Aclosed the plan to new participants. Participants will continue to accrue benefits under the plan for future pay increases. In conjunction with thisthe change, the Board of Directors took actioncontributions were increased to increase benefits employees will receive under the RSOP. The modification of Retirement Plan A required us to re-measure our pension expense as of August 9, 2006. As a result of the re-measurement, Retirement Plan A pension expense for 2006 was reduced by $0.2 million.

We have postretirement health care and life insurance plans covering eligible employees. The postretirement health plans are contributory with participant contributions adjusted annually. Postretirement health and life benefits are funded through a combination of Voluntary Employee Benefit Association trusts (VEBAs), established under section 501(c)(9) of the Internal Revenue Code, and an irrevocable grantor trust. Contributions deductible for income tax purposes aretrusts. In 2009 we made directlya net contribution of $0.3 million to the VEBAs; nondeductible contributions are made to the irrevocable grantor trust. Amounts are transferred from the irrevocable grantor trust to the VEBAs when they become deductible for income tax purposes. In 2007, $5.9 million was transferred from the grantor trust and $9.3 million to the VEBAs ($3.6VEBAs. In 2008 $3.7 million in 2006; $11.4 million in 2005).was contributed to the VEBAs.

In September 2006,Management considers various factors when making funding decisions such as regulatory requirements, actuarially determined minimum contribution requirements, and contributions required to avoid benefit restrictions for the FASB issued SFAS 158, “Employers’ pension plans. Estimated defined benefit pension contributions for years 2010 through 2014 are expected to be up to $25 million per year, and are based on estimates and assumptions that are subject to change. Funding for the other postretirement benefit plans is impacted by utility regulatory requirements. Estimated postretirement health and life contributions for years 2010 through 2014 are approximately $11 million per year, and are based on estimates and assumptions that are subject to change.

Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans” (SFAS 158). SFAS 158Benefit Plans requires that employers recognize on a prospective basis the funded status of their defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans on their consolidated balance sheet and recognize as a component of other comprehensive income, net of tax, the gains or losses and prior service costs or credits that arise during the period but that are not recognized as components of net periodic benefit cost. SFAS 158 also requires additional disclosures in the notes to financial statements. SFAS 158 was effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2006.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
83


Note 15.                      Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans (Continued)

We use a September 30 measurement date for theThe defined benefit pension and postretirement health and life plans. Pursuantbenefit costs recognized annually by our regulated companies are expected to SFAS 158,be recovered through rates filed with our regulatory jurisdictions. As a result, these amounts that are required to otherwise be recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income have been recognized as a long-term regulatory asset on our consolidated balance sheet, in accordance with the accounting requirements for Regulated Operations. The defined benefit pension and postretirement health and life benefit costs associated with our other non-rate base operations are recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income.

During the year ended December 31, 2008, we arewere required to change our measurement date from September 30 to December 31 during the year ending December 31, 2008.31. On January 1, 2008, ALLETE recorded three months of pension expense as a reduction to retained earnings in the amount of $1.6 million, net of tax, to reflect the impact of this measurement date change.

Approximately 82 percent Also on January 1, 2008, we recorded $0.8 million relating to three months of the defined benefit pensionamortization for transition obligations, prior service costs, and 69 percent of the postretirement healthprior gains and life benefit costs recognized annually by our regulated companies are recovered through rates filed with our regulatory jurisdictions. It is expected that these costs will continue to be recovered in future rates in accordance with the requirements of SFAS 71. As a result, these amounts that are required to otherwise be recognized inlosses within accumulated other comprehensive income under the provisions of SFAS 158 have been recognized as a long-term regulatory asset on our consolidated balance sheet. The remaining 18 percent of the defined benefit pension and 31 percent of the postretirement health and life benefit costs relate to costs associated with our nonregulated operations and, accordingly, have been recognized as a charge to accumulated other comprehensive income at December 31, 2007.income.

Pension Obligation and Funded Status Pension Obligation and Funded Status
At September 3020072006
Year Ended December 3120092008
Millions   
 
Accumulated Benefit Obligation$384.9$376.1$435.9$406.6
   
Change in Benefit Obligation   
Obligation, Beginning of Year$417.7$412.4$440.4$421.9
Service Cost5.39.15.77.3
Interest Cost23.422.226.231.8
Actuarial Gain(7.1)(12.2)
Actuarial Loss (Gain)14.63.2
Benefits Paid(21.6)(19.8)(25.5)(29.9)
Participant Contributions2.76.03.96.1
Obligation, End of Year$420.4$417.7$465.3$440.4
Change in Plan Assets   
Fair Value, Beginning of Year$364.7$337.1$273.7$405.6
Actual Return on Assets58.932.5
Actual Return on Plan Assets41.6(120.2)
Employer Contribution3.68.937.818.2
Benefits Paid(21.6)(19.8)(25.5)(29.9)
Other6.0
Fair Value, End of Year$405.6$364.7$327.6$273.7
Funded Status, End of Year$(14.8)$(53.0)$(137.7)$(166.7)
   
Net Pension Amounts Recognized in Consolidated Balance Sheet Consist of:   
Noncurrent Assets$29.3
Current Liabilities$0.8$0.8$(0.9)$(0.9)
Noncurrent Liabilities$43.3$52.3$(136.8)$(165.8)
 

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
8486

 

Note 15.Pension
Note 16.Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans (Continued)

The pension costs that are reported onas a component within our consolidated balance sheet, asreflected in regulatory long-term assets and accumulated other comprehensive income, consist of the following:

Pension Costs  
Year Ended December 3120072006
Millions  
   
Net Loss$31.1$69.9
Prior Service Cost3.23.9
Transition Obligation(0.1)
Total Pension Cost$34.3$73.7

Components of Net Periodic Pension Expense   
Year Ended December 31200720062005
Millions   
Service Cost$5.3$9.1$8.7
Interest Cost23.422.221.3
Expected Return on Assets(30.6)(28.6)(28.2)
Amortized Amounts   
Loss3.44.63.1
Prior Service Cost0.60.60.6
Transition Obligation0.2
Net Pension Expense$2.1$7.9$5.7
Unrecognized Pension Costs
Year Ended December 312009 2008
Millions  
Net Loss$196.5$193.2
Prior Service Cost1.82.4
Transition Obligation
Total Unrecognized Pension Costs$198.3$195.6


Other Changes in Plan Assets and Benefit Obligations Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income  
Year Ended December 3120072006
Millions  
Net Gain$(35.4)$(5.9)
Amortization 
Prior Service Cost(0.6)(0.6)
Prior Loss(3.3)(4.6)
Total Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income$(39.3)$(11.1)
Components of Net Periodic Pension Expense
Year Ended December 31200920082007
Millions   
Service Cost$5.7$5.8$5.3
Interest Cost26.225.423.4
Expected Return on Plan Assets(33.8)(32.5)(30.6)
Amortization of Loss3.41.64.9
Amortization of Prior Service Costs0.60.60.6
Net Pension Expense$2.1$0.9$3.6


Information for Pension Plans with an  
Accumulated Benefit Obligation in Excess of Plan Assets  
At September 3020072006
Millions  
Projected Benefit Obligation$170.6$180.4
Accumulated Benefit Obligation$188.3$160.6
Fair Value of Plan Assets$145.3$130.9
Other Changes in Pension Plan Assets and Benefit Obligations Recognized in
Other Comprehensive Income and Regulatory Assets
Year Ended December 3120092008
Millions  
Net Loss (Gain)$6.8$164.0
Amortization of Prior Service Costs(0.6)(0.6)
Amortization of Loss (Gain)(3.4)(1.6)
Total Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income and Regulatory Assets$2.8$161.8


Information for Pension Plans with an Accumulated Benefit Obligation in Excess of Plan Assets
Year Ended December 3120092008
Millions            
Projected Benefit Obligation$465.3$440.4
Accumulated Benefit Obligation$435.9$406.6
Fair Value of Plan Assets$327.6$273.7


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
8587

 

Note 15.                      
Note 16.Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans (Continued)

Postretirement Health and Life Obligation and Funded Status Postretirement Health and Life Obligation and Funded Status
At September 3020072006
Year Ended December 3120092008
Millions  
Change in Benefit Obligation  
Obligation, Beginning of Year$138.9$136.9$166.9$153.7
Service Cost4.24.44.15.0
Interest Cost7.97.410.011.7
Actuarial Loss (Gain)7.5(4.7)
Participation Contributions1.41.4
Actuarial Loss18.44.0
Participant Contributions1.72.0
Plan Amendments(1.3)
Benefits Paid(6.2)(6.4)(7.7)(9.5)
Amendments(0.1)
Obligation, End of Year$153.7$138.9$192.1$166.9
Change in Plan Assets  
Fair Value, Beginning of Year$78.9$60.9$78.6$90.9
Actual Return on Assets9.65.8
Actual Return on Plan Assets13.9(25.2)
Employer Contribution6.817.29.920.3
Participation Contributions1.41.4
Participant Contributions1.61.9
Benefits Paid(5.8)(6.4)(7.6)(9.3)
Fair Value, End of Year$90.9$78.9$96.4$78.6
Funded Status, End of Year($62.8)$(60.0)$(95.7)$(88.3)
  
Net Pension Amounts Recognized in Consolidated Balance Sheet Consist of: 
Net Postretirement Health and Life Amounts Recognized in Consolidated Balance Sheet Consist of:
 
Current Liabilities$0.6 $(0.8)$(0.7)
Noncurrent Liabilities$62.2$60.0$(94.8)$(87.6)

Under SFAS 106, “Employers’ AccountingAccording to the accounting guidance for PostretirementRetirement Benefits Other Than Pensions,” only assets in the VEBAs are treated as plan assets in the above table for the purpose of determining funded status. In addition to the postretirement health and life assets reported in the previous table, we had $22.8$18.2 million in an irrevocable grantor trust at December 31, 2007 ($25.6 million at December 31, 2006). We consolidate the irrevocable grantor trust and ittrusts is included in Other Investments on our consolidated balance sheet.sheet at December 31, 2009 ($14.1 million at December 31, 2008).

The postretirement health and life costs that are reported onas a component within our consolidated balance sheet, asreflected in regulatory long-term assets and accumulated other comprehensive income, consist of the following:

Postretirement Health and Life Costs 
Unrecognized Postretirement Health and Life CostsUnrecognized Postretirement Health and Life Costs
Year Ended December 312007200620092008
Millions  
Net Loss$22.7$19.2$69.6$59.2
Prior Service Cost(0.1)(0.1)(1.3)
Transition Obligation12.615.06.99.4
Total Postretirement Health and Life Costs$35.2$34.1
Total Unrecognized Postretirement Health and Life Costs$75.2$68.6


Components of Net Periodic Postretirement Health and Life Expense (Income)  
Year Ended December 31200720062005
Millions   
Service Cost$4.2$4.4$4.0
Interest Cost7.87.46.7
Expected Return on Assets(6.5)(5.6)(4.8)
Amortized Amounts   
Loss1.01.70.7
Transition Obligation2.42.42.4
Net Expense$8.9$10.3$9.0
Components of Net Periodic Postretirement Health and Life Expense
Year Ended December 31200920082007
Millions   
Service Cost$4.1$4.0$4.2
Interest Cost10.09.47.8
Expected Return on Plan Assets(8.3)(7.2)(6.5)
Amortization of Loss2.51.41.0
Amortization of Transition Obligation2.52.52.4
Net Postretirement Health and Life Expense$10.8$10.1$8.9


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
8688

 

Note 15.16.                      Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans (Continued)

  Postretirement
Estimated Future Benefit PaymentsPensionHealth and Life
Millions  
   
2008$22.5$5.9
2009$23.1$6.7
2010$24.0$7.6
2011$25.0$8.4
2012$25.9$9.0
Years 2013 – 2017$148.2$54.8
Other Changes in Postretirement Benefit Plan Assets and Benefit Obligations
Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income and Regulatory Assets
Year Ended December 3120092008
Millions  
Net Loss (Gain)$12.9$38.3
Prior Service Cost (Credit) Arising During the Period(1.3)
Amortization of Transition Obligation(2.5)(2.5)
Amortization of Loss (Gain)(2.5)(1.4)
Total Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income and Regulatory Assets$6.6$34.4


Estimated Future Benefit Payments
  Postretirement
 PensionHealth and Life
Millions  
2010$26.4$7.5
2011$26.9$8.4
2012$27.8$9.2
2013$28.8$10.0
2014$29.9$10.9
Years 2015 – 2019$165.0$65.5


The pension and postretirement health and life costs recorded in other long-term assets and accumulated other comprehensive income expected to be recognized as a component of net pension and postretirement benefit costs for the year ending December 31, 2008,2010, are as follows:

 Postretirement Postretirement
PensionHealth and LifePensionHealth and Life
Millions    
  
Net Loss$1.5$1.4$6.6$4.8
Prior Service Costs$0.6$0.5$(0.1)
Transition Obligations$2.5$2.5
Total Pension and Postretirement Health and Life Costs$2.1$3.9$7.1$7.2


Weighted-Average Assumptions 
Used to Determine Benefit Obligation 
At September 3020072006
 
Weighted-Average Assumptions Used to Determine Benefit ObligationWeighted-Average Assumptions Used to Determine Benefit Obligation
Year Ended December 3120092008
Discount Rate6.25%5.75%5.81%6.12%
Rate of Compensation Increase4.3 – 4.6%3.5 – 4.5%4.3 – 4.6%4.3 – 4.6%
Health Care Trend Rates   
Trend Rate10%10%8.5%9%
Ultimate Trend Rate5%5%5%5%
Year Ultimate Trend Rate Effective2012201120172012


Weighted-Average Assumptions 
Used to Determine Net Periodic Benefit Costs 
Weighted-Average Assumptions Used to Determine Net Periodic Benefit CostsWeighted-Average Assumptions Used to Determine Net Periodic Benefit Costs
Year Ended December 31200720062005200920082007
 
Discount Rate5.75%5.50%5.75%6.12%6.25%5.75%
Expected Long-Term Return on Plan Assets    
Pension9.0%8.5%9.0%9.0%
Postretirement Health and Life5.0 – 9.0%6.8 – 8.5%7.2 – 9.0%5.0 – 9.0%
Rate of Compensation Increase4.3 – 4.6%3.5 – 4.5%4.3 – 4.6%4.3 – 4.6%4.3 – 4.6%


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
89


Note 16.Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans (Continued)

In establishing the expected long-term return on plan assets, we considertake into account the diversification and allocationactual long-term historical performance of our plan assets, the actual long-term historical performance for the type of securities we are invested in, and apply the actual long-term historical performance utilizing the target allocation of our plan assets andto forecast an expected long-term return.  Our expected rate of return is then selected after considering the results of each of those factors, in addition to considering the impact of current economic conditions, if any,applicable, on long-term historical returns.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
87


Note 15.                      Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans (Continued)

Currently for plan valuation purposes, theThe discount rate is computed using the Citigroup Pension Discount Curve adjusted for ALLETE’s projected cash flows to match our plan characteristics.  The Citigroup Pension Discount Curve is determined consideringusing high-quality long-term corporate bond rates at the valuation date. The discount rate is compared to the Citigroup Pension Discount Curve adjusted for ALLETE’s specific cash flows.

Sensitivity of a One-Percentage-PointOne PercentOne Percent
Change in Health Care Trend RatesIncreaseDecrease
Millions  
   
Effect on Total of Postretirement Health and Life Service and Interest Cost$1.9$(1.5)
Effect on Postretirement Health and Life Obligation$18.4$(15.1)


 Pension
Postretirement
Health and Life (a)
Plan Asset Allocations2007200620072006
     
Equity Securities61.3%65.1%61.6%68.9%
Debt Securities25.1%29.6%27.9%30.6%
Real Estate1.6%0.8%
Private Equity9.4%4.2%5.5%
Cash2.6%0.3%5.0%0.5%
 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%
Sensitivity of a One-Percentage-Point Change in Health Care Trend Rates
 One PercentOne Percent
 IncreaseDecrease
Millions  
Effect on Total of Postretirement Health and Life Service and Interest Cost$2.1$(1.8)
Effect on Postretirement Health and Life Obligation$23.6$(20.9)


Actual Plan Asset Allocations
 Pension
Postretirement
Health and Life (a)
 200920082009 2008
Equity Securities53%46%54%47%
Debt Securities28%32%38%40%
Real Estate5%6%
Private Equity14%16%8%9%
Cash4%
 100%100%100%100%

(a)Includes VEBAs and irrevocable grantor trust.trusts.

Pension plan equity securities did not includeincluded $9.9 million, or 3.0 percent, of ALLETE common stock at September 30, 2007 or 2006.December 31, 2009 (none at December 31, 2008).

To achieve strong returns within managed risk, we diversify our asset portfolio to approximate the target allocations in the table below. Equity securities are diversified among domestic companies with large, mid and small market capitalizations, as well as investments in international companies. In addition, allThe majority of debt securities must have a Standard & Poor’s credit ratingare made up of A or higher.investment grade bonds.

Plan Asset Target AllocationsPlan Asset Target Allocations
 Postretirement Postretirement
Plan Asset Target AllocationsPension
Health and Life (a)
  Pension
Health and Life (a)
Equity Securities60%69%50%48%
Debt Securities243030%34%
Real Estate910%9%
Private Equity610%9%
Cash11
100%100%100%100%

(a)      Includes VEBAs and irrevocable grantor trust.trusts.

In May 2004,Fair value is the FASB issued FSP 106-2, “Accountingprice that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (exit price). We utilize market data or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, including assumptions about risk and Disclosure Requirements Relatedthe risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. These inputs can be readily observable, market corroborated, or generally unobservable. We primarily apply the market approach for recurring fair value measurements and endeavor to utilize the best available information. Accordingly, we utilize valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. These inputs, which are used to measure fair value, are prioritized through the fair value hierarchy. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurement). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are as follows:

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
90


Note 16.Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans (Continued)

Level 1 — Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical assets as of the reported date. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis.

Level 2 — Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets, but are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reported date. The types of assets included in Level 2 are typically either comparable to actively traded securities or contracts, such as treasury securities with pricing interpolated from recent trades of similar securities, or priced with models using highly observable inputs, such as commodity options priced using observable forward prices and volatilities.

Level 3 — Significant inputs that are generally less observable from objective sources. The types of assets included in Level 3 are those with inputs requiring significant management judgment or estimation, such as the complex and subjective models and forecasts used to determine the fair value.


Pension Fair Value

 At Fair Value as of December 31, 2009
Recurring Fair Value MeasuresLevel 1Level 2Level 3Total
Millions    
Assets:    
Equity Securities    
     U.S. Large-cap (a)
$23.2$27.5$5.2$55.9
     U.S. Mid-cap Growth (a)
8.910.62.021.5
     U.S. Small-cap (a)
8.610.11.920.6
     International66.466.4
     ALLETE9.99.9
Debt Securities:    
     Mutual Funds32.032.0
     Fixed Income59.359.3
Other Types of Investments:    
     Private Equity Funds44.744.7
Real Estate17.317.3
Total Fair Value of Assets$82.6$173.9$71.1$327.6

(a)   The underlying investments classified under U.S. Equity Securities represent Money Market Funds and U.S. Government Bonds (Level 1), Hedge Funds (Level 2), and Auction Rate Securities (Level 3), which are combined with futures, which settle daily, in a portable alpha program to achieve the returns of the U.S. Equity Securities Large-cap, Mid-cap Growth, and Small-cap funds. Our exposure with respect to these investments includes both the futures and the underlying investments.


Recurring Fair Value MeasuresEquity Securities  
Activity in Level 3(Auction Rate Securities)Private Equity FundsReal Estate
Millions   
Balance as of December 31, 2008$10.2$43.2$17.0
Actual Return on Plan Assets0.1(8.7)(8.6)
Purchases, sales, and settlements, net(1.1)10.28.9
Balance as of December 31, 2009$9.1$44.7$17.3


ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
91


Note 16.                      Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans (Continued)

Postretirement Health and Life Fair Value

 At Fair Value as of December 31, 2009
Recurring Fair Value MeasuresLevel 1Level 2Level 3Total
Millions    
Assets:    
Equity Securities    
     U.S. Large-cap$13.4$13.4
     U.S. Mid-cap Growth9.09.0
     U.S. Small-cap6.36.3
     International21.421.4
Debt Securities:    
     Mutual Funds5.55.5
     Fixed Income$31.431.4
Other Types of Investments:    
     Private Equity Funds$9.49.4
Total Fair Value of Assets$55.6$31.4$9.4$96.4


Recurring Fair Value Measures
Activity in Level 3Private Equity Funds
Millions
Balance as of December 31, 2008$7.9
Actual Return on Plan Assets(1.1)
Purchases, sales, and settlements, net2.6
Balance as of December 31, 2009$9.4


Accounting and disclosure requirements for the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (Act),” which provides accounting and disclosure guidance for employers that sponsor postretirement health care plans that provide prescription drug benefits. FSP 106-2 requires that the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation and postretirement benefit cost reflect the impact of the Act upon adoption. We provide postretirement health benefits that include prescription drug benefits, and have concluded that our prescription drug benefits qualifiedwhich qualify us for the federal subsidy to be provided for under the Act. We adopted FSP 106-2 in the third quarter of 2004. The deductionexpected reimbursement for Medicare health subsidies reduced our after-tax postretirement medical expense by $2.0 million for 2009 ($1.2 million for 2008; $2.3 million for 2007 ($2.4 million for 2006; $3.5 million in 2005)2007).

In 2005 we determined that our postretirement health care plans met the requirements ofenrolled with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (CMS) regulations, and enrolled with the CMS to beginbegan recovering the subsidy.subsidy in 2007. We received the first subsidy paymenta reimbursement of $0.6 million in 2009 and $0.3 million in May 2007 for 2006 credits.

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K2007.

88


Note 16.                      
Note 17.Employee Stock and Incentive Plans

Employee Stock Ownership Plan. We sponsor a leveraged employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) within the RSOP. As of their date of hire, all employees of ALLETE, SWL&P and Minnesota Power Affiliate Resources are eligible to contribute to the plan. In 1990, the ESOP issued a $75 million note (term not to exceed 25 years at 10.25 percent) to us as consideration for 2.8 million shares (1.9 million shares adjusted for stock splits) of our newly issued common stock. The note was refinanced in 2006 at 6 percent. We make annual contributions to the ESOP equal to the ESOP’s debt service less available dividends received by the ESOP. The majority of dividends received by the ESOP are used to pay debt service, with the balance distributed to participants. The ESOP shares were initially pledged as collateral for its debt. As the debt is repaid, shares are released from collateral and allocated to participants based on the proportion of debt service paid in the year. As shares are released from collateral, we report compensation expense equal to the current market price of the shares less dividends on allocated shares. Dividends on allocated ESOP shares are recorded as a reduction of retained earnings; available dividends on unallocated ESOP shares are recorded as a reduction of debt and accrued interest. ESOP compensation expense was $9.5$6.5 million in 20072009 ($6.910.1 million in 2006; $5.52008; $9.2 million in 2005)2007).

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
92


Note 17.Employee Stock and Incentive Plans (Continued)

PursuantAccording to AICPA Statement of Position 93-6, “Employers’ Accountingthe accounting guidance for Employee Stock Ownership Plans,”stock compensation, unallocated ALLETE common stock currently held and purchased by the ESOP will be treated as unearned ESOP shares and not considered as outstanding for earnings per share computations. ESOP shares are included in earnings per share computations after they are allocated to participants.

Year Ended December 31200720062005200920082007
Millions  
 
ESOP Shares  
Allocated1.81.71.92.22.01.8
Unallocated2.22.52.61.51.92.2
Total4.04.24.53.73.94.0
Fair Value of Unallocated Shares$87.1$115.2$115.0$49.0$61.3$87.1


Stock-Based Compensation. Stock Incentive Plan. Under our Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan (Executive Plan), share-based awards may be issued to key employees through a broad range of methods, including non-qualified and incentive stock options, performance shares, performance units, restricted stock, stock appreciation rights and other awards. There are 1.51.4 million shares of common stock reserved for issuance under the Executive Plan, with 0.90.6 million of these shares available for issuance as of December 31, 2007.2009.

We had a Director Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan (Director Plan) which expired on January 1, 2006. No grants have been made since 2003 under the Director Plan. Approximately 7,7583,879 options were outstanding under the Director Plan at December 31, 2007.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
89


Note 16.                      Employee Stock and Incentive Plans (Continued)2009.

We currently have the following types of share-based awards outstanding:

Non-Qualified Stock Options. The options allow for the purchase of shares of common stock at a price equal to the market value of our common stock at the date of grant. Options become exercisable beginning one year after the grant date, with one-third vesting each year over three years. Options may be exercised up to ten years following the date of grant. In the case of qualified retirement, death or disability, options vest immediately and the period over which the options can be exercised is three years. Employees have up to three months to exercise vested options upon voluntary termination or involuntary termination without cause. All options are cancelled upon termination for cause. All options vest immediately upon retirement, death, disability or a change of control, as defined in the award agreement. We determine the fair value of options using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The estimated fair value of options, including the effect of estimated forfeitures, is recognized as expense on the straight-line basis over the options’ vesting periods, or the accelerated vesting period if the employee is retirement eligible.

In 2009, no stock options were granted under our Executive Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan. The following assumptions were used in determining the fair value of stock options granted during 2008 and 2007, respectively, under the Black-Scholes option-pricing model:

2007200620082007
Risk-Free Interest Rate4.8%4.5%2.8%4.8%
Expected Life 5 Years5 Years 5 Years
Expected Volatility20%20%20%
Dividend Growth Rate5%5%4.4%5.0%

The risk-free interest rate for periods within the contractual life of the option is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the grant date. Expected volatility is estimated based on the historic volatility of our stock and the stock of our peer group companies. We utilize historical option exercise and employee pre-vesting termination data to estimate the option life. The dividend growth rate is based upon historical growth rates in our dividends.

Performance Shares. Under thesethe performance share awards plan, the number of shares earned is contingent upon attaining specific performance targets over a three-year performance period. Performance goals are measured by total shareholder return relative to a group of peer companies. In the case of qualified retirement, death or disability during a performance period, a pro-rata portion of the award will be earned at the conclusion of the performance period based on the performance goals achieved. In the case of termination of employment for any reason other than qualified retirement, death or disability, no award will be earned. If there is a change in control, a pro-rata portion of the award will be paid based on the greater of actual performance up to the date of the change in control or target performance. The fair value of these awards is equal todetermined by the grant date fair value which is estimated based uponprobability of meeting the assumed share-based payment three years from the date of grant.total shareholder return goals. Compensation cost is recognized over the three-year performance period based on our estimate of the number of shares which will be earned by the award recipients.

ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
93

Note 17.Employee Stock and Incentive Plans (Continued)

Restricted Stock Units. Under the restricted stock units plan, shares vest at the end of a three-year period, at which time the restrictions will be removed. In the case of qualified retirement, death or disability, a pro-rata portion of the award will be earned at the conclusion of the vesting period. In the case of termination of employment for any other reason other than qualified retirement, death or disability, no award will be earned. If there is a change in control, a pro-rata portion of the award will be paid. The fair value of these awards is equal to the grant date fair value. Compensation cost is recognized over the three-year vesting period based on our estimate of the number of shares which will be earned by the award recipients.

Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). Under our ESPP, eligible employees may purchase ALLETE common stock at a 5 percent discount from the market price. Because the discount is not greater than 5 percent, we are not required by SFAS 123R to apply fair value accounting to these awards.

RSOP. Shares held in our RSOP are excluded from SFAS 123R and are accounted for in accordance with the AICPA Statement of Position No. 93-6, “Employers’ Accounting for EmployeeRetirement Savings & Stock Ownership Plans.”Plan (RSOP). The RSOP is a contributory defined contribution plan subject to the provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, and qualifies as an employee stock ownership plan and profit sharing plan. The RSOP provides eligible employees an opportunity to save for retirement.

The following share-based compensation expense amounts were recognized in our consolidated statement of income for the periods presented since our adoption of SFAS 123R.presented.

Share-Based Compensation Expense  Share-Based Compensation Expense
For the Year Ended December 3120072006
Year Ended December 31200920082007
Millions   
  
Stock Options$0.8$0.8$0.3$0.7$0.8
Performance Shares1.01.01.51.11.0
  
Restricted Stock Units0.3
Total Share-Based Compensation Expense$1.8$1.8$2.1$1.8$1.8
  
Income Tax Benefit$0.7$0.7$0.8$0.7$0.7

There were no capitalized stock-based compensation costs at December 31, 2009, 2008, or 2007.

As of December 31, 2007,2009, the total unrecognized compensation cost for the performance share awards and restricted stock units not yet recognized in our statements of income was $1.1 million. This amount is$1.8 million and $0.5 million, respectively. These amounts are expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.7 years.


ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
90


Note 16.                      Employee Stockyears and Incentive Plans (Continued)

The following table presents the pro forma effect of stock-based compensation had we applied the provisions of SFAS 123 for the year ended December 31, 2005.

Pro Forma Effect of SFAS 123
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation2005
Millions Except Per Share Amounts
Net Income
As Reported$13.3
Less: Employee Stock Compensation Expense Determined Under SFAS 123 – Net of Tax1.5
Plus: Employee Stock Compensation Expense Included in Net Income – Net of Tax1.5
Pro Forma Net Income$13.3
Basic Earnings Per Share
As Reported$0.49
Pro Forma$0.49
Diluted Earnings Per Share
As Reported$0.48
Pro Forma$0.48

In the previous table, the pro forma expense determined under SFAS 123 for employee stock options granted was calculated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following assumptions:

2005
Risk-Free Interest Rate3.7%
Expected Life5 Years
Expected Volatility20.0%
Dividend Growth Rate5%
2.0 years, respectively.

The following table presents information regarding our outstanding stock options for the year endedas of December 31, 2007.2009.

    Weighted-Average
  Weighted-AverageAggregateRemaining
 Number ofExerciseIntrinsicContractual
 OptionsPriceValueTerm
   Millions 
Outstanding at December 31, 2006438,351$37.35$4.07.2 years
Granted100,702$48.65  
Exercised(28,061)$32.80  
Forfeited  
Outstanding at December 31, 2007510,992$39.83$(0.1)6.8 years
Exercisable at December 31, 2007327,473$36.43$1.06.0 years
Fair Value of Options    
Granted During the Year$8.15   
    Weighted-Average
  Weighted-AverageAggregateRemaining
 Number ofExerciseIntrinsicContractual
 OptionsPriceValueTerm
   Millions 
Outstanding as of December 31, 2008672,419$39.99$(5.2)6.9 years
Granted (a)
  
Exercised4,508$18.85  
Forfeited21,676$42.62  
Outstanding as of December 31, 2009646,235$40.05$(4.8)5.9 years
Exercisable as of December 31, 2009512,743$37.34$(3.7)5.4 years

(a)       Restricted stock units were issued in 2009, instead of stock options.

The weighted-average grant-date fair value of options was $6.18 for 2009 ($6.18 for 2008; $6.92 for 2007 ($6.48 for 2006)2007). The intrinsic value of a stock award is the amount by which the fair value of the underlying stock exceeds the exercise price of the award. The total intrinsic value of options exercised was $0.1 million during 2009 ($0.2 million in 2008; $0.4 million during 2007 ($0.6 in 2006)2007).


At
ALLETE 2009 Form 10-K
94


Note 17.Employee Stock and Incentive Plans (Continued)

As of December 31, 2007,2009, options outstanding consisted of 0.1 million with exercise prices ranging from $18.85 to $29.79, 0.20.4 million with exercise prices ranging from $37.76 to $41.35 and 0.2 million with exercise prices ranging from $44.15 to $48.65. The options with exercise prices ranging from $18.85 to $29.79 have an average remaining contractual life of 3.82.1 years; all arewere exercisable atas of December 31, 2007,2009, at a weighted average price of $26.70.$27.34. The options with exercise prices ranging from $37.76 to $41.35 have an average remaining contractual life of 6.66.3 years; all are0.2 million were exercisable onas of December 31, 2007,2009, at a weighted average price of $39.92.$39.47. The options with exercise prices ranging from $44.15 to $48.65 have an average remaining contractual life of 8.56.5 years; less than 0.10.2 million arewere exercisable onas of December 31, 2007,2009, at a weighted average price of $46.25.

In February 2007, we granted stock options to purchase 0.1 million shares of common stock (exercise price of $48.65 per share).

ALLETE 2007 Form 10-K
91


Note 16.                      Employee Stock and Incentive Plans (Continued)$46.36.

Performance Shares. The following table presents information regarding our nonvestednon-vested performance shares for the year endedas of December 31, 2007.2009.

  Weighted-Average
 Number ofGrant Date
 SharesFair Value
Nonvested at December 31, 200671,004$45.39
Granted23,974$54.48
Awarded(24,714)$42.80
Forfeited(3,299)$49.70
Nonvested at December 31, 200766,965$49.39
  Weighted-Average
 Number ofGrant Date
 SharesFair Value
Non-vested as of December 31, 200879,238$47.94
Granted69,800$35.06
Unearned Grant Award(24,615)$41.97
Forfeited(2,598)$38.78
Non-vested as of December 31, 2009121,825$41.96

Less than 0.1 million performance share grants were awardedgranted in February 20072009 for the performance periodsperiod ending in 2009.2011. The ultimate issuance is contingent upon the attainment of certain future performance goals of ALLETE during the performance periods. The grant date fair value of the performance share awards was $1.1$2.2 million.

No performance shares were awarded in February 2010 for the three-year performance period ending in 2009, as performance targets were not met. However, in accordance with the accounting guidance for stock compensation, no compensation expense previously recognized in connection with those grants will be reversed.

Restricted Stock Units. The following table presents information regarding our non-vested restricted stock units as of December 31, 2009.

  Weighted-Average
 Number ofGrant Date
 SharesFair Value
Non-vested as of December 31, 2008
Granted30,465$29.41
Forfeited(1,482)$29.41
Non-vested as of December 31, 200928,983$29.41

Less than 0.1 million performance share grantsrestricted stock units were awardedgranted in February 20062009 for the performance periodsvesting period ending in 2007.2011. The grant date fair value of the sharerestricted stock unit awards was $1.0$0.9 million. Performance share grants related to the 2007 period will be issued in early 2008.



ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
9295

 

Note 17.                      
Note 18.Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)

Information for any one quarterly period is not necessarily indicative of the results which may be expected for the year.

Quarter EndedMar. 31Jun. 30Sept. 30Dec. 31
Millions Except Earnings Per Share    
     
2007    
Operating Revenue$205.3$223.3$200.8$212.3
     
Operating Income from Continuing Operations$41.3$33.9$24.7$33.8
     
Income from Continuing Operations$26.3$22.6$16.5$22.2
     
Net Income$26.3$22.6$16.5$22.2
     
Earnings Per Share of Common Stock    
Basic             Continuing Operations$0.93$0.80$0.58$0.78
     
Diluted           Continuing Operations$0.93$0.80$0.58$0.77
     
2006    
Operating Revenue$192.5$178.3$199.1$197.2
     
Operating Income from Continuing Operations$36.4$26.3$38.7$39.3
     
Income from     Continuing Operations$18.8$13.6$21.9$23.0
Loss from         Discontinued Operations(0.4)(0.1)(0.4)
Net Income$18.8$13.2$21.8$22.6
     
Earnings (Loss) Per Share of Common Stock    
Basic             Continuing Operations$0.68$0.50$0.78$0.82
Discontinued Operations(0.02)(0.01)
 $0.68$0.48$0.78$0.81
     
Diluted           Continuing Operations$0.68$0.49$0.78$0.82
Discontinued Operations(0.02)(0.01)
 $0.68$0.47$0.78$0.81
Quarter EndedMar. 31Jun. 30Sept. 30Dec. 31
Millions Except Earnings Per Share    
2009    
Operating Revenue$199.6$164.7$178.8$216.0
Operating Income$31.1$15.7$25.4$33.8
Net Income Attributable to ALLETE$16.9$9.4$16.0$18.7
Earnings Per Share of Common Stock    
Basic$0.55$0.29$0.49$0.56
Diluted$0.55$0.29$0.49$0.56
2008    
Operating Revenue$213.4$189.8$201.7$196.1
Operating Income$31.3$17.5$33.2$39.8
Net Income Attributable to ALLETE$23.6$10.7$24.7$23.5
Earnings Per Share of Common Stock    
Basic$0.82$0.37$0.85$0.78
Diluted$0.82$0.37$0.85$0.78

ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
9396


Schedule II

ALLETE
Valuation and Qualifying Accounts and Reserves


Balance atAdditionsDeductionsBalance atBalance atAdditionsDeductionsBalance at
BeginningChargedOtherfromEnd ofBeginningChargedOtherfromEnd of
For the Year Ended December 31of Yearto IncomeChanges
Reserves (a)
Period
Year Ended December 31of Yearto IncomeChanges
Reserves (a)
Period
Millions        
   
Reserve Deducted from Related Assets        
Reserve For Uncollectible Accounts        
2007 Trade Accounts Receivable$1.1$1.0$1.1$1.0$1.1$1.0$1.1$1.0
Finance Receivables – Long-Term0.20.20.20.2
2006 Trade Accounts Receivable1.00.7_0.61.1
2008 Trade Accounts Receivable1.01.01.30.7
Finance Receivables – Long-Term0.6__0.40.20.20.10.1
2005 Trade Accounts Receivable1.01.11.11.0
2009 Trade Accounts Receivable0.71.31.10.9
Finance Receivables – Long-Term0.70.10.60.10.30.4
Deferred Asset Valuation Allowance        
2007 Deferred Tax Assets3.6(0.3)3.33.6(0.3)3.3
2006 Deferred Tax Assets4.1(1.1)$0.63.6
2005 Deferred Tax Assets1.13.80.84.1
2008 Deferred Tax Assets3.3(2.9)0.4
2009 Deferred Tax Assets0.4(0.1)0.3

(a)Includes uncollectible accounts written off.


ALLETE 20072009 Form 10-K
 
9497