UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C., 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
| [X] | ||||||||||||
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 | ||||||||||||
| For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010 | ||||||||||||
| OR | ||||||||||||
| [ ] | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 | |||||||||||
| For the transition period from | ||||||||||||
Commission File Number | ||||||||||
Exact Name of Registrant as specified in its charter | ||||||||||
State or other Jurisdiction of Incorporation | IRS Employer Identification Number | |||||||||
| 1-12609 | PG&E Corporation | California | 94-3234914 | |||||||
| 1-2348 | Pacific Gas and Electric Company | California | 94-0742640 | |||||||
Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street P.O. Box 770000 San Francisco, California 94177 | PG&E Corporation One Market, Spear Tower Suite 2400 San Francisco, California 94105 | |||||||||
| Address of principal executive offices, including zip code | ||||||||||
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (415) 973-7000 | PG&E Corporation (415) 267-7000 | |||||||||
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code
Indicate by check mark whether each 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) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. [X] Yes [ ] No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
| Pacific Gas and Electric Company: | [ ] | Yes [ ] No | ||||||||
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer”, and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
| PG&E Corporation: | [X] Large accelerated filer | [ ] | ||||
| [ ] Non-accelerated filer | [ ] Smaller reporting company | |||||
| Pacific Gas and Electric Company: | [ ] Large accelerated filer | [ ] Accelerated Filer | ||||
| [X] 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 Exchange Act).
| PG&E Corporation: | [ ] Yes [X] No | |
| Pacific Gas and Electric Company: | [ ] Yes |
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.
Common Stock Outstanding as of October | ||||||||||
PG&E Corporation | 392,065,793 | |||||||||
Pacific Gas and Electric Company | ||||||||||
| 264,374,809 | ||||||||||
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,
FORM 10-Q
FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
| CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME | ||||||||||||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions, except per share amounts) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Revenues | ||||||||||||||||
| Electric | $ | 2,630 | $ | 2,880 | $ | 7,610 | $ | 8,039 | ||||||||
| Natural gas | 605 | 794 | 2,250 | 2,946 | ||||||||||||
| Total operating revenues | 3,235 | 3,674 | 9,860 | 10,985 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Expenses | ||||||||||||||||
| Cost of electricity | 997 | 1,282 | 2,763 | 3,406 | ||||||||||||
| Cost of natural gas | 134 | 351 | 879 | 1,613 | ||||||||||||
| Operating and maintenance | 1,047 | 983 | 3,144 | 3,010 | ||||||||||||
| Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 450 | 419 | 1,298 | 1,240 | ||||||||||||
| Total operating expenses | 2,628 | 3,035 | 8,084 | 9,269 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Income | 607 | 639 | 1,776 | 1,716 | ||||||||||||
| Interest income | 1 | 23 | 27 | 82 | ||||||||||||
| Interest expense | (174 | ) | (178 | ) | (533 | ) | (550 | ) | ||||||||
| Other income (expense), net | 23 | (14 | ) | 63 | (4 | ) | ||||||||||
| Income Before Income Taxes | 457 | 470 | 1,333 | 1,244 | ||||||||||||
| Income tax provision | 136 | 163 | 376 | 413 | ||||||||||||
| Net Income | 321 | 307 | 957 | 831 | ||||||||||||
| Preferred stock dividend requirement of subsidiary | 3 | 3 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||
| Income Available for Common Shareholders | $ | 318 | $ | 304 | $ | 947 | $ | 821 | ||||||||
| Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding, Basic | 370 | 357 | 367 | 356 | ||||||||||||
| Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding, Diluted | 388 | 358 | 386 | 357 | ||||||||||||
| Net Earnings Per Common Share, Basic | $ | 0.84 | $ | 0.83 | $ | 2.53 | $ | 2.25 | ||||||||
| Net Earnings Per Common Share, Diluted | $ | 0.83 | $ | 0.83 | $ | 2.49 | $ | 2.24 | ||||||||
| Dividends Declared Per Common Share | $ | 0.42 | $ | 0.39 | $ | 1.26 | $ | 1.17 | ||||||||
| See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. | ||||||||||||||||
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETSSTATEMENTS OF INCOME
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
Balance At | ||||||||
| (in millions) | September 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | ||||||
| ASSETS | ||||||||
| Current Assets | ||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 700 | $ | 219 | ||||
| Restricted cash | 569 | 1,290 | ||||||
| Accounts receivable: | ||||||||
| Customers (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $68 million in 2009 and $76 million in 2008) | 1,609 | 1,751 | ||||||
| Accrued unbilled revenue | 807 | 685 | ||||||
| Regulatory balancing accounts | 882 | 1,197 | ||||||
| Inventories: | ||||||||
| Gas stored underground and fuel oil | 141 | 232 | ||||||
| Materials and supplies | 204 | 191 | ||||||
| Income taxes receivable | 58 | 120 | ||||||
| Prepaid expenses and other | 640 | 718 | ||||||
| Total current assets | 5,610 | 6,403 | ||||||
| Property, Plant, and Equipment | ||||||||
| Electric | 29,875 | 27,638 | ||||||
| Gas | 10,524 | 10,155 | ||||||
| Construction work in progress | 1,767 | 2,023 | ||||||
| Other | 15 | 17 | ||||||
| Total property, plant, and equipment | 42,181 | 39,833 | ||||||
| Accumulated depreciation | (13,997 | ) | (13,572 | ) | ||||
| Net property, plant, and equipment | 28,184 | 26,261 | ||||||
| Other Noncurrent Assets | ||||||||
| Regulatory assets | 5,931 | 5,996 | ||||||
| Nuclear decommissioning funds | 1,870 | 1,718 | ||||||
| Income taxes receivable | 506 | - | ||||||
| Other | 450 | 482 | ||||||
| Total other noncurrent assets | 8,757 | 8,196 | ||||||
| TOTAL ASSETS | $ | 42,551 | $ | 40,860 | ||||
| (Unaudited) | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions, except per share amounts) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Operating Revenues | ||||||||||||||||
Electric | $ 2,857 | $ 2,630 | $ 7,882 | $ 7,610 | ||||||||||||
Natural gas | 656 | 605 | 2,338 | 2,250 | ||||||||||||
Total operating revenues | 3,513 | 3,235 | 10,220 | 9,860 | ||||||||||||
Operating Expenses | ||||||||||||||||
Cost of electricity | 1,102 | 997 | 2,885 | 2,763 | ||||||||||||
Cost of natural gas | 182 | 134 | 924 | 879 | ||||||||||||
Operating and maintenance | 1,225 | 1,047 | 3,175 | 3,144 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 501 | 450 | 1,420 | 1,298 | ||||||||||||
Total operating expenses | 3,010 | 2,628 | 8,404 | 8,084 | ||||||||||||
Operating Income | 503 | 607 | 1,816 | 1,776 | ||||||||||||
Interest income | 3 | 1 | 7 | 27 | ||||||||||||
Interest expense | (167 | ) | (174 | ) | (510 | ) | (533 | ) | ||||||||
Other income, net | 29 | 23 | 25 | 63 | ||||||||||||
Income Before Income Taxes | 368 | 457 | 1,338 | 1,333 | ||||||||||||
Income tax provision | 107 | 136 | 479 | 376 | ||||||||||||
Net Income | 261 | 321 | 859 | 957 | ||||||||||||
Preferred stock dividend requirement of subsidiary | 3 | 3 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||
Income Available for Common Shareholders | $ 258 | $ 318 | $ 849 | $ 947 | ||||||||||||
Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding, Basic | 390 | 370 | 378 | 367 | ||||||||||||
Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding, Diluted | 392 | 388 | 391 | 386 | ||||||||||||
Net Earnings Per Common Share, Basic | $ 0.66 | $ 0.84 | $ 2.22 | $ 2.53 | ||||||||||||
Net Earnings Per Common Share, Diluted | $ 0.66 | $ 0.83 | $ 2.19 | $ 2.49 | ||||||||||||
Dividends Declared Per Common Share | $ 0.46 | $ 0.42 | $ 1.37 | $ 1.26 | ||||||||||||
See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
Balance At | ||||||||
(in millions, except share amounts) | September 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | ||||||
| LIABILITIES AND EQUITY | ||||||||
| Current Liabilities | ||||||||
| Short-term borrowings | $ | 500 | $ | 287 | ||||
| Long-term debt, classified as current | 342 | 600 | ||||||
| Energy recovery bonds, classified as current | 382 | 370 | ||||||
| Accounts payable: | ||||||||
| Trade creditors | 864 | 1,096 | ||||||
| Disputed claims and customer refunds | 816 | 1,580 | ||||||
| Regulatory balancing accounts | 629 | 730 | ||||||
| Other | 370 | 343 | ||||||
| Interest payable | 794 | 802 | ||||||
| Income taxes payable | 589 | - | ||||||
| Deferred income taxes | 172 | 251 | ||||||
| Other | 1,491 | 1,567 | ||||||
| Total current liabilities | 6,949 | 7,626 | ||||||
| Noncurrent Liabilities | ||||||||
| Long-term debt | 9,839 | 9,321 | ||||||
| Energy recovery bonds | 928 | 1,213 | ||||||
| Regulatory liabilities | 4,152 | 3,657 | ||||||
| Pension and other postretirement benefits | 2,221 | 2,088 | ||||||
| Asset retirement obligations | 1,545 | 1,684 | ||||||
| Income taxes payable | - | 35 | ||||||
| Deferred income taxes | 4,321 | 3,397 | ||||||
| Deferred tax credits | 90 | 94 | ||||||
| Other | 2,092 | 2,116 | ||||||
| Total noncurrent liabilities | 25,188 | 23,605 | ||||||
| Commitments and Contingencies | ||||||||
| Equity | ||||||||
| Shareholders’ Equity | ||||||||
| Preferred stock, no par value, authorized 80,000,000 shares, $100 par value, authorized 5,000,000 shares, none issued | - | - | ||||||
| Common stock, no par value, authorized 800,000,000 shares, issued 370,877,751 common and 670,552 restricted shares in 2009 and issued 361,059,116 common and 1,287,569 restricted shares in 2008 | 6,265 | 5,984 | ||||||
| Reinvested earnings | 4,097 | 3,614 | ||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (200 | ) | (221 | ) | ||||
| Total shareholders’ equity | 10,162 | 9,377 | ||||||
| Noncontrolling Interest – Preferred Stock of Subsidiary | 252 | 252 | ||||||
| Total equity | 10,414 | 9,629 | ||||||
| TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY | $ | 42,551 | $ | 40,860 | ||||
| (Unaudited) | ||||||||
| Balance At | ||||||||
| (in millions) | September 30, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | ||||||
ASSETS | ||||||||
Current Assets | ||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents | $ 347 | $ 527 | ||||||
Restricted cash ($38 and $39 related to Energy recovery bonds at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively) | 573 | 633 | ||||||
Accounts receivable: | ||||||||
Customers (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $76 at September 30, 2010 and $68 at December 31, 2009) | 989 | 859 | ||||||
Accrued unbilled revenue | 752 | 671 | ||||||
Regulatory balancing accounts | 1,118 | 1,109 | ||||||
Other | 786 | 750 | ||||||
Inventories: | ||||||||
Gas stored underground and fuel oil | 192 | 114 | ||||||
Materials and supplies | 187 | 200 | ||||||
Income taxes receivable | - | 127 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other | 807 | 667 | ||||||
Total current assets | 5,751 | 5,657 | ||||||
Property, Plant, and Equipment | ||||||||
Electric | 32,074 | 30,481 | ||||||
Gas | 11,079 | 10,697 | ||||||
Construction work in progress | 2,180 | 1,888 | ||||||
Other | 14 | 14 | ||||||
Total property, plant, and equipment | 45,347 | 43,080 | ||||||
Accumulated depreciation | (14,672 | ) | (14,188 | ) | ||||
Net property, plant, and equipment | 30,675 | 28,892 | ||||||
Other Noncurrent Assets | ||||||||
Regulatory assets ($833 and $1,124 related to Energy recovery bonds at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively) | 5,702 | 5,522 | ||||||
Nuclear decommissioning trusts | 1,977 | 1,899 | ||||||
Income taxes receivable | 624 | 596 | ||||||
Other | 524 | 379 | ||||||
Total other noncurrent assets | 8,827 | 8,396 | ||||||
TOTAL ASSETS | $ 45,253 | $ 42,945 | ||||||
See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
| PG&E CORPORATION | ||||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
| Nine Months Ended | ||||||||
September 30, | ||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||
| Cash Flows from Operating Activities | ||||||||
| Net income | $ | 957 | $ | 831 | ||||
| Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: | ||||||||
| Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 1,455 | 1,388 | ||||||
| Allowance for equity funds used during construction | (71 | ) | (51 | ) | ||||
| Deferred income taxes and tax credits, net | 301 | 482 | ||||||
| Other changes in noncurrent assets and liabilities | 61 | 87 | ||||||
| Effect of changes in operating assets and liabilities: | ||||||||
| Accounts receivable | 20 | (181 | ) | |||||
| Inventories | 78 | (153 | ) | |||||
| Accounts payable | (159 | ) | (100 | ) | ||||
| Disputed claims and customer refunds | (700 | ) | - | |||||
| Income taxes receivable/payable | 658 | 177 | ||||||
| Regulatory balancing accounts, net | 226 | (94 | ) | |||||
| Other current assets | 27 | (123 | ) | |||||
| Other current liabilities | (50 | ) | (68 | ) | ||||
| Other | 4 | (3 | ) | |||||
| Net cash provided by operating activities | 2,807 | 2,192 | ||||||
| Cash Flows from Investing Activities | ||||||||
| Capital expenditures | (3,022 | ) | (2,691 | ) | ||||
| Decrease (increase) in restricted cash | 732 | (3 | ) | |||||
| Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust sales | 1,177 | 1,121 | ||||||
| Purchases of nuclear decommissioning trust investments | (1,219 | ) | (1,161 | ) | ||||
| Other | 14 | (41 | ) | |||||
| Net cash used in investing activities | (2,318 | ) | (2,775 | ) | ||||
| Cash Flows from Financing Activities | ||||||||
| Net borrowings under revolving credit facility | - | 283 | ||||||
| Net (repayment) issuance of commercial paper, net of discount of $3 million in 2009 and $9 million in 2008 | (290 | ) | 524 | |||||
| Proceeds from issuance of short-term debt, net of issuance costs of $1 million in 2009 | 499 | - | ||||||
| Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net of premium, discount, and issuance costs of $16 million in 2009 and $2 million in 2008 | 1,193 | 693 | ||||||
| Long-term debt matured or repurchased | (909 | ) | (454 | ) | ||||
| Energy recovery bonds matured | (273 | ) | (260 | ) | ||||
| Common stock issued | 211 | 150 | ||||||
| Common stock dividends paid | (435 | ) | (406 | ) | ||||
| Other | (4 | ) | (41 | ) | ||||
| Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities | (8 | ) | 489 | |||||
| Net change in cash and cash equivalents | 481 | (94 | ) | |||||
| Cash and cash equivalents at January 1 | 219 | 345 | ||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents at September 30 | $ | 700 | $ | 251 | ||||
| Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information | ||||||||
| Cash received (paid) for: | ||||||||
| Interest, net of amounts capitalized | $ | (493 | ) | $ | (449 | ) | ||
| Income taxes, net | 437 | 146 | ||||||
| Supplemental disclosures of noncash investing and financing activities | ||||||||
| Common stock dividends declared but not yet paid | $ | 156 | $ | 140 | ||||
| Capital expenditures financed through accounts payable | 229 | 224 | ||||||
| Noncash common stock issuances | 50 | 6 | ||||||
| See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. | ||||||||
| PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY | ||||||||||||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Revenues | ||||||||||||||||
| Electric | $ | 2,630 | $ | 2,880 | $ | 7,610 | $ | 8,039 | ||||||||
| Natural gas | 605 | 794 | 2,250 | 2,946 | ||||||||||||
| Total operating revenues | 3,235 | 3,674 | 9,860 | 10,985 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Expenses | ||||||||||||||||
| Cost of electricity | 997 | 1,282 | 2,763 | 3,406 | ||||||||||||
| Cost of natural gas | 134 | 351 | 879 | 1,613 | ||||||||||||
| Operating and maintenance | 1,047 | 982 | 3,143 | 3,009 | ||||||||||||
| Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 450 | 419 | 1,298 | 1,239 | ||||||||||||
| Total operating expenses | 2,628 | 3,034 | 8,083 | 9,267 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Income | 607 | 640 | 1,777 | 1,718 | ||||||||||||
| Interest income | 3 | 20 | 29 | 77 | ||||||||||||
| Interest expense | (162 | ) | (170 | ) | (501 | ) | (528 | ) | ||||||||
| Other income (expense), net | 16 | (2 | ) | 52 | 24 | |||||||||||
| Income Before Income Taxes | 464 | 488 | 1,357 | 1,291 | ||||||||||||
| Income tax provision | 111 | 167 | 374 | 421 | ||||||||||||
| Net Income | 353 | 321 | 983 | 870 | ||||||||||||
| Preferred stock dividend requirement | 3 | 3 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||
| Income Available for Common Stock | $ | 350 | $ | 318 | $ | 973 | $ | 860 | ||||||||
| See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. | ||||||||||||||||
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
Balance At | ||||||||
(in millions) | September 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | ||||||
| ASSETS | ||||||||
| Current Assets | ||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 511 | $ | 52 | ||||
| Restricted cash | 569 | 1,290 | ||||||
| Accounts receivable: | ||||||||
| Customers (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $68 million in 2009 and $76 million in 2008) | 1,609 | 1,751 | ||||||
| Accrued unbilled revenue | 807 | 685 | ||||||
| Related parties | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| Regulatory balancing accounts | 882 | 1,197 | ||||||
| Inventories: | ||||||||
| Gas stored underground and fuel oil | 141 | 232 | ||||||
| Materials and supplies | 204 | 191 | ||||||
| Income taxes receivable | 63 | 25 | ||||||
| Prepaid expenses and other | 635 | 705 | ||||||
| Total current assets | 5,423 | 6,130 | ||||||
| Property, Plant, and Equipment | ||||||||
| Electric | 29,875 | 27,638 | ||||||
| Gas | 10,524 | 10,155 | ||||||
| Construction work in progress | 1,767 | 2,023 | ||||||
| Total property, plant, and equipment | 42,166 | 39,816 | ||||||
| Accumulated depreciation | (13,983 | ) | (13,557 | ) | ||||
| Net property, plant, and equipment | 28,183 | 26,259 | ||||||
| Other Noncurrent Assets | ||||||||
| Regulatory assets | 5,931 | 5,996 | ||||||
| Nuclear decommissioning funds | 1,870 | 1,718 | ||||||
| Related parties receivable | 26 | 27 | ||||||
| Income taxes receivable | 518 | - | ||||||
| Other | 365 | 407 | ||||||
| Total other noncurrent assets | 8,710 | 8,148 | ||||||
| TOTAL ASSETS | $ | 42,316 | $ | 40,537 | ||||
| (Unaudited) | ||||||||
| Balance At | ||||||||
| (in millions, except share amounts) | September 30, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | ||||||
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY | ||||||||
Current Liabilities | ||||||||
Short-term borrowings | $ 1,076 | $ 833 | ||||||
Long-term debt, classified as current | 500 | 342 | ||||||
Energy recovery bonds, classified as current | 399 | 386 | ||||||
Accounts payable: | ||||||||
Trade creditors | 943 | 984 | ||||||
Disputed claims and customer refunds | 746 | 773 | ||||||
Regulatory balancing accounts | 371 | 281 | ||||||
Other | 364 | 349 | ||||||
Interest payable | 787 | 818 | ||||||
Income taxes payable | 260 | 214 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes | 150 | 332 | ||||||
Other | 1,588 | 1,501 | ||||||
Total current liabilities | 7,184 | 6,813 | ||||||
Noncurrent Liabilities | ||||||||
Long-term debt | 10,727 | 10,381 | ||||||
Energy recovery bonds | 528 | 827 | ||||||
Regulatory liabilities | 4,446 | 4,125 | ||||||
Pension and other postretirement benefits | 2,064 | 1,773 | ||||||
Asset retirement obligations | 1,610 | 1,593 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes | 5,267 | 4,732 | ||||||
Other | 2,152 | 2,116 | ||||||
Total noncurrent liabilities | 26,794 | 25,547 | ||||||
Commitments and Contingencies | ||||||||
Equity | ||||||||
Shareholders’ Equity | ||||||||
Preferred stock, no par value, authorized 80,000,000 shares, $100 par value, authorized 5,000,000 shares, none issued | - | - | ||||||
Common stock, no par value, authorized 800,000,000 shares, 391,530,616 shares outstanding (including 475,914 restricted shares) at September 30, 2010 and 371,272,457 shares outstanding (including 670,552 restricted shares) at December 31, 2009 | 6,712 | 6,280 | ||||||
Reinvested earnings | 4,535 | 4,213 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (224 | ) | (160 | ) | ||||
Total shareholders’ equity | 11,023 | 10,333 | ||||||
Noncontrolling Interest – Preferred Stock of Subsidiary | 252 | 252 | ||||||
Total equity | 11,275 | 10,585 | ||||||
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY | $ 45,253 | $ 42,945 | ||||||
See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
Balance At | ||||||||
| (in millions, except share amounts) | September 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | ||||||
| LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY | ||||||||
| Current Liabilities | ||||||||
| Short-term borrowings | $ | 500 | $ | 287 | ||||
| Long-term debt, classified as current | 95 | 600 | ||||||
| Energy recovery bonds, classified as current | 382 | 370 | ||||||
| Accounts payable: | ||||||||
| Trade creditors | 864 | 1,096 | ||||||
| Disputed claims and customer refunds | 816 | 1,580 | ||||||
| Related parties | 14 | 25 | ||||||
| Regulatory balancing accounts | 629 | 730 | ||||||
| Other | 371 | 325 | ||||||
| Interest payable | 777 | 802 | ||||||
| Income tax payable | 612 | 53 | ||||||
| Deferred income taxes | 177 | 257 | ||||||
| Other | 1,289 | 1,371 | ||||||
| Total current liabilities | 6,526 | 7,496 | ||||||
| Noncurrent Liabilities | ||||||||
| Long-term debt | 9,491 | 9,041 | ||||||
| Energy recovery bonds | 928 | 1,213 | ||||||
| Regulatory liabilities | 4,152 | 3,657 | ||||||
| Pension and other postretirement benefits | 2,170 | 2,040 | ||||||
| Asset retirement obligations | 1,545 | 1,684 | ||||||
| Income taxes payable | - | 12 | ||||||
| Deferred income taxes | 4,353 | 3,449 | ||||||
| Deferred tax credits | 90 | 94 | ||||||
| Other | 2,057 | 2,064 | ||||||
| Total noncurrent liabilities | 24,786 | 23,254 | ||||||
| Commitments and Contingencies | ||||||||
| Shareholders’ Equity | ||||||||
| Preferred stock without mandatory redemption provisions: | ||||||||
| Nonredeemable, 5.00% to 6.00%, outstanding 5,784,825 shares | 145 | 145 | ||||||
| Redeemable, 4.36% to 5.00%, outstanding 4,534,958 shares | 113 | 113 | ||||||
| Common stock, $5 par value, authorized 800,000,000 shares, issued 264,374,809 shares in 2009 and 2008 | 1,322 | 1,322 | ||||||
| Additional paid-in capital | 3,022 | 2,331 | ||||||
| Reinvested earnings | 6,597 | 6,092 | ||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (195 | ) | (216 | ) | ||||
| Total shareholders’ equity | 11,004 | 9,787 | ||||||
| TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY | $ | 42,316 | $ | 40,537 | ||||
| (Unaudited) | ||||||||
| Nine Months Ended September 30, | ||||||||
(in millions)
| 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Cash Flows from Operating Activities | ||||||||
Net income | $ 859 | $ 957 | ||||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: | ||||||||
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 1,609 | 1,455 | ||||||
Allowance for equity funds used during construction | (89 | ) | (71 | ) | ||||
Deferred income taxes and tax credits, net | 328 | 301 | ||||||
Other changes in noncurrent assets and liabilities | (339 | ) | 61 | |||||
Effect of changes in operating assets and liabilities: | ||||||||
Accounts receivable | (246 | ) | 20 | |||||
Inventories | (65 | ) | 78 | |||||
Accounts payable | 17 | (159 | ) | |||||
Disputed claims and customer refunds | - | (700 | ) | |||||
Income taxes receivable/payable | 252 | 658 | ||||||
Regulatory balancing accounts, net | (14 | ) | 226 | |||||
Other current assets | 28 | 27 | ||||||
Other current liabilities | (34 | ) | (50 | ) | ||||
Other | 14 | 4 | ||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities | 2,320 | 2,807 | ||||||
Cash Flows from Investing Activities | ||||||||
Capital expenditures | (2,794 | ) | (3,022 | ) | ||||
Decrease in restricted cash | 61 | 732 | ||||||
Proceeds from sales and maturities of nuclear decommissioning trust investments | 962 | 1,177 | ||||||
Purchases of nuclear decommissioning trust investments | (1,001 | ) | (1,219 | ) | ||||
Other | (25 | ) | 14 | |||||
Net cash used in investing activities | (2,797 | ) | (2,318 | ) | ||||
Cash Flows from Financing Activities | ||||||||
Borrowings under revolving credit facilities | 490 | 300 | ||||||
Repayments under revolving credit facilities | - | (300 | ) | |||||
Net issuance (repayments) of commercial paper, net of discount of $2 in 2010 and $3 in 2009 | 251 | (290 | ) | |||||
Proceeds from issuance of short-term debt, net of issuance costs of $1 in 2009 | - | 499 | ||||||
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net of discount and issuance costs of $12 in 2010 and $16 in 2009 | 838 | 1,193 | ||||||
Short-term debt matured | (500 | ) | - | |||||
Long-term debt matured or repurchased | (95 | ) | (909 | ) | ||||
Energy recovery bonds matured | (285 | ) | (273 | ) | ||||
Common stock issued | 141 | 211 | ||||||
Common stock dividends paid | (492 | ) | (435 | ) | ||||
Other | (51 | ) | (4 | ) | ||||
Net cash provided by financing activities | 297 | (8 | ) | |||||
Net change in cash and cash equivalents | (180 | ) | 481 | |||||
Cash and cash equivalents at January 1 | 527 | 219 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at September 30 | $ 347 | $ 700 | ||||||
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information | ||||||||
Cash received (paid) for: | ||||||||
Interest, net of amounts capitalized | $ (526 | ) | $ (493 | ) | ||||
Income taxes, net | (52 | ) | 437 | |||||
Supplemental disclosures of noncash investing and financing activities | ||||||||
Common stock dividends declared but not yet paid | $ 180 | $ 156 | ||||||
Capital expenditures financed through accounts payable | 229 | 229 | ||||||
Noncash common stock issuances | 259 | 50 | ||||||
See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
| PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY | ||||||||
(Unaudited) | ||||||||
| Nine Months Ended | ||||||||
September 30, | ||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||
| Cash Flows from Operating Activities | ||||||||
| Net income | $ | 983 | $ | 870 | ||||
| Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: | ||||||||
| Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 1,439 | 1,388 | ||||||
| Allowance for equity funds used during construction | (71 | ) | (51 | ) | ||||
| Deferred income taxes and tax credits, net | 274 | 470 | ||||||
| Other changes in noncurrent assets and liabilities | 95 | 55 | ||||||
| Effect of changes in operating assets and liabilities: | ||||||||
| Accounts receivable | 20 | (179 | ) | |||||
| Inventories | 78 | (153 | ) | |||||
| Accounts payable | (151 | ) | (85 | ) | ||||
| Disputed claims and customer refunds | (700 | ) | - | |||||
| Income taxes receivable/payable | 534 | 208 | ||||||
| Regulatory balancing accounts, net | 226 | (94 | ) | |||||
| Other current assets | 26 | (125 | ) | |||||
| Other current liabilities | (62 | ) | (80 | ) | ||||
| Other | 3 | (4 | ) | |||||
| Net cash provided by operating activities | 2,694 | 2,220 | ||||||
| Cash Flows from Investing Activities | ||||||||
| Capital expenditures | (3,022 | ) | (2,691 | ) | ||||
| Decrease (increase) in restricted cash | 732 | (3 | ) | |||||
| Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust sales | 1,177 | 1,121 | ||||||
| Purchases of nuclear decommissioning trust investments | (1,219 | ) | (1,161 | ) | ||||
| Other | 7 | 21 | ||||||
| Net cash used in investing activities | (2,325 | ) | (2,713 | ) | ||||
| Cash Flows from Financing Activities | ||||||||
| Net borrowings under revolving credit facility | - | 283 | ||||||
| Net (repayment) issuance of commercial paper, net of discount of $3 million in 2009 and $9 million in 2008 | (290 | ) | 524 | |||||
| Proceeds from issuance of short-term debt, net of issuance costs of $1 million in 2009 | 499 | - | ||||||
| Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net of premium, discount, and issuance costs of $12 million in 2009 and $2 million in 2008 | 847 | 693 | ||||||
| Long-term debt matured or repurchased | (909 | ) | (454 | ) | ||||
| Energy recovery bonds matured | (273 | ) | (260 | ) | ||||
| Preferred stock dividends paid | (10 | ) | (10 | ) | ||||
| Common stock dividends paid | (468 | ) | (426 | ) | ||||
| Equity contribution | 688 | 90 | ||||||
| Other | 6 | (31 | ) | |||||
| Net cash provided by financing activities | 90 | 409 | ||||||
| Net change in cash and cash equivalents | 459 | (84 | ) | |||||
| Cash and cash equivalents at January 1 | 52 | 141 | ||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents at September 30 | $ | 511 | $ | 57 | ||||
| Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information | ||||||||
| Cash received (paid) for: | ||||||||
| Interest, net of amounts capitalized | $ | (481 | ) | $ | (436 | ) | ||
| Income taxes, net | 297 | 138 | ||||||
| Supplemental disclosures of noncash investing and financing activities | ||||||||
| Capital expenditures financed through accounts payable | $ | 229 | $ | 224 | ||||
| See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. | ||||||||
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
| (Unaudited) | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
(in millions)
| 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Operating Revenues | ||||||||||||||||
Electric | $ 2,857 | $ 2,630 | $ 7,882 | $ 7,610 | ||||||||||||
Natural gas | 656 | 605 | 2,338 | 2,250 | ||||||||||||
Total operating revenues | 3,513 | 3,235 | 10,220 | 9,860 | ||||||||||||
Operating Expenses | ||||||||||||||||
Cost of electricity | 1,102 | 997 | 2,885 | 2,763 | ||||||||||||
Cost of natural gas | 182 | 134 | 924 | 879 | ||||||||||||
Operating and maintenance | 1,224 | 1,047 | 3,172 | 3,143 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 500 | 450 | 1,419 | 1,298 | ||||||||||||
Total operating expenses | 3,008 | 2,628 | 8,400 | 8,083 | ||||||||||||
Operating Income | 505 | 607 | 1,820 | 1,777 | ||||||||||||
Interest income | 3 | 3 | 7 | 29 | ||||||||||||
Interest expense | (161 | ) | (162 | ) | (481 | ) | (501 | ) | ||||||||
Other income, net | 25 | 16 | 20 | 52 | ||||||||||||
Income Before Income Taxes | 372 | 464 | 1,366 | 1,357 | ||||||||||||
Income tax provision | 107 | 111 | 498 | 374 | ||||||||||||
Net Income | 265 | 353 | 868 | 983 | ||||||||||||
Preferred stock dividend requirement | 3 | 3 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||
Income Available for Common Stock | $ 262 | $ 350 | $ 858 | $ 973 | ||||||||||||
See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
| (Unaudited) | ||||||||
| Balance At | ||||||||
| (in millions) | September 30, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | ||||||
ASSETS | ||||||||
Current Assets | ||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents | $ 119 | $ 334 | ||||||
Restricted cash ($38 and $39 related to Energy recovery bonds at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively) | 573 | 633 | ||||||
Accounts receivable: | ||||||||
Customers (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $76 at September 30, 2010 and $68 at December 31, 2009) | 989 | 859 | ||||||
Accrued unbilled revenue | 752 | 671 | ||||||
Regulatory balancing accounts | 1,118 | 1,109 | ||||||
Other | 781 | 751 | ||||||
Inventories: | ||||||||
Gas stored underground and fuel oil | 192 | 114 | ||||||
Materials and supplies | 187 | 200 | ||||||
Income taxes receivable | - | 138 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other | 806 | 662 | ||||||
Total current assets | 5,517 | 5,471 | ||||||
Property, Plant, and Equipment | ||||||||
Electric | 32,074 | 30,481 | ||||||
Gas | 11,079 | 10,697 | ||||||
Construction work in progress | 2,180 | 1,888 | ||||||
Total property, plant, and equipment | 45,333 | 43,066 | ||||||
Accumulated depreciation | (14,659 | ) | (14,175 | ) | ||||
Net property, plant, and equipment | 30,674 | 28,891 | ||||||
Other Noncurrent Assets | ||||||||
Regulatory assets ($833 and $1,124 related to Energy recovery bonds at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively) | 5,702 | 5,522 | ||||||
Nuclear decommissioning trusts | 1,977 | 1,899 | ||||||
Income taxes receivable | 673 | 610 | ||||||
Other | 357 | 316 | ||||||
Total other noncurrent assets | 8,709 | 8,347 | ||||||
TOTAL ASSETS | $ 44,900 | $ 42,709 | ||||||
See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
| (Unaudited) | ||||||||
| Balance At | ||||||||
| (in millions, except share amounts) | September 30, | December 31, | ||||||
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY | ||||||||
Current Liabilities | ||||||||
Short-term borrowings | $ 986 | $ 833 | ||||||
Long-term debt, classified as current | 500 | 95 | ||||||
Energy recovery bonds, classified as current | 399 | 386 | ||||||
Accounts payable: | ||||||||
Trade creditors | 943 | 984 | ||||||
Disputed claims and customer refunds | 746 | 773 | ||||||
Regulatory balancing accounts | 371 | 281 | ||||||
Other | 376 | 363 | ||||||
Interest payable | 777 | 813 | ||||||
Income taxes payable | 260 | 223 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes | 154 | 334 | ||||||
Other | 1,377 | 1,307 | ||||||
Total current liabilities | 6,889 | 6,392 | ||||||
Noncurrent Liabilities | ||||||||
Long-term debt | 10,378 | 10,033 | ||||||
Energy recovery bonds | 528 | 827 | ||||||
Regulatory liabilities | 4,446 | 4,125 | ||||||
Pension and other postretirement benefits | 2,006 | 1,717 | ||||||
Asset retirement obligations | 1,610 | 1,593 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes | 5,322 | 4,764 | ||||||
Other | 2,105 | 2,073 | ||||||
Total noncurrent liabilities | 26,395 | 25,132 | ||||||
Commitments and Contingencies | ||||||||
Shareholders’ Equity | ||||||||
Preferred stock without mandatory redemption provisions: | ||||||||
Nonredeemable, 5.00% to 6.00%, 5,784,825 shares outstanding at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 | 145 | 145 | ||||||
Redeemable, 4.36% to 5.00%, 4,534,958 shares outstanding at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 | 113 | 113 | ||||||
Common stock, $5 par value, authorized 800,000,000 shares, 264,374,809 shares outstanding at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 | 1,322 | 1,322 | ||||||
Additional paid-in capital | 3,228 | 3,055 | ||||||
Reinvested earnings | 7,025 | 6,704 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (217 | ) | (154 | ) | ||||
Total shareholders’ equity | 11,616 | 11,185 | ||||||
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY | $ 44,900 | $ 42,709 | ||||||
See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
| (Unaudited) | ||||||||
| Nine Months Ended September 30, | ||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Cash Flows from Operating Activities | ||||||||
Net income | $ 868 | $ 983 | ||||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: | ||||||||
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 1,580 | 1,439 | ||||||
Allowance for equity funds used during construction | (89 | ) | (71 | ) | ||||
Deferred income taxes and tax credits, net | 332 | 274 | ||||||
Other changes in noncurrent assets and liabilities | (286 | ) | 95 | |||||
Effect of changes in operating assets and liabilities: | ||||||||
Accounts receivable | (240 | ) | 20 | |||||
Inventories | (65 | ) | 78 | |||||
Accounts payable | 15 | (151 | ) | |||||
Disputed claims and customer refunds | - | (700 | ) | |||||
Income taxes receivable/payable | 241 | 534 | ||||||
Regulatory balancing accounts, net | (14 | ) | 226 | |||||
Other current assets | 28 | 26 | ||||||
Other current liabilities | (33 | ) | (62 | ) | ||||
Other | 14 | 3 | ||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities | 2,351 | 2,694 | ||||||
Cash Flows from Investing Activities | ||||||||
Capital expenditures | (2,794 | ) | (3,022 | ) | ||||
Decrease in restricted cash | 61 | 732 | ||||||
Proceeds from sales and maturities of nuclear decommissioning trust investments | 962 | 1,177 | ||||||
Purchases of nuclear decommissioning trust investments | (1,001 | ) | (1,219 | ) | ||||
Other | 15 | 7 | ||||||
Net cash used in investing activities | (2,757 | ) | (2,325 | ) | ||||
Cash Flows from Financing Activities | ||||||||
Borrowings under revolving credit facilities | 400 | 300 | ||||||
Repayments under revolving credit facilities | - | (300 | ) | |||||
Net issuance (repayments) of commercial paper, net of discount of $2 in 2010 and $3 in 2009 | 251 | (290 | ) | |||||
Proceeds from issuance of short-term debt, net of issuance costs of $1 in 2009 | - | 499 | ||||||
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net of discount and issuance costs of $12 in 2010 and 2009 | 838 | 847 | ||||||
Short-term debt matured | (500 | ) | - | |||||
Long-term debt matured or repurchased | (95 | ) | (909 | ) | ||||
Energy recovery bonds matured | (285 | ) | (273 | ) | ||||
Preferred stock dividends paid | (11 | ) | (10 | ) | ||||
Common stock dividends paid | (537 | ) | (468 | ) | ||||
Equity contribution | 170 | 688 | ||||||
Other | (40 | ) | 6 | |||||
Net cash provided by financing activities | 191 | 90 | ||||||
Net change in cash and cash equivalents | (215 | ) | 459 | |||||
Cash and cash equivalents at January 1 | 334 | 52 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents at September 30 | $ 119 | $ 511 | ||||||
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information | ||||||||
Cash received (paid) for: | ||||||||
Interest, net of amounts capitalized | $ (504 | ) | $ (481 | ) | ||||
Income taxes, net | (87 | ) | 297 | |||||
Supplemental disclosures of noncash investing and financing activities | ||||||||
Capital expenditures financed through accounts payable | $ 229 | $ 229 | ||||||
See accompanying Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
NOTES TO THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited)
PG&E Corporation is a holding company whose primary purpose is to hold interests in energy-based businesses. PG&E Corporation conducts its business principally through Pacific Gas and Electric Company (“Utility”), a public utility operating in northern and central California. The Utility engages ingenerates revenues mainly through the businessessale and delivery of electricity and natural gas distribution; electricity generation, procurement, and transmission; and natural gas procurement, transportation, and storage.to customers. The Utility is regulated primarily by the California Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”).
This quarterly report on Form 10-Q is a combined report of PG&E Corporation and the Utility. Therefore, theUtility that includes separate Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for each company. The Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements apply to both PG&E Corporation and the Utility. PG&E Corporation’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of PG&E Corporation, the Utility, and other wholly owned and controlled subsidiaries. The Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of the Utility and its wholly owned and controlled subsidiaries, as well as the accounts of variable interest entities (“VIEs”) for which the Utility absorbs a majority of the risk of loss or gain.subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions have been eliminated from the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
The accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America (“GAAP”) for interim financial information and in accordance with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and therefore do not contain all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP and the SEC for annual financial statements. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements reflect all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) that management believes are necessary for the fair presentation of their financial condition, and results of operations, and cash flows for the periods presented. The 2009 presentation of borrowings and payments under the revolving credit facilities has been adjusted in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows to present borrowings and repayments on a gross basis rather than a net basis to conform with GAAP. The information at December 31, 20082009 in both PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets included in this quarterly report was derived from the audited Consolidated Balance Sheets incorporated by reference into their combined 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K forfiled with the year ended December 31, 2008.SEC on February 19, 2010. PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s combined 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K, for the year ended December 31, 2008, together with the information incorporated by reference into such report, is referred to in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q as the “2008“2009 Annual Report.”
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions based on a wide range of factors, including future regulatory decisions and economic conditions that are difficult to predict. Some of the more critical estimates and assumptions discussed further below in these notes, relate to the Utility’s regulatory assets and liabilities, environmental remediation liability,liabilities, asset retirement obligations (“ARO”), income tax-related assets and liabilities, and pension plan and other postretirement plan obligations,obligations. In addition, management has made significant estimates and assumptions about accruals related to the rupture of a natural gas transmission pipeline owned and operated by the Utility in the City of San Bruno, California on September 9, 2010, as well as accruals for various legal matters. (See Note 10 below.) Management believes that its estimates and assumptions reflected in the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements are appropriate and reasonable. A change in management’s estimates or assumptions could result in an adjustment that would have a material impact on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition and results of operations during the period in which such change occurred.
The significant accounting policies used by PG&E Corporation and the Utility are required to consolidate any entity over which it has control. In most cases, control can be determined based on majority ownership. However, for certain entities, control is difficult to discern based on voting equity interests only. These entities are referred to as VIEs. Characteristics of a VIE include equity investment at risk that is not sufficient to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties, or equity investors that lack any of the characteristics of a controlling financial interest. The primary beneficiary, defined as the entity that absorbs a majority of the expected losses of the VIE, receives a majority of the expected residual returns of the VIE, or both, is required to consolidate the VIE.
| (in millions) | ||||
| ARO liability at December 31, 2008 | $ | 1,684 | ||
| Revision in estimated cash flows | (172 | ) | ||
| Accretion | 73 | |||
| Liabilities settled | (40 | ) | ||
| ARO liability at September 30, 2009 | $ | 1,545 | ||
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits
PG&E Corporation and the Utility provide a non-contributory defined benefit pension plan for certaineligible employees and retirees (referred to collectively as “pension benefits”), contributory postretirement medical plans for certaineligible employees and retirees and their eligible dependents, and non-contributory postretirement life insurance plans for certaineligible employees and retirees (referred to collectively as “other benefits”). PG&E Corporation and the Utility use a December 31 measurement date for all plans.
The net periodic benefit costs as reflected in PG&E Corporation’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income as a component of Operating and maintenance for the three and nine monthsnine-months ended September 30, 20092010 and 20082009 were as follows:
Pension Benefits | Other Benefits | |||||||||||||||
Three Months Ended September 30, | Three Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Service cost for benefits earned | $ | 62 | $ | 59 | $ | 7 | $ | 7 | ||||||||
| Interest cost | 158 | 148 | 23 | 21 | ||||||||||||
| Expected return on plan assets | (144 | ) | (173 | ) | (17 | ) | (22 | ) | ||||||||
| Amortization of transition obligation | - | - | 6 | 6 | ||||||||||||
| Amortization of prior service cost | 16 | 12 | 4 | 4 | ||||||||||||
| Amortization of unrecognized (gain) loss | 27 | 1 | 1 | (3 | ) | |||||||||||
| Net periodic benefit cost | 119 | 47 | 24 | 13 | ||||||||||||
Less: transfer to regulatory account (1) | (78 | ) | (5 | ) | - | - | ||||||||||
| Total | $ | 41 | $ | 42 | $ | 24 | $ | 13 | ||||||||
(1) For the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, the Utility recorded $78 million as an addition to the existing pension regulatory asset and $5 million as a reduction to the existing pension regulatory liability, respectively, to reflect the difference between pension expense or income for accounting purposes and pension expense or income for ratemaking purposes, which is based on a funding approach. | ||||||||||||||||
Pension Benefits | Other Benefits | |||||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Service cost for benefits earned | $ | 194 | $ | 177 | $ | 22 | $ | 22 | ||||||||
| Interest cost | 468 | 436 | 66 | 61 | ||||||||||||
| Expected return on plan assets | (434 | ) | (522 | ) | (51 | ) | (70 | ) | ||||||||
| Amortization of transition obligation | - | - | 19 | 19 | ||||||||||||
| Amortization of prior service cost | 39 | 35 | 12 | 12 | ||||||||||||
| Amortization of unrecognized (gain) loss | 76 | 1 | 2 | (11 | ) | |||||||||||
| Net periodic benefit cost | 343 | 127 | 70 | 33 | ||||||||||||
Less: transfer to regulatory account (1) | (221 | ) | (3 | ) | - | - | ||||||||||
| Total | $ | 122 | $ | 124 | $ | 70 | $ | 33 | ||||||||
(1) For the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, the Utility recorded $221 million as an addition to the existing pension regulatory asset and $3 million as a reduction to the existing pension regulatory liability, respectively, to reflect the difference between pension expense or income for accounting purposes and pension expense or income for ratemaking purposes, which is based on a funding approach. | ||||||||||||||||
| Pension Benefits | Other Benefits | |||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Three Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Service cost for benefits earned | $ 70 | $ 62 | $ 8 | $ 7 | ||||||||||||
Interest cost | 162 | 158 | 21 | 23 | ||||||||||||
Expected return on plan assets | (155 | ) | (144 | ) | (18 | ) | (17 | ) | ||||||||
Amortization of transition obligation | - | - | 6 | 6 | ||||||||||||
Amortization of prior service cost | 13 | 16 | 7 | 4 | ||||||||||||
Amortization of unrecognized loss | 11 | 27 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||||
Net periodic benefit cost | 101 | 119 | 25 | 24 | ||||||||||||
Less: transfer to regulatory account (1) | (60 | ) | (78 | ) | - | - | ||||||||||
Total | $ 41 | $ 41 | $ 25 | $ 24 | ||||||||||||
(1) The Utility recorded $60 million and $78 million for the three month periods ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, to a regulatory account as the amounts are probable of recovery from customers in future rates. |
| |||||||||||||||
| Pension Benefits | Other Benefits | |||||||||||||||
| Nine Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Service cost for benefits earned | $ 209 | $ 194 | $ 27 | $ 22 | ||||||||||||
Interest cost | 484 | 468 | 66 | 66 | ||||||||||||
Expected return on plan assets | (467 | ) | (434 | ) | (55 | ) | (51 | ) | ||||||||
Amortization of transition obligation | - | - | 19 | 19 | ||||||||||||
Amortization of prior service cost | 39 | 39 | 19 | 12 | ||||||||||||
Amortization of unrecognized loss | 32 | 76 | 2 | 2 | ||||||||||||
Net periodic benefit cost | 297 | 343 | 78 | 70 | ||||||||||||
Less: transfer to regulatory account (1) | (175 | ) | (221 | ) | - | - | ||||||||||
Total | $ 122 | $ 122 | $ 78 | $ 70 | ||||||||||||
(1) The Utility recorded $175 million and $221 million for the nine month periods ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, to a regulatory account as the amounts are probable of recovery from customers in future rates. |
| |||||||||||||||
There was no material difference between PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s consolidated net periodic benefit costs for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009.
On February 16, 2010, the Utility amended its defined benefit medical plans for retirees to provide for additional employer contributions towards retiree premiums. The plan amendment was accounted for as a plan modification that required re-measurement of the accumulated benefit obligation, plan assets, and periodic benefit costs. The inputs and assumptions used in re-measurement did not change significantly from December 31, 2009 and 2008.
Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements
Improvements to Financial Reporting by Enterprises Involved with Variable Interest Entities
On January 1, 2009,2010, PG&E Corporation and the Utility adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative Instrumentsan accounting standards update that changes when and Hedging Activities - an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133” (“SFAS No. 161”). SFAS No. 161 requireshow to determine, or re-determine, whether an entity to provide qualitative disclosures about its objectives and strategiesis a variable interest entity (“VIE”), which could require consolidation. In addition, the new guidance replaces the quantitative approach for using derivative instruments and quantitative disclosures that detail the fair value amounts of, and gains and losses on, derivative instruments. SFAS No. 161 also requires disclosures about credit risk-related contingent features of derivative instruments. (See Note 7 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.)
PG&E Corporation and the Utility are required to consolidate any entities which the companies control. In most cases, control can be determined based on majority ownership or voting interests. However, for Liabilities Measuredcertain entities, control is difficult to discern based on equity or voting interests alone. These entities are referred to as VIEs. A VIE is an entity which does not have sufficient equity at risk to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties, or whose equity investors lack any characteristics of a controlling financial interest. An enterprise has a controlling financial interest if it has the obligation to absorb expected losses or receive expected gains that could potentially be significant to the VIE and the power to direct the activities that are most significant to the VIE’s economic performance. The enterprise that has a controlling financial interest is known as the VIE’s primary beneficiary and is the enterprise that is required to consolidate the VIE.
Some of the counterparties to the Utility’s power purchase agreements are considered VIEs. In determining whether the Utility has a controlling financial interest in the VIE, the Utility must first assess whether it absorbs any of the VIE’s expected losses or receives portions of the expected residual returns as a result of the power purchase agreement. This assessment includes an evaluation of how the risks and rewards associated with the power plant’s activities are absorbed by variable interest holders. These VIEs are typically exposed to credit risk, production risk, commodity price risk, and any applicable tax incentive risks, among others. The Utility analyzes the variability in the VIE’s gross margin and the impact of the power purchase agreement on the gross margin to determine whether the Utility absorbs variability, resulting in a variable interest. Factors that may be considered when assessing the impact of the power purchase agreement on the VIE’s gross margin include the pricing structure of the agreement and the cost of inputs and production, depending on the technology of the power plant.
For each variable interest, the Utility must also determine whether it has the power to direct the activities of the power plant that most directly impact the VIE’s economic performance. The Utility’s assessment of the activities that are economically significant to the VIE’s performance often include decision-making rights associated with designing the VIE, dispatch rights, operating and maintenance activities, and re-marketing activities of the power plant after the end of its power purchase agreement with the Utility.
The Utility held a variable interest in several entities that own power plants that generate electricity for sale to the Utility under power purchase agreements. Each of these VIEs was designed to own a power plant that would generate electricity for sale to the Utility utilizing various technologies such as natural gas, wind, solar photovoltaic, solar thermal, hydroelectric, and other technologies. Under each power purchase agreement, the Utility is obligated to purchase electricity or capacity, or both, from the VIEs. The Utility does not provide any other financial or other support to these VIEs and the Utility’s financial exposure is limited to the amount it pays for delivered electricity and capacity. (See Note 10 below.) The Utility does not have the power to direct the activities of the VIE that are most significant to the VIE’s economic performance. As a result, the Utility does not have a controlling financial interest in any of these VIEs. Therefore, at September 30, 2010, the Utility was not the primary beneficiary of any of these VIEs.
The Utility continues to consolidate PG&E Energy Recovery Funding LLC (“PERF”) at September 30, 2010, as the Utility is the primary beneficiary of PERF. The Utility has a controlling financial interest in PERF as the Utility is exposed to PERF’s losses and returns through the Utility’s equity investment in PERF, and the Utility was involved in the design of PERF, an activity that is significant to PERF’s economic performance. The assets of PERF were $1.0 billion at September 30, 2010, and primarily consisted of assets related to energy recovery bonds, which is included in noncurrent regulatory assets in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The liabilities of PERF were $927 million at September 30, 2010, and consisted of energy recovery bonds, which is included in current and noncurrent liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. (See Note 4 below.) The assets of PERF are only available to settle the liabilities of PERF.
As of September 30, 2010, PG&E Corporation’s affiliates had entered into four tax equity agreements with privately held companies to fund residential and commercial retail solar energy installations. Under these agreements, PG&E Corporation will provide payments of up to $300 million, and in return, receive the benefits of local rebates, federal investment tax credits, and a share of these entities’ customer payments. As of September 30, 2010, PG&E Corporation had made total payments of $100 million under these tax equity agreements, which was recorded in noncurrent assets – other in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. PG&E Corporation holds a variable interest in these entities as a result of these tax equity agreements. When determining whether PG&E
Corporation was the primary beneficiary of the VIEs, PG&E Corporation evaluated which party had control over significant economic activities such as designing the entities, vendor selection, construction, customer selection, and remarketing activities at the end of the customer leases, among other activities. As these activities were under the control of these VIEs, PG&E Corporation was not the primary beneficiary at September 30, 2010. PG&E Corporation’s financial exposure for these arrangements is primarily limited to its lease payments and investment contributions to these entities.
Improving Disclosures about Fair Value with a Third-Party Credit Enhancement
On January 1, 2009,2010, PG&E Corporation and the Utility adopted Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) 08-5, “Issuer’s Accounting for Liabilities Measured at Fair Value with a Third-Party Credit Enhancement” (“EITF 08-5”). EITF 08-5 clarifies the unitan accounting standards update that requires disclosures regarding significant transfers in and out of account in determining the fair value of a liability. Specifically, it requires an entity to exclude any third-party credit enhancements that are issued with,hierarchy levels, and are inseparable from, a debt instrument from the fair value measurement inputs and valuation techniques. Furthermore, the update requires presentation of that debt instrument. Adoptiondisaggregated activity within the reconciliation for fair value measurements using significant unobservable (Level 3) inputs, beginning for the first quarter of EITF 08-52011. The adoption of the accounting standards update did not have a material impact on PG&E Corporation’s or the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
As a regulated entity, the financial effects of regulation based on the Regulated Operations Topic of the FASB ASC, which applies to regulated entities whoseUtility’s rates are designed to recover the costcosts of providing service (“cost-of-service rate regulation”). All of the Utility’s operations are subject to cost-of-service rate regulation.
Balance At | ||||||||
(in millions) | September 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | ||||||
| Pension benefits | $ | 1,732 | $ | 1,624 | ||||
| Energy recovery bonds | 1,219 | 1,487 | ||||||
| Deferred income tax | 982 | 847 | ||||||
| Utility retained generation | 754 | 799 | ||||||
| Price risk management | 340 | 362 | ||||||
| Environmental compliance costs | 398 | 385 | ||||||
| Unamortized loss, net of gain, on reacquired debt | 209 | 225 | ||||||
| Regulatory assets associated with plan of reorganization | 87 | 99 | ||||||
| Contract termination costs | 71 | 82 | ||||||
| Other | 139 | 86 | ||||||
| Total long-term regulatory assets | $ | 5,931 | $ | 5,996 | ||||
Balance At | ||||||||
(in millions) | September 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | ||||||
| Cost of removal obligation | $ | 2,886 | $ | 2,735 | ||||
| Public purpose programs | 521 | 442 | ||||||
| Recoveries in excess of asset retirement obligation | 498 | 226 | ||||||
| Price risk management | 82 | 81 | ||||||
| Gateway Generating Station | 65 | 67 | ||||||
| Environmental remediation insurance recoveries | 39 | 52 | ||||||
| Other | 61 | 54 | ||||||
| Total long-term regulatory liabilities | $ | 4,152 | $ | 3,657 | ||||
The Utility uses regulatory balancing accounts to accumulate differences between actual billed and unbilled revenues and the Utility’s authorized revenue requirements for the period. The Utility also uses regulatory balancing accounts to accumulate differences between incurred costs and actual billed and unbilled revenues, as well as differences between incurred costs and authorized revenue meant to recover those costs. Under-collections that are probable of recovery through regulated rates are recorded as regulatory balancing account assets. Over-collections that are probable of being creditedrefunded to customers are recorded as regulatory balancing account liabilities.
Regulatory Assets
Current Regulatory Assets
At September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the Utility had current regulatory assets of $641 million and $427 million, respectively, consisting primarily of the current portion of price risk management regulatory assets. Price risk management regulatory assets represent the deferral of unrealized losses related to price risk management derivative instruments with terms of one year or less. (See Note 7 below for further discussion.) Current regulatory assets are included in prepaid expenses and other in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Long-Term Regulatory Assets
Long-term regulatory assets are composed of the following:
| Balance at | ||||||||
| (in millions) | September 30, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | ||||||
Pension benefits | $ 1,490 | $ 1,386 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes | 1,158 | 1,027 | ||||||
Energy recovery bonds | 833 | 1,124 | ||||||
Utility retained generation | 684 | 737 | ||||||
Price risk management | 599 | 346 | ||||||
Environmental compliance costs | 393 | 408 | ||||||
Unamortized loss, net of gain, on reacquired debt | 186 | 203 | ||||||
Other | 359 | 291 | ||||||
Total long-term regulatory assets | $ 5,702 | $ 5,522 | ||||||
The regulatory asset for pension benefits represents the cumulative differences between amounts recognized for ratemaking purposes and amounts recognized in accordance with GAAP, which also includes amounts that otherwise would be fully recorded to accumulated other comprehensive loss in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. (See Note 13 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2009 Annual Report.)
The regulatory assets for deferred income taxes represent deferred income tax benefits previously passed through to customers. The CPUC requires the Utility to pass through certain tax benefits to customers by reducing rates, thereby ignoring the effect of deferred taxes on rates. Based on current regulatory ratemaking and income tax laws, the Utility expects to recover these regulatory assets over average plant depreciation lives of 1 to 45 years.
The regulatory asset for energy recovery bonds (“ERBs”) represents the refinancing of the regulatory asset provided for in the settlement agreement entered into between PG&E Corporation, the Utility, and the CPUC in 2003 to resolve the Utility’s proceeding under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (“Chapter 11 Settlement Agreement”). (See Note 4 below.) The regulatory asset is amortized over the life of the bonds, consistent with the period over which the related revenues and bond-related expenses are recognized. The Utility expects to fully recover this asset by the end of 2012 when the ERBs mature.
In connection with the Chapter 11 Settlement Agreement, the CPUC authorized the Utility to recover $1.2 billion of costs related to the Utility’s retained generation assets. The individual components of these regulatory assets are being amortized over the respective lives of the underlying generation facilities, consistent with the period over which the related revenues are recognized. The weighted average remaining life of the assets is 14 years.
Price risk management regulatory assets represent the deferral of unrealized losses related to price risk management derivative instruments with terms in excess of one year. (See Note 7 below.)
The regulatory assets for environmental compliance costs represent the portion of estimated environmental remediation costs that the Utility expects to recover in future rates as actual remediation costs are incurred. The Utility expects to recover these costs over the next 32 years. (See Note 10 below.)
The regulatory assets for unamortized loss, net of gain, on reacquired debt represent costs related to debt reacquired or redeemed prior to maturity with associated discount and debt issuance costs. These costs are expected to be recovered over the next 16 years, which is the remaining amortization period of the reacquired debt. The Utility expects to fully recover these costs by 2026.
At September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, “other” primarily consisted of regulatory assets relating to ARO expenses for decommissioning of the Utility’s fossil facilities that are probable of future recovery through the ratemaking process; costs that the Utility incurred in terminating a 30-year power purchase agreement, which are being amortized and collected in rates through September 2014; and costs incurred in relation to the Utility’s plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 that became effective in April 2004. Additionally, at September 30, 2010, “other” included removal costs associated with the replacement of old electromechanical meters with SmartMeter™ devices.
In general, the Utility does not earn a return on regulatory assets if the related costs do not accrue interest. Accordingly, the Utility earns a return only on its retained generation regulatory assets and regulatory assets for unamortized loss, net of gain, on reacquired debt.
Regulatory Liabilities
Current Regulatory Liabilities
At September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the Utility had current regulatory liabilities of $81 million and $163 million, respectively, primarily consisting of amounts that the Utility expects to refund to customers for over-collected electric transmission rates; amounts that the Utility expects to refund to electric transmission customers for their portion of settlements the Utility entered into with various electricity suppliers to resolve certain remaining Chapter 11 disputed claims; and the current portion of price risk management regulatory liabilities. Price risk management regulatory liabilities represent the deferral of unrealized gains related to price risk management derivative instruments with terms of one year or less. Current regulatory liabilities are included in current liabilities – other in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Long-Term Regulatory Liabilities
Long-term regulatory liabilities are composed of the following:
| Balance at | ||||||||
| (in millions) | September 30, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | ||||||
Cost of removal obligation | $ 3,182 | $ 2,933 | ||||||
Public purpose programs | 599 | 508 | ||||||
Recoveries in excess of ARO | 542 | 488 | ||||||
Other | 123 | 196 | ||||||
Total long-term regulatory liabilities | $ 4,446 | $ 4,125 | ||||||
The regulatory liability for the Utility’s cost of removal obligations represents differences between amounts collected in rates for asset removal costs and the asset removal costs recorded in accordance with GAAP.
The regulatory liability for public purpose programs represents amounts received from customers designated for public purpose program costs that are expected to be incurred in the future. The public purpose programs regulatory liabilities primarily consist of revenues collected from customers to pay for costs that the Utility expects to incur in the future under the California Solar Initiative program to promote the use of solar energy in residential homes and commercial, industrial, and agricultural properties, and under the Self-Generation program to promote distributed generation technologies installed on the customer’s side of the Utility meter that provide electricity and gas for all or a portion of that customer’s load.
The regulatory liability for recoveries in excess of ARO represents differences between amounts collected in rates for decommissioning the Utility’s nuclear power facilities and the ARO expenses recorded in accordance with GAAP. Decommissioning costs recovered in rates are placed in nuclear decommissioning trusts. The regulatory liability for recoveries in excess of ARO also represents the deferral of realized and unrealized gains and losses on those nuclear decommissioning trust assets.
“Other” at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 primarily consisted of regulatory liabilities related to the deferral of unrealized gains related to price risk management derivative instruments with terms in excess of one year, the gain associated with the Utility’s acquisition of the permits and other assets related to the Gateway Generating Station as part of a settlement that the Utility entered into with Mirant Corporation, and insurance recoveries for hazardous substance remediation.
Regulatory Balancing Accounts
The Utility’s current regulatory balancing accounts represent the amountamounts expected to be received from or refunded to or received from the Utility’s customers through authorized rate adjustments within the next 12 months. Regulatory balancing accounts that the Utility does not expect to collect or refund in the next 12 months are included in Other Noncurrent Assetsother noncurrent assets – Regulatoryregulatory assets and Noncurrent Liabilitiesnoncurrent liabilities – Regulatoryregulatory liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Current Regulatory Balancing Accounts, net
Receivable (Payable) | ||||||||
Balance At | ||||||||
| (in millions) | September 30, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | ||||||
| Utility generation | $ | 199 | $ | 164 | ||||
| Gas fixed cost | 167 | 60 | ||||||
| Transmission revenue | 147 | 173 | ||||||
| Public purpose programs | (70 | ) | (263 | ) | ||||
| Energy procurement costs | (117 | ) | 598 | |||||
| Energy recovery bonds | (167 | ) | (231 | ) | ||||
| Other | 94 | (34 | ) | |||||
Total regulatory balancing accounts, net | $ | 253 | $ | 467 | ||||
| Receivable (Payable) | ||||||||
| Balance at | ||||||||
| (in millions) | September 30, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | ||||||
Utility generation | $ 223 | $ 355 | ||||||
Public purpose programs | 158 | 83 | ||||||
Gas fixed cost | 134 | 93 | ||||||
Distribution revenue adjustment mechanism | 107 | 152 | ||||||
Electric transmission | (19 | ) | 114 | |||||
Energy recovery bonds | (93 | ) | (185 | ) | ||||
Other | 237 | 216 | ||||||
Total regulatory balancing accounts, net | $ 747 | $ 828 | ||||||
The utility generation balancing account is used to record and recover the authorized revenue requirements associated with Utility-owned electric generation, including capital and related non-fuel operating and maintenance expenses. The distribution revenue adjustment mechanism balancing account is used to record and recover the authorized electric distribution revenue requirements and certain other electric distribution-related authorized costs. The Utility’s recovery of these revenue requirements is independent, or “decoupled,” from the volume of sales; therefore, the Utility recognizes revenue evenly over the year, even though the level of cash collected from customers will fluctuate depending on the volume of electricity sales. During periods of more temperate weather, there is generally an under-collection in this balancing account due to lower electricity sales and lower rates. During the warmer months of summer, the under-collectionthere is generally decreasesan over-collection due to higher rates and electric usage that cause an increase in generation revenues.
The public purpose programs balancing accounts primarily track the recovery of the authorized public purpose program revenue requirements and incentive awards earned by the Utility for implementing customer energy efficiency programs. The public purpose programs primarily consist of the energy efficiency programs; low-income energy efficiency programs; research, development, and demonstration programs; and renewable energy programs.
The gas fixed cost balancing account is used to track the recovery of CPUC-authorized gas distribution revenue requirements and certain other gas-distribution relatedgas distribution-related costs. The under-collectionunder-collected or over-collectionover-collected position of this account is dependent on seasonality and volatility in gas prices.
The electric transmission revenue balancing account representsaccounts represent the difference between electric transmission wheeling revenues received by the Utility from the California Independent System Operator (“CAISO”) (on behalf of electric transmission wholesale customers) and refunds of those revenues to customers, plus interest.
The Utility is generally authorized to recover 100% of its prudently incurred electric fuel and energy procurement costs. The Utility tracks energy procurement costs in balancing accounts and files annual forecasts of energy procurement costs that it expects to incur during the following year, and rates are set to recover such expected costs.
At September 30, 20092010 and December 31, 2008, “Other” includes2009, “other” primarily consisted of the California Alternate Rates for EnergyDepartment of Water Resources (“DWR”) power charge collection balancing account, which recordsensures amounts collected from customers for DWR-delivered power are remitted to the DWR; balancing accounts that track recovery of the authorized revenue shortfall associated withrequirements and costs related to the low-income customer assistance program. Participation in the program is generally impacted by economic conditions. Program spending increases as more customers participate in the programs, resulting in an under-collection. At December 31, 2008, “Other” also included incentive awards earnedSmartMeterTM advanced metering project; and balancing accounts that track recoverable hazardous substance clean-up costs incurred by the Utility for implementing customer energy efficiency programs.
PG&E Corporation
Convertible Subordinated Notes
PG&E Corporation issued $35016,370,779 shares of common stock upon conversion of the $247 million principal amount of 5.75% SeniorPG&E Corporation’s 9.50% Convertible Subordinated Notes due April 1, 2014.
Credit Facility
At September 30, 2009,2010, PG&E Corporation had no$90 million of cash borrowings outstanding under its $187 million revolving credit facility. PG&E Corporation amended its revolving credit facility on April 27, 2009 to remove Lehman Brothers Bank, FSB (“Lehman Bank”) as a lender. Prior to the amendment, the total borrowing capacity under the revolving credit facility was $200 million, including a commitment from Lehman Bank that represented $13 million, or 7%,which had an average interest rate of the total.0.59%.
Utility
Senior Notes
On April 1, 2010, the Utility issued $250 million principal amount of 5.8% Senior Notes due March 6, 2009,1, 2037.
On September 15, 2010, the Utility issued $550 million principal amount of 6.25%3.5% Senior Notes due MarchOctober 1, 2039.
On June 11, 2009,October 12, 2010, the Utility issued $500$250 million principal amount of
Pollution Control Bonds
On April 8, 2010, the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (“CIEDB”), serving as conduit issuer, have issued various series of tax-exempt pollution control bonds for the benefit of the Utility.
On September 20, 2010, the Utility repurchased $50 million principal amount of pollution control bonds Series 2008F and $45 million principal amount of pollution control bonds Series 2008G that were subject to mandatory tender on the same date. The bonds will be reissuedremarketed in a fixed or refunded in 2009variable rate mode every 30 days until the bonds are reissued. The Utility, as bondholder, will be both the payer and the recipient of principal and interest payments on each remarketing day.
Credit Facilities and Short-Term Borrowings
On June 8, 2010, the Utility entered into a $750 million unsecured revolving credit agreement with a syndicate of lenders. Of the total credit capacity, $500 million was used to replace the $500 million Floating Rate Senior Notes that matured on June 10, 2010. The aggregate facility of $750 million includes a $75 million commitment for swingline loans, or 2010 as tax-exempt bondsloans that are not subject to AMT. Asmade available on a result, the series 2009 bonds were issuedsame-day basis and are repayable in full within 30 days. The Utility can, at a lower interest rate, reducingany time, repay amounts outstanding in whole or in part. The credit agreement expires on February 26, 2012, unless extended for additional periods at the Utility’s request and at the sole discretion of each lender.
Borrowings under the credit agreement (other than swingline loans) will bear interest expense.
The credit agreement contains covenants that are substantially similar to the covenants contained in the Utility’s existing $1.9 billion credit facility, and Short-Term Borrowings
At September 30, 2009,2010, the Utility had $273$400 million of cash borrowings outstanding under its $1.9 billion revolving credit facility which had an average interest rate of 0.45%, and no cash borrowings outstanding under its $750 million revolving credit facility. The $400 million borrowing was repaid on October 29, 2010.
At September 30, 2010, the Utility had $289 million of letters of credit outstanding under the Utility’s $1.94its $1.9 billion revolving credit facility.
The Utility amended itsUtility’s revolving credit facility on April 27, 2009 to remove Lehman Bank as a lender. Prior to the amendment, the total borrowing capacity under the revolving credit facility was $2.0 billion, including a commitment from Lehman Bank that represented $60 million, or 3%, of the total.
Energy Recovery Bonds
In 2005, PERF, a wholly owned consolidated subsidiary of the Utility, issued two separate series of ERBs in the aggregate amount of $2.7 billion in 2005.billion. The proceeds of the ERBs were used by PERF to purchase from the Utility the right, known as “recovery property,” to be paid a specified amount from a dedicated rate component.component to be collected from the Utility’s electricity customers. The total amount of ERB principal outstanding was $1.3 billion$927 million at September 30, 2009.
While PERF is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Utility, it is legally separate from the Utility. The assets of PERF, including the recovery property, of PERF are not available to creditors of the Utility or PG&E Corporation, and the recovery property is not legally an asset of the Utility or PG&E Corporation.
PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s changes in equity for the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 were as follows:
PG&E Corporation | Utility | |||||||
| (in millions) | Total Equity | Total Shareholders’ Equity | ||||||
| Balance at December 31, 2008 | $ | 9,629 | $ | 9,787 | ||||
| Net income | 957 | 983 | ||||||
| Common stock issued | 261 | - | ||||||
| Share-based compensation amortization | 17 | - | ||||||
| Common stock dividends declared and paid | (309 | ) | (468 | ) | ||||
| Common stock dividends declared but not yet paid | (156 | ) | - | |||||
| Preferred stock dividend requirement | - | (10 | ) | |||||
| Preferred stock dividend requirement of subsidiary | (10 | ) | - | |||||
| Tax benefit from employee stock plans | 4 | 3 | ||||||
| Other comprehensive income | 21 | 21 | ||||||
| Equity contribution | - | 688 | ||||||
| Balance at September 30, 2009 | $ | 10,414 | $ | 11,004 | ||||
| PG&E Corporation | Utility | |||||||
| (in millions) | Total Equity | Total Shareholders’ Equity | ||||||
Balance at December 31, 2009 | $ 10,585 | $ 11,185 | ||||||
Net income | 859 | 868 | ||||||
Common stock issued | 400 | - | ||||||
Share-based compensation expense | 28 | - | ||||||
Common stock dividends declared | (527 | ) | (537 | ) | ||||
Preferred stock dividend requirement | - | (10 | ) | |||||
Preferred stock dividend requirement of subsidiary | (10 | ) | - | |||||
Tax benefit from employee stock plans | 4 | 3 | ||||||
Other comprehensive loss | (64 | ) | (63 | ) | ||||
Equity contribution | - | 170 | ||||||
Balance at September 30, 2010 | $ 11,275 | $ 11,616 | ||||||
Between June 23 and June 29, 2010, PG&E Corporation issued 16,370,779 shares of common stock upon conversion of the $247 million principal amount of PG&E Corporation’s Convertible Subordinated Notes. In addition, for the nine months ended September 30, 2010, PG&E Corporation issued 3,766,678 shares of common stock upon the exercise of employee stock options and under its 401(k) plan and Dividend Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, PG&E Corporation contributed equity of $688$170 million to the Utility in order to maintain the 52% common equity targetratio authorized by the CPUC and to ensure that the Utility has adequate capital to fund its capital expenditures.
Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive income consists of net income and other comprehensive income, which includes certain changes in equity that are excluded from net income. Specifically, adjustments for employee benefit plans, net of tax, are recorded in other comprehensive income.
| PG&E Corporation | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Net income | $ 261 | $ 321 | $ 859 | $ 957 | ||||||||||||
Employee benefit plan adjustment, net of tax(1) | 8 | 7 | (64 | ) | 21 | |||||||||||
Comprehensive income | $ 269 | $ 328 | $ 795 | $ 978 | ||||||||||||
(1)These balances are net of income tax expense of $7 million and $5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, the income tax benefit was $42 million and for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, the income tax expense was $14 million. |
| |||||||||||||||
| Utility | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Net income | $ | 265 | $ | 353 | $ | 868 | $ | 983 | ||||||||
Employee benefit plan adjustment, net of tax(1) | 9 | 7 | (63 | ) | 21 | |||||||||||
Comprehensive income | $ | 274 | $ | 360 | $ | 805 | $ | 1,004 | ||||||||
(1)These balances are net of income tax expense of $7 million and $5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, the income tax benefit was $42 million and for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, the income tax expense was $14 million. |
| |||||||||||||||
Dividends
PG&E Corporation
During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, the Utility paid common stock dividends totaling $468 million to PG&E Corporation.
Utility
During the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, the Utility paid cashcommon stock dividends totaling $10$537 million to PG&E Corporation.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, the Utility paid dividends totaling $11 million to holders of its outstanding series of preferred stock. On September 16, 2009,15, 2010, the Board of Directors of the Utility declared a cash dividenddividends totaling $3 million on its outstanding series of preferred stock, payable on November 15, 20092010, to shareholders on record as of record on October 30, 2009.
Earnings per common share (“EPS”) is calculated utilizing the “two-class” method, by dividing the sum of distributed earnings to common shareholders and undistributed earnings allocated to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. In applying the two-class method, undistributed earnings are allocated to both common shares and participating securities. PG&E Corporation’s 9.5% Convertible Subordinated Notes (“Convertible Subordinated Notes”) aremet the criteria of participating securities as the holders were entitled to receive pass-through dividends and meet the criteria of participating securities. All of the participating securities participate in dividends on a 1:1 basis with shares of common stock.
As of September 30, 2010, all of PG&E Corporation’s Convertible Subordinated Notes have been converted into common stock. (See Note 4 above for further discussion.)
The following is a reconciliation of PG&E Corporation’s income available for common shareholders and weighted average shares of common stock outstanding for calculating basic earnings per share:
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions, except per share amounts) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Basic | ||||||||||||||||
| Income Available for Common Shareholders | $ | 318 | $ | 304 | $ | 947 | $ | 821 | ||||||||
| Less: distributed earnings to common shareholders | 156 | 140 | 465 | 419 | ||||||||||||
| Undistributed earnings | $ | 162 | $ | 164 | $ | 482 | $ | 402 | ||||||||
| Allocation of undistributed earnings to common shareholders | ||||||||||||||||
| Distributed earnings to common shareholders | $ | 156 | $ | 140 | $ | 465 | $ | 419 | ||||||||
| Undistributed earnings allocated to common shareholders | 155 | 156 | 461 | 382 | ||||||||||||
| Total common shareholders earnings | $ | 311 | $ | 296 | $ | 926 | $ | 801 | ||||||||
| Weighted average common shares outstanding, basic | 370 | 357 | 367 | 356 | ||||||||||||
| Convertible Subordinated Notes | 16 | 19 | 17 | 19 | ||||||||||||
| Weighted average common shares outstanding and participating securities | 386 | 376 | 384 | 375 | ||||||||||||
| Net earnings per common share, basic | ||||||||||||||||
Distributed earnings, basic (1) | $ | 0.42 | $ | 0.39 | $ | 1.27 | $ | 1.18 | ||||||||
| Undistributed earnings, basic | 0.42 | 0.44 | 1.26 | 1.07 | ||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 0.84 | $ | 0.83 | $ | 2.53 | $ | 2.25 | ||||||||
(1) Distributed earnings, basic may differ from actual per share amounts paid as dividends, as the EPS computation under GAAP requires the use of the weighted average, rather than the actual, number of shares outstanding. | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions, except per share amounts) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Basic | ||||||||||||||||
Income available for common shareholders | $ | 258 | $ | 318 | $ | 849 | $ | 947 | ||||||||
Less: distributed earnings to common shareholders | 179 | 156 | 527 | 465 | ||||||||||||
Undistributed earnings | $ | 79 | $ | 162 | $ | 322 | $ | 482 | ||||||||
Allocation of undistributed earnings to common shareholders | ||||||||||||||||
Distributed earnings to common shareholders | $ | 179 | $ | 156 | $ | 527 | $ | 465 | ||||||||
Undistributed earnings allocated to common shareholders | 79 | 155 | 313 | 461 | ||||||||||||
Total common shareholders earnings | $ | 258 | $ | 311 | $ | 840 | $ | 926 | ||||||||
Weighted average common shares outstanding, basic | 390 | 370 | 378 | 367 | ||||||||||||
Convertible subordinated notes | - | 16 | 11 | 17 | ||||||||||||
Weighted average common shares outstanding and participating securities | 390 | 386 | 389 | 384 | ||||||||||||
Net earnings per common share, basic | ||||||||||||||||
Distributed earnings, basic(1) | $ | 0.46 | $ | 0.42 | $ | 1.39 | $ | 1.27 | ||||||||
Undistributed earnings, basic | 0.20 | 0.42 | 0.83 | 1.26 | ||||||||||||
Total | $ | 0.66 | $ | 0.84 | $ | 2.22 | $ | 2.53 | ||||||||
(1) Distributed earnings, basic may differ from actual per share amounts paid as dividends, as the EPS computation under GAAP requires the use of the weighted average, rather than the actual, number of shares outstanding. |
| |||||||||||||||
In calculating diluted EPS, PG&E Corporation applies the if-converted“if-converted” method to reflect the dilutive effect of the Convertible Subordinated Notes to the extent that the impact is dilutive when compared to basic EPS. In addition, PG&E Corporation applies the treasury stock method of reflecting the dilutive effect of outstanding stock-based compensation in the calculation of diluted EPS.
The following is a reconciliation of PG&E Corporation’s income available for common shareholders and weighted average shares of common stock outstanding for calculating diluted earnings per shareEPS for three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009:
September 30, 2009 | ||||||||
| (in millions, except per share amounts) | Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | ||||||
| Diluted | ||||||||
| Income Available for Common Shareholders | $ | 318 | $ | 947 | ||||
| Add earnings impact of assumed conversion of participating securities: | ||||||||
Interest expense on Convertible Subordinated Notes, net of tax | 4 | 12 | ||||||
Unrealized loss on embedded derivative, net of tax | - | 2 | ||||||
| Income Available for Common Shareholders and Assumed Conversion | $ | 322 | $ | 961 | ||||
| Weighted average common shares outstanding, basic | 370 | 367 | ||||||
| Add incremental shares from assumed conversions: | ||||||||
Convertible Subordinated Notes | 16 | 17 | ||||||
Employee share-based compensation | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| Weighted average common shares outstanding, diluted | 388 | 386 | ||||||
| Total earnings per common share, diluted | $ | 0.83 | $ | 2.49 | ||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions, except per share amounts) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Diluted | ||||||||||||||||
Income available for common shareholders | $ | 258 | $ | 318 | $ | 849 | $ | 947 | ||||||||
Add earnings impact of assumed conversion of participating securities: | ||||||||||||||||
Interest expense on convertible subordinated notes, net of tax | - | 4 | 8 | 12 | ||||||||||||
Unrealized loss on embedded derivative, net of tax | - | - | - | 2 | ||||||||||||
Income available for common shareholders and assumed conversion | $ | 258 | $ | 322 | $ | 857 | $ | 961 | ||||||||
Weighted average common shares outstanding, basic | 390 | 370 | 378 | 367 | ||||||||||||
Add incremental shares from assumed conversions: | ||||||||||||||||
Convertible subordinated notes | - | 16 | 11 | 17 | ||||||||||||
Employee share-based compensation | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||||||||||||
Weighted average common shares outstanding, diluted | 392 | 388 | 391 | 386 | ||||||||||||
Total earnings per common share, diluted | $ | 0.66 | $ | 0.83 | $ | 2.19 | $ | 2.49 | ||||||||
For each of the periods presented above, the calculation of outstanding shares on a diluted basis excluded an insignificant amount of options to purchase 7,285 and 11,935 shares of PG&E Corporation common stocksecurities that were excluded from the computation of diluted EPS for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, respectively, because the exercise prices of these options were greater than the average market price of PG&E Corporation common stock during these periods.
September 30, 2008 | ||||||||
| (in millions, except per share amounts) | Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | ||||||
| Diluted | ||||||||
| Income Available for Common Shareholders | $ | 304 | $ | 821 | ||||
| Less: distributed earnings to common shareholders | 140 | 419 | ||||||
| Undistributed earnings | $ | 164 | $ | 402 | ||||
| Allocation of undistributed earnings to common shareholders | ||||||||
| Distributed earnings to common shareholders | $ | 140 | $ | 419 | ||||
| Undistributed earnings allocated to common shareholders | 156 | 382 | ||||||
| Total common shareholders earnings | $ | 296 | $ | 801 | ||||
| Weighted average common shares outstanding, basic | 357 | 356 | ||||||
| Convertible Subordinated Notes | 19 | 19 | ||||||
| Weighted average common shares outstanding and participating securities, basic | 376 | 375 | ||||||
| Weighted average common shares outstanding, basic | 357 | 356 | ||||||
| Employee share-based compensation | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| Weighted average common shares outstanding, diluted | 358 | 357 | ||||||
| Convertible Subordinated Notes | 19 | 19 | ||||||
| Weighted average common shares outstanding and participating securities, diluted | 377 | 376 | ||||||
| Net earnings per common share, diluted | ||||||||
| Distributed earnings, diluted | $ | 0.39 | $ | 1.17 | ||||
| Undistributed earnings, diluted | 0.44 | 1.07 | ||||||
| Total earnings per common share, diluted | $ | 0.83 | $ | 2.24 | ||||
Use of Derivative Instruments
The Utility faces market risk primarily related to electricity and natural gas commodity prices. Substantially allAll of the Utility’s risk management activities involving derivatives occur to reduce the volatility of commodity costs on behalf of its customers. The CPUC and the FERC allow the Utility to charge customer rates designed to recover the Utility’s reasonable costs of providing services, including the cost to obtain and deliver electricity and natural gas. As these costs are passed through to customers in rates, the Utility’s earnings are not exposed to the commodity price risk inherent in the purchase and sale of electricity and natural gas.
The Utility uses both derivative and non-derivative contracts in managing its customers’ exposure to commodity-related price risk, including:
forward contracts that commit the Utility to purchase a commodity in the future;
swap agreements that require payments to or from counterparties based upon the difference between two prices for a predetermined contractual quantity;
option contracts that provide the Utility with the right to buy a commodity at a predetermined price; and
futures contracts that are exchange-traded contracts committing the Utility to make a cash settlement at a specified price and future date.
These instruments are not held for speculative purposes and are subject to certain limitations imposed by regulatory requirements.
Commodity-Related Price Risk
Commodity-related price risk management activities that meet the definition of a derivative are recorded at fair value on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Certain commodity-related price risk management activities reduce the cash flow variability associated with fluctuating commodity prices. Prior to September 2009, the Utility designated qualifying derivative transactions as cash flow hedges for accounting purposes. As long as the ratemaking mechanisms discussed above remain in place and the Utility’s risk management activities are carried out in accordance with CPUC directives, the Utility expects to fully recover from customers, in rates, all costs related to commodity-related price risk-related derivative instruments. Therefore, all unrealized gains and losses associated with the change in fair value of these derivative instruments including those designated as cash flow hedges, are deferred and recorded within the Utility’s regulatory assets and liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. (See Note 3 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.above.) Net realized gains or losses on derivative instruments related to price risk for commodities are recorded in the cost of electricity or the cost of natural gas with corresponding increases or decreases to regulatory balancing accounts for recovery from customers. As of September 30, 2009, the Utility de-designated all cash flow hedge relationships. Due to the regulatory accounting treatment described above, the de-designation of cash flow hedge relationships had no impact on Income Available for Common Shareholders or the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.
The Utility elects the normal purchase and sale exception for qualifying commodity-related derivative instruments. Derivative instruments that require physical delivery, are probable of physical delivery in quantities that are expected to be used by the Utility over a reasonable period in the normal course of business, and do not contain pricing provisions unrelated to the commodity delivered are eligible for the normal purchase and sale exception. The fair value of instruments that are eligible for the normal purchase and sales exception are not reflected in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
The following is a discussion of the Utility’s use of derivative instruments intended to mitigate commodity-related price risk for its customers.
Electricity Procurement
The Utility obtains electricity from a diverse mix of resources, including third-party power purchase agreements, amounts allocated under California Department of Water Resources (“DWR”)DWR contracts, and its own electricity generation facilities. The amount of electricity the Utility needs to meet the demands of customers and that is not satisfied from the Utility’s own generation facilities, existing purchase contracts, or DWR contracts allocated to the Utility’s customers is subject to change for a number of reasons, including:
periodic expirations or terminations of existing electricity purchase contracts, including the DWR’s contracts;
the execution of new electricity purchase contracts;
fluctuation in the output of hydroelectric and other renewable power facilities owned or under contract;
changes in the Utility’s customers’ electricity demands due to customer and economic growth or decline, weather, implementation of new energy efficiency and demand response programs, direct access, and community choice aggregation;
the acquisition, retirement, or closure of generation facilities; and
changes in market prices that make it more economical to purchase power in the market rather than use the Utility’s existing resources.
The Utility enters into third-party power purchase agreements to ensure sufficient electricity to meet customer needs. The Utility’s third-party power purchase agreements are generally accounted for as leases, but certain third-party power purchase agreements are considered derivative instruments and, therefore, are recorded at fair value within the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.instruments. The Utility elects to use the normal purchase and sale exception for eligible derivative instruments. Derivative instruments that are eligible for the normal purchase and normal sales exception are not required to be recorded at fair value.
A portion of the Utility’s third-party power purchase agreements contain market-based pricing terms. In order to reduce the cash flow variability associated with fluctuating electricity prices,volatility in customer rates, the Utility has entered into financial swap contracts to effectively fix the price of future purchases and reduce the cash flow variability associated with fluctuating electricity prices under some of those power purchase agreements. These financial swaps are considered derivative instruments and are recorded at fair value within the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Electric Transmission Congestion Revenue Rights
The CAISO-controlledCAISO controlled electricity transmission grid used by the Utility to transmit power is subject to transmission constraints. As a result, the Utility is subject to financial risk associated with the cost of transmission congestion. The CAISO implemented its new day-ahead wholesale electricity market as part of its Market Redesign and Technology Update on April 1, 2009. The CAISO created congestion revenue rights (“CRRs”) to allow market participants, including load servingload-serving entities, to hedge the financial risk of CAISO-imposed congestion charges in the new day-ahead market. The CAISO releases CRRs through an annual and monthly process, each of which includes an allocation phase (in which load servingload-serving entities are allocated CRRs at no cost based on the customer demand or “load” they serve), and an auction phase (in which CRRs are priced at market and available to all market participants). InThe CRRs held by the third quarter of 2009, the Utility acquired CRRs through both allocation and auction.
Natural Gas Procurement (Electric Portfolio)
The Utility’s electric procurement portfolio is exposed to natural gas price risk primarily through the Utility-owned natural gas generating facilities, tolling agreements, and natural gas-indexed electricity procurement contracts. In order to reduce the future cash flow variability associated with fluctuating natural gas prices,volatility in customer rates, the Utility purchases financial instruments such as futures, swaps, and options.options to reduce future cash flow variability associated with fluctuating natural gas prices. These financial instruments are considered derivative instruments and are recorded at fair value within the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Natural Gas Procurement (Small Commercial and Residential Customers)
The Utility enters into physical natural gas commodity contracts to fulfill the needs of its small commercial and residential, or “core,” customers. (The Utility does not procure natural gas for industrial and large commercial, or “non-core,” customers.) Changes in temperature cause natural gas demand to vary daily, monthly, and seasonally. Consequently, varying volumes of gas may be purchased or sold in the multi-month, monthly, and to a lesser extent, daily spot marketmarkets to balance such seasonal supply and demand.
Volume of Derivative Activity
At September 30, 2009,2010, the volume of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s outstanding derivative contracts waswere as follows:
Contract Volumes (1) | |||||||||||||||||
Underlying Product | Instruments | Less Than 1 Year | Greater Than 1 Year But Less Than 3 Years | Greater Than 3 Years But Less Than 5 Years | Greater Than 5 Years (2) | ||||||||||||
Natural Gas (3) (MMBtus (4)) | Forwards, Futures, and Swaps | 331,103,829 | 192,707,140 | 21,277,500 | - | ||||||||||||
| Options | 136,232,644 | 86,837,080 | - | - | |||||||||||||
| Electricity (Megawatt-hours) | Forwards, Futures, and Swaps | 3,508,656 | 7,644,024 | 5,093,912 | 4,768,447 | ||||||||||||
| Options | 9,400 | 11,450 | 110,980 | 557,512 | |||||||||||||
| Congestion Revenue Rights | 55,374,468 | 64,267,318 | 59,648,715 | 107,581,890 | |||||||||||||
PG&E Corporation Equity (Shares) | Dividend Participation Rights | 16,370,789 | - | - | - | ||||||||||||
(1) Amounts shown reflect the total gross derivative volumes by commodity type that are expected to settle in each time period. | |||||||||||||||||
(2) Derivatives in this category expire between 2014 and 2022. | |||||||||||||||||
(3) Amounts shown are for the combined positions of the electric and core gas portfolios. | |||||||||||||||||
(4) Million British Thermal Units. | |||||||||||||||||
| Contract Volume(1) | ||||||||||||||||||
Underlying Product | Instruments | Less Than 1 Year | Greater Than 1 Year But Less Than 3 Years | Greater Than 3 Years But Less Than 5 Years | Greater Than 5 Years(2) | |||||||||||||
Natural Gas (3) (MMBtus(4)) | Forwards, Futures, and Swaps | 393,102,663 | 266,868,040 | 8,970,000 | - | |||||||||||||
| Options | 218,112,080 | 172,925,000 | 10,800,000 | - | ||||||||||||||
| Electricity (Megawatt-hours) | Forwards, Futures, and Swaps | 5,242,021 | 7,664,859 | 4,060,087 | 4,974,816 | |||||||||||||
| Options | 1,211,030 | - | 239,028 | 421,464 | ||||||||||||||
| Congestion Revenue Rights | 53,171,874 | 69,986,929 | 67,512,934 | 93,842,817 | ||||||||||||||
(1) Amounts shown reflect the total gross derivative volumes by commodity type that are expected to settle in each time period. |
| |||||||||||||||||
| (2) Derivatives in this category expire between 2015 and 2022. | ||||||||||||||||||
| (3)Amounts shown are for the combined positions of the electric and core gas portfolios. | ||||||||||||||||||
| (4)Million British Thermal Units. | ||||||||||||||||||
Presentation of Derivative Instruments in the Financial Statements
In PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, derivative instruments are presented on a net basis by counterparty where the right of offset exists.exists under a master netting agreement. The net balances include outstanding cash collateral associated with derivative positions.
At September 30, 2010, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s outstanding derivative balances were as follows:
| (in millions) | Gross Derivative Balance (1) | Netting (2) | Cash Collateral (2) | Total Derivative Balances | ||||||||||||
| Commodity Risk (PG&E Corporation and Utility) | ||||||||||||||||
| Current assets – prepaid expenses and other | $ 19 | $ (11 | ) | $ 52 | $ 60 | |||||||||||
| Other noncurrent assets – other | 59 | (42 | ) | 64 | 81 | |||||||||||
| Current liabilities – other | (411 | ) | 11 | 177 | (223 | ) | ||||||||||
| Noncurrent liabilities – other | (641 | ) | 42 | 239 | (360 | ) | ||||||||||
| Total commodity risk | $ (974 | ) | $ - | $ 532 | $ (442 | ) | ||||||||||
(1)See Note 8 below for a discussion of the valuation techniques used to calculate the fair value of these instruments. |
| |||||||||||||||
| (2) Positions, by counterparty, are netted where the intent and legal right to offset exist in accordance with master netting agreements. | ||||||||||||||||
At December 31, 2009, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s outstanding derivative balances were as follows:
(in millions) | Gross Derivative Balance (1) | Netting (2) | Cash Collateral (2) | Total Derivative Balances | ||||||||||||
Commodity Risk (PG&E Corporation and Utility) | ||||||||||||||||
| Current Assets – Prepaid expenses and other | $ | 48 | $ | (9 | ) | $ | 63 | $ | 102 | |||||||
| Other Noncurrent Assets – Other | 120 | (40 | ) | 21 | 101 | |||||||||||
| Current Liabilities – Other | (253 | ) | 9 | 84 | (160 | ) | ||||||||||
| Noncurrent Liabilities – Other | (379 | ) | 40 | 29 | (310 | ) | ||||||||||
| Total commodity risk | $ | (464 | ) | $ | - | $ | 197 | $ | (267 | ) | ||||||
Other Risk Instruments (3) (PG&E Corporation Only) | ||||||||||||||||
| Current Liabilities – Other | $ | (20 | ) | $ | - | $ | - | $ | (20 | ) | ||||||
| Total derivatives | $ | (484 | ) | $ | - | $ | 197 | $ | (287 | ) | ||||||
(1) See Note 8 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of the valuation techniques used to calculate the fair value of these instruments. | ||||||||||||||||
(2) Positions, by counterparty, are netted where the intent and legal right to offset exist in accordance with master netting agreements. | ||||||||||||||||
(3) This category relates to the dividend participation rights of PG&E Corporation’s Convertible Subordinated Notes. | ||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Gross Derivative Balance | Netting (1) | Cash Collateral (1) | Total Derivative Balances | ||||||||||||
| Commodity Risk(PG&E Corporation and Utility) | ||||||||||||||||
| Current assets – prepaid expenses and other | $ 76 | $ (12 | ) | $ 77 | $ 141 | |||||||||||
| Other noncurrent assets – other | 64 | (44 | ) | 13 | 33 | |||||||||||
| Current liabilities – other | (231 | ) | 12 | 54 | (165 | ) | ||||||||||
| Noncurrent liabilities – other | (390 | ) | 44 | 44 | (302 | ) | ||||||||||
| Total commodity risk | $ (481 | ) | $ - | $ 188 | $ (293 | ) | ||||||||||
| Other Risk Instruments(2) (PG&E Corporation Only) | ||||||||||||||||
| Current liabilities – other | $ (13 | ) | $ - | $ - | $ (13 | ) | ||||||||||
| Total derivatives | $ (494 | ) | $ - | $ 188 | $ (306 | ) | ||||||||||
(1) Positions, by counterparty, are netted where the intent and legal right to offset exist in accordance with master netting agreements. |
| |||||||||||||||
| (2) This category relates to the dividend participation rights of PG&E Corporation’s Convertible Subordinated Notes, which were fully converted as of September 30, 2010. | ||||||||||||||||
Gains and losses recorded on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s derivative instruments were as follows:
(in millions) | ||||
Commodity Risk (PG&E Corporation and Utility) | ||||
Unrealized gain/(loss) - Regulatory assets andliabilities (1) | $ | 32 | ||
Realized gain/(loss) - Cost of electricity(2) | (558 | ) | ||
Realized gain/(loss)- Cost of natural gas (2) | (30 | ) | ||
| Total commodity risk instruments | $ | (556 | ) | |
Other Risk Instruments(3) (PG&E Corporation Only) | ||||
| Other income, net | $ | 1 | ||
| Total other risk instruments | $ | 1 | ||
(1) Unrealized gains and losses on commodity risk-related derivative instruments are recorded to regulatory assets or liabilities, rather than being recorded to the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income. These amounts exclude the impact of cash collateral postings. | ||||
(2) These amounts are fully passed through to customers in rates. Accordingly, net income was not impacted by realized amounts on these instruments. | ||||
(3) This category relates to dividend participation rights of PG&E Corporation’s Convertible Subordinated Notes. | ||||
| Commodity Risk (PG&E Corporation and Utility) | ||||||||||||||||
| Three months ended September 30, | Nine months ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
| Unrealized gain/(loss) - regulatory assets and liabilities(1) | $ (222 | ) | $ 192 | $ (493 | ) | $ 32 | ||||||||||
| Realized gain/(loss) - cost of electricity(2) | (154 | ) | (133 | ) | (435 | ) | (558 | ) | ||||||||
| Realized gain/(loss) - cost of natural gas(2) | (6 | ) | (1 | ) | (50 | ) | (30 | ) | ||||||||
| Total commodity risk instruments | $ (382 | ) | $ 58 | $ (978 | ) | $ (556 | ) | |||||||||
(1) Unrealized gains and losses on commodity risk-related derivative instruments are recorded to regulatory assets or liabilities, rather than being recorded to the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income. These amounts exclude the impact of cash collateral postings. (2) These amounts are fully passed through to customers in rates. Accordingly, net income was not impacted by realized amounts on these instruments. |
| |||||||||||||||
Cash inflows and outflows associated with the settlement of all derivative instruments are recognized in operating cash flows on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.
The majority of the Utility’s commodity risk-related derivative instruments contain collateral posting provisions tied to the Utility’s credit rating from each of the major credit rating agencies. If the Utility’s credit rating were to fall below investment grade, the Utility would be required to immediately post additional cash to fully collateralize its net liability derivative positions.
At September 30, 2009,2010, the additional cash collateral the Utility would be required to post if its credit-risk-relatedcredit risk-related contingent features were triggered was as follows:
| (in millions) | ||||
Derivatives in a liability position with credit-risk-relatedcontingencies that are not fully collateralized | $ | (541 | ) | |
| Related derivatives in an asset position | 57 | |||
Collateral posting in the normal course of business relatedto these derivatives | 70 | |||
Net position of derivative contracts/additional collateral posting requirements (1) | $ | (414 | ) | |
(1) This calculation excludes the impact of closed but unpaid positions, as their settlement is not impacted by any of the Utility’s credit-risk-related contingencies. | ||||
(in millions) | ||||
| Derivatives in a liability position with credit-risk-related contingencies that are not fully collateralized | $ (652 | ) | ||
| Related derivatives in an asset position | 1 | |||
| Collateral posting in the normal course of business related to these derivatives | 74 | |||
| Net position of derivative contracts/additional collateral posting requirements(1) | $ (577 | ) | ||
(1) This calculation excludes the impact of closed but unpaid positions, as their settlement is not impacted by any of the Utility’s credit risk-related contingencies. | ||||
PG&E Corporation and the Utility determinemeasure their cash equivalents, trust assets, and price risk management instruments at fair value. Fair value is an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants. As such, fair value of certain assets and liabilitiesis a market-based measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or a liability. A three-tier fair value hierarchy is established as a basis for considering such assumptions and for inputs used in the valuation methodologies in measuring fair value:
Level 1—Observable inputs that reflect quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities.liabilities in active markets.
Level 2—Include other inputs that are directly or indirectly observable in the marketplace.
Level 3—Unobservable inputs which are supported by little or no market activities.
The fair value hierarchy requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value.
Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for PG&E Corporation and the Utility utilize aare summarized below (money market investments and assets held in rabbi trusts are held by PG&E Corporation and not the Utility):
| Fair Value Measurements at September 30, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | ||||||||||||
Assets: | ||||||||||||||||
Money market investments | $ 227 | $ - | $ - | $ 227 | ||||||||||||
Nuclear decommissioning trusts | ||||||||||||||||
U.S. equity securities(1) | 796 | 6 | - | 802 | ||||||||||||
Non-U.S. equity securities | 328 | - | - | 328 | ||||||||||||
U.S. government and agency securities | 757 | 48 | - | 805 | ||||||||||||
Municipal securities | - | 107 | - | 107 | ||||||||||||
Other fixed income securities | - | 80 | - | 80 | ||||||||||||
Total nuclear decommissioning trusts(2) | 1,881 | 241 | - | 2,122 | ||||||||||||
Price risk management instruments | ||||||||||||||||
Electric(3) | 83 | - | - | 83 | ||||||||||||
Total price risk management instruments | 83 | - | - | 83 | ||||||||||||
Rabbi trusts | ||||||||||||||||
Equity securities | 23 | - | - | 23 | ||||||||||||
Life insurance contracts | - | 65 | - | 65 | ||||||||||||
Total rabbi trusts | 23 | 65 | - | 88 | ||||||||||||
Long-term disability trust | ||||||||||||||||
U.S. equity securities(1) | 7 | 23 | - | 30 | ||||||||||||
Corporate debt securities(1) | - | 132 | - | 132 | ||||||||||||
Total long-term disability trust | 7 | 155 | - | 162 | ||||||||||||
Total assets | $ 2,221 | $ 461 | $ - | $ 2,682 | ||||||||||||
Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||||
Price risk management instruments | ||||||||||||||||
Electric(4) | $ - | $ 30 | $ 436 | $ 466 | ||||||||||||
Gas(5) | - | 2 | 57 | 59 | ||||||||||||
Total price risk management instruments | - | 32 | 493 | 525 | ||||||||||||
Total liabilities | $ - | $ 32 | $ 493 | $ 525 | ||||||||||||
| (1) | Level 2 balances include commingled funds, which are comprised primarily of securities traded publicly on exchanges. Price quotes for the assets held by the funds are readily observable and available. |
| (2) | Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value. |
| (3) | Balances include the impact of netting adjustments of $365 million to Level 1. Includes natural gas for electric portfolio. |
| (4) | Balances include the impact of netting adjustments of $62 million to Level 2 and $52 million to Level 3. Includes natural gas for electric portfolio. |
| (5) | Balances include the impact of netting adjustments of $53 million to Level 3. Includes natural gas for core customers. |
| Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | ||||||||||||
Assets: | ||||||||||||||||
Money market investments | $ 189 | $ - | $ 4 | $ 193 | ||||||||||||
Nuclear decommissioning trusts | ||||||||||||||||
U.S. equity securities(1) | 762 | 6 | - | 768 | ||||||||||||
Non-U.S. equity securities | 344 | - | - | 344 | ||||||||||||
U.S. government and agency securities | 653 | 51 | - | 704 | ||||||||||||
Municipal securities | 1 | 89 | - | 90 | ||||||||||||
Other fixed income securities | - | 108 | - | 108 | ||||||||||||
Total nuclear decommissioning trusts(2) | 1,760 | 254 | - | 2,014 | ||||||||||||
Rabbi trusts | ||||||||||||||||
Equity securities | 21 | - | - | 21 | ||||||||||||
Life insurance contracts | 60 | - | - | 60 | ||||||||||||
Total rabbi trusts | 81 | - | - | 81 | ||||||||||||
Long-term disability trust | ||||||||||||||||
U.S. equity securities(1) | 52 | 23 | - | 75 | ||||||||||||
Corporate debt securities(1) | - | 113 | - | 113 | ||||||||||||
Total long-term disability trust | 52 | 136 | - | 188 | ||||||||||||
Total assets | $ 2,082 | $ 390 | $ 4 | $ 2,476 | ||||||||||||
Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||||
Dividend participation rights(3) | $ - | $ - | $ 12 | $ 12 | ||||||||||||
Price risk management instruments | ||||||||||||||||
Electric(4) | 2 | 73 | 157 | 232 | ||||||||||||
Gas(5) | 1 | - | 60 | 61 | ||||||||||||
Total price risk management instruments | 3 | 73 | 217 | 293 | ||||||||||||
Other liabilities | - | - | 3 | 3 | ||||||||||||
Total liabilities | $ 3 | $ 73 | $ 232 | $ 308 | ||||||||||||
(1) Level 2 balances include commingled funds, which are comprised primarily of securities traded publicly on exchanges. Price quotes for the assets held by the funds are readily observable and available.
(2) Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value.
(3) The dividend participation rights were associated with PG&E Corporation’s Convertible Subordinated Notes which were no longer outstanding as of September 30, 2010.
(4) Balances include the impact of netting adjustments of $108 million to Level 1, $48 million to Level 2, and $19 million to Level 3. Includes natural gas for electric portfolio.
(5)Balances include the impact of netting adjustments of $13 million to Level 3. Includes natural gas for core customers.
Trust Assets
The assets held by the nuclear decommissioning trusts, the rabbi trusts related to the non-qualified deferred compensation plans, and the long-term disability trust are comprised primarily of equity securities and debt securities. Equity securities primarily include investments in common stock and commingled funds comprised of equity across multiple industry sectors in the U.S. and other regions of the world. Equity securities are generally valued based on unadjusted prices in active markets for identical transactions or unadjusted prices in active markets for similar transactions. Debt securities are comprised primarily of fixed income securities that include U.S. government and agency securities, municipal securities, and corporate debt securities. A market based valuation approach is generally used to estimate the fair value hierarchy that prioritizesof debt securities classified as Level 2 instruments in the tables above. Under a market approach, fair values are determined based on evaluated pricing data, such as broker quotes, for similar securities adjusted for observable differences. Significant inputs toused in the valuation techniques used to measuremodel generally include benchmark yield curves and issuer spreads. The external credit rating, coupon rate, and maturity of each security are considered in the valuation, as applicable. No trust assets were measured at fair value using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) at September 30, 2010.
Price Risk Management Instruments
Price risk management instruments include physical and give precedencefinancial derivative contracts, such as futures, forwards, swaps, options, and CRRs that are either exchange-traded or over-the-counter traded. Some futures, forwards, and swaps are valued using observable market prices for the underlying commodity or an identical instrument and are classified as Level 1 or Level 2 instruments. Other instruments are valued using unobservable inputs and are considered Level 3 instruments.
Certain exchange-traded contracts are classified as Level 2 measurements because the contract term extends to observable inputs in determining fair value. An instrument’s level withina period at which the hierarchymarket is no longer considered active; however, the prices are still observable. This determination is based on an analysis of the lowest levelrelevant characteristics of any significant inputthe market such as trading hours and volumes, frequency of available quotes, and open interest. In addition, a number of over -the -counter contracts are valued using unadjusted exchange prices of similar instruments in active markets. Such instruments are classified as Level 2 measurements as they are not exchange-traded instruments.
All energy-related options are classified as Level 3 and are valued using a standard option pricing model with various assumptions, including forward prices for the underlying commodity, time value at a risk free rate, and volatility. Some of these assumptions are derived from internal models as they are unobservable.The Utility’s demand response contracts with third-party aggregators of retail electricity customers contain a call option entitling the Utility to require that the aggregator reduce electric usage by the aggregator’s customers at times of peak energy demand or in response to a CAISO alert or other emergency.
The Utility holds CRRs to hedge financial risk of CAISO-imposed congestion charges in the day-ahead markets. CRRs are valued based on the forecasted settlement price at the delivery points underlying the CRR using internal models. The Utility also uses the most current annual auction prices published by the CAISO to calibrate internal models. Limited market data is available between auction dates; therefore, CRRs are classified as Level 3 measurements.
The Utility enters into power purchase agreements for the purchase of electricity to meet the demand of its customers. (See Note 7 above.) The Utility uses internal models to determine the fair value measurement. See Note 12 of these power purchase agreements. These power purchase agreements include contract terms that extend beyond a period for which an active market exists. The Utility utilizes market data for the Notesunderlying commodity to the Consolidated Financial Statementsextent that it is available in determining the 2008 Annual Report for further discussionfair value. For periods where market data is not available, the Utility extrapolates forward prices based on historical data. These power purchase agreements are considered Level 3 instruments as the determination of their fair value measurements.
PG&E Corporation | ||||||||||||||||
Fair Value Measurements at September 30, 2009 | ||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | ||||||||||||
| Assets: | ||||||||||||||||
| Money market investments (held by PG&E Corporation) | $ | 185 | $ | - | $ | 5 | $ | 190 | ||||||||
| Nuclear decommissioning trusts | ||||||||||||||||
| Equity securities | 1,081 | - | 6 | 1,087 | ||||||||||||
| U.S. government and agency issues | 661 | 52 | - | 713 | ||||||||||||
| Municipal bonds and other | - | 183 | - | 183 | ||||||||||||
Total nuclear decommissioning trusts (1) | 1,742 | 235 | 6 | 1,983 | ||||||||||||
| Rabbi trusts-equity securities | 76 | - | - | 76 | ||||||||||||
| Long-term disability trust | ||||||||||||||||
| Equity securities | 8 | - | 20 | 28 | ||||||||||||
| Corporate debt securities | - | - | 101 | 101 | ||||||||||||
| Total long-term disability trust | 8 | - | 121 | 129 | ||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 2,011 | $ | 235 | $ | 132 | $ | 2,378 | ||||||||
| Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||||
| Dividend participation rights | $ | - | $ | - | $ | 20 | $ | 20 | ||||||||
Price risk management instruments(2) | 25 | 85 | 157 | 267 | ||||||||||||
| Other | - | - | 4 | 4 | ||||||||||||
| Total liabilities | $ | 25 | $ | 85 | $ | 181 | $ | 291 | ||||||||
(1) Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value. | ||||||||||||||||
(2) Balances include the impact of netting adjustments of $76 million to Level 1, $33 million to Level 2, and $88 million to Level 3. | ||||||||||||||||
Utility | ||||||||||||||||
Fair Value Measurements at September 30, 2009 | ||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | ||||||||||||
| Assets: | ||||||||||||||||
| Nuclear decommissioning trusts | ||||||||||||||||
| Equity securities | $ | 1,081 | $ | - | $ | 6 | $ | 1,087 | ||||||||
| U.S. government and agency issues | 661 | 52 | - | 713 | ||||||||||||
| Municipal bonds and other | - | 183 | - | 183 | ||||||||||||
Total nuclear decommissioning trusts(1) | 1,742 | 235 | 6 | 1,983 | ||||||||||||
| Long-term disability trust | ||||||||||||||||
| Equity securities | 8 | - | 20 | 28 | ||||||||||||
| Corporate debt securities | - | - | 101 | 101 | ||||||||||||
| Total long-term disability trust | 8 | - | 121 | 129 | ||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 1,750 | $ | 235 | $ | 127 | $ | 2,112 | ||||||||
| Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||||
Price risk management instruments (2) | $ | 25 | $ | 85 | $ | 157 | $ | 267 | ||||||||
| Other | - | - | 4 | 4 | ||||||||||||
| Total liabilities | $ | 25 | $ | 85 | $ | 161 | $ | 271 | ||||||||
(1) Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value. | ||||||||||||||||
(2) Balances include the impact of netting adjustments of $76 million to Level 1, $33 million to Level 2, and $88 million to Level 3. | ||||||||||||||||
Transfers between Levels
PG&E Corporation and the Utility utilize a mid-market pricing convention (the midpointrecognize any transfers between bid and ask prices)levels in the fair value hierarchy as a practical expedient in valuingof the majorityend of its derivativethe reporting period. There were no significant transfers between levels for the nine month period ended September 30, 2010. The following tables present reconciliations for assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value.
| PG&E Corporation Only | PG&E Corporation and the Utility | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Money Market | Dividend Participation Rights | Price Risk Management Instruments | Nuclear Decommissioning Trusts Equity Securities (1) | Long- Term Disability Equity Securities | Long-Term Disability Corp. Debt Securities | Other Liabilities | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (liability) balance as of June 30, 2010 | $ - | $ - | $ (400 | ) | $ - | $ - | $ - | $ (2 | ) | $ (402 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Realized and unrealized gains (losses): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Included in earnings | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Included in regulatory assets and liabilities or balancing accounts | - | - | (93 | ) | - | - | - | 2 | (91 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchases, issuances, and settlements | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Transfers into Level 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Transfers out of Level 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (liability) balance as of September 30, 2010 | $ - | $ - | $ (493 | ) | $ - | $ - | $ - | $ - | $ (493 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(1) Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value.
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PG&E Corporation Only | PG&E Corporation and the Utility | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Money Market | Dividend Participation Rights | Price Risk Management Instruments | Nuclear Decommissioning Trusts Equity Securities(1) | Long- Term Disability Equity Securities | Long-Term Disability Corp. Debt Securities | Other Liabilities | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (liability) balance as of June 30, 2009 | $ 5 | $ (27 | ) | $ (189 | ) | $ 5 | $ 57 | $ 24 | $ (3 | ) | $ (128 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Realized and unrealized gains (losses): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Included in earnings | - | - | - | - | 8 | 2 | - | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Included in regulatory assets and liabilities or balancing accounts | - | - | 32 | 1 | - | - | (1 | ) | 32 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchases, issuances, and settlements | - | 7 | - | - | (45 | ) | 75 | - | 37 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Transfers into Level 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Transfers out of Level 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (liability) balance as of September 30, 2009 | $ 5 | $ (20 | ) | $ (157 | ) | $ 6 | $ 20 | $ 101 | $ (4 | ) | $ (49 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
(1) Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PG&E Corporation Only | PG&E Corporation and the Utility | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Money Market | Dividend Participation Rights | Price Risk Management Instruments | Nuclear Decommissioning Trusts Equity Securities(1) | Long- Term Disability Equity Securities | Long-Term Disability Corp. Debt Securities | Other Liabilities | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (liability) balance as of December 31, 2009 | $ 4 | $ (12 | ) | $ (217 | ) | $ - | $ - | $ - | $ (3 | ) | $ (228 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Realized and unrealized gains (losses): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Included in earnings | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Included in regulatory assets and liabilities or balancing accounts | - | - | (276 | ) | - | - | - | 3 | (273 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchases, issuances, and settlements | (4 | ) | 12 | - | - | - | - | - | 8 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Transfers into Level 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Transfers out of Level 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (liability) balance as of September 30, 2010 | $ - | $ - | $ (493 | ) | $ - | $ - | $ - | $ - | $ (493 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(1) Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value.
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PG&E Corporation Only | PG&E Corporation and the Utility | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Money Market | Dividend Participation Rights | Price Risk Management Instruments | Nuclear Decommissioning Trusts Equity Securities(1) | Long- Term Disability Equity Securities | Long-Term Disability Corp. Debt Securities | Other Liabilities | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (liability) balance as of December 31, 2008 | $ 12 | $ (42 | ) | $ (156 | ) | $ 5 | $ 54 | $ 24 | $ (2 | ) | $ (105 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Realized and unrealized gains (losses): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Included in earnings | - | 1 | - | - | 11 | 3 | - | 15 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Included in regulatory assets and liabilities or balancing accounts | - | - | (1 | ) | 1 | - | - | (2 | ) | (2 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchases, issuances, and settlements | (7 | ) | 21 | - | - | (45 | ) | 74 | - | 43 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Transfers into Level 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Transfers out of Level 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (liability) balance as of September 30, 2009 | $ 5 | $ (20 | ) | $ (157 | ) | $ 6 | $ 20 | $ 101 | $ (4 | ) | $ (49 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
(1) Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Financial Instruments
The Utility use the following methods and assumptions in estimating the fair value of financial instruments:
At September 30, | At December 31, | |||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Carrying Amount | Fair Value | Carrying Amount | Fair Value | ||||||||||||
| Debt (Note 4): | ||||||||||||||||
| PG&E Corporation | $ | 597 | $ | 1,061 | $ | 280 | $ | 739 | ||||||||
| Utility | 8,690 | 9,528 | 8,740 | 9,134 | ||||||||||||
| Energy recovery bonds (Note 4) | 1,310 | 1,357 | 1,583 | 1,564 | ||||||||||||
| At September 30, | At December 31, | |||||||||||||||
| 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Carrying Amount | Fair Value(2) | Carrying Amount | Fair Value(2) | ||||||||||||
Debt (Note 4): | ||||||||||||||||
PG&E Corporation (1) | $ 349 | $ 394 | $ 597 | $ 1,096 | ||||||||||||
Utility | 9,956 | 11,226 | 9,240 | 9,824 | ||||||||||||
Energy recovery bonds (Note 4) | 927 | 973 | 1,213 | 1,269 | ||||||||||||
(1) PG&E Corporation Convertible Subordinated Notes were no longer outstanding as of September 30, 2010. |
| |||||||||||||||
| (2)Fair values are determined using readily available quoted market prices. | ||||||||||||||||
Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Investments
The Utility classifies its investments held in the nuclear decommissioning trust as “available-for-sale.” As the day-to-day investing activities of the trusts are managed by external investment managers, the Utility is unable to assert that it has the intent and ability to hold investments to maturity. Therefore, all unrealized losses are considered other-than-temporary impairments. Gains or losses on the nuclear decommissioning trust investments are refundable or recoverable, respectively, from customers. Therefore, trust earnings are deferred and included in the regulatory liability for recoveries in excess of asset retirement obligations.ARO. There is no impact on the Utility’s earnings or accumulated other comprehensive income. (See Note 3 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.above for further discussion.)
The following table provides a summary of the fair value of thesummarizes unrealized gains and losses related to available-for-sale investments held in the Utility’s nuclear decommissioning trusts:
Maturity Date | Amortized Cost | Total Unrealized Gains | Total Unrealized Losses | Estimated (1) Fair Value | ||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Nine months ended September 30, 2009 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. government and agency issues | 2009-2038 | $ | 648 | $ | 66 | $ | (1 | ) | $ | 713 | ||||||||||
| Municipal bonds and other | 2009-2049 | 179 | 6 | (2 | ) | 183 | ||||||||||||||
| Equity securities | 546 | 543 | (2 | ) | 1,087 | |||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 1,373 | $ | 615 | $ | (5 | ) | $ | 1,983 | |||||||||||
(1) Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Amortized Cost | Total Unrealized Gains | Total Unrealized Losses | Estimated (1) Fair Value | |||||||||||||
(in millions) As of September 30, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||
| U.S. equity securities | $ 359 | $ 446 | $ (3 | ) | $ 802 | |||||||||||
| Non-U.S. equity securities | 178 | 151 | (1 | ) | 328 | |||||||||||
| U.S. government and agency securities | 710 | 95 | - | 805 | ||||||||||||
| Municipal securities | 104 | 4 | (1 | ) | 107 | |||||||||||
| Other fixed income securities | 77 | 3 | - | 80 | ||||||||||||
Total | $ 1,428 | $ 699 | $ (5 | ) | $ 2,122 | |||||||||||
As of December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||||||||
| U.S. equity securities | $ 344 | $ 425 | $ (1 | ) | $ 768 | |||||||||||
| Non-U.S. equity securities | 182 | 163 | (1 | ) | 344 | |||||||||||
| U.S. government and agency securities | 656 | 52 | (4 | ) | 704 | |||||||||||
| Municipal securities | 89 | 1 | - | 90 | ||||||||||||
| Other fixed income securities | 108 | 2 | (2 | ) | 108 | |||||||||||
Total | $ 1,379 | $ 643 | $ (8 | ) | $ 2,014 | |||||||||||
(1)Excludes taxes on appreciation of investment value. |
| |||||||||||||||
The costfollowing table summarizes the estimated fair value of debt and equity securities sold is determinedclassified by specific identification. the contractual maturity date of the security:
| At September 30, | ||||
| 2010 | ||||
| (in millions) | ||||
Less than 1 year | $ 64 | |||
1–5 years | 447 | |||
5–10 years | 238 | |||
More than 10 years | 242 | |||
Total maturities of debt securities | $ 991 | |||
The following table provides a summary of the activity for the debt and equityavailable-for-sale securities:
Nine Months Ended September 30, | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
| (in millions) | ||||||||
| Gross realized gains on sales of securities held as available-for-sale | $ | 24 | $ | 30 | ||||
| Gross realized losses on sales of securities held as available-for-sale | (52 | ) | (142 | ) | ||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
| (in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
Proceeds received from sales of securities | $ 277 | $ 223 | $ 962 | $ 1,177 | ||||||||||||
| Gross realized gains on sales of securities held as available-for-sale | 4 | 12 | 26 | 24 | ||||||||||||
| Gross realized losses on sales of securities held as available-for-sale | (2 | ) | (2 | ) | (8 | ) | (52 | ) | ||||||||
In general, investments held in the nuclear decommissioning trusttrusts are exposed to various risks, such as interest rate, credit, and market volatility risks. Due to the level of risk associated with certain investment securities, itIt is reasonably possible that changes in the market values of investment securities could occur in the near term, and such changes could materially affect the trusts’ fair value.
PG&E Corporation Only | PG&E Corporation and the Utility | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Money Market | Dividend Participation Rights | Price Risk Management Instruments | Nuclear Decommission-ing Trusts Equity Securities (1) | Long-Term Disability Equity Securities | Long-Term Disability Corp. Debt Securities | Other | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (Liability) Balance as of January 1, 2009 | $ | 12 | $ | (42 | ) | $ | (156 | ) | $ | 5 | $ | 54 | $ | 24 | $ | (2 | ) | $ | (105 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Realized and unrealized gains (losses): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Included in earnings | - | 1 | - | - | 11 | 3 | - | 15 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Included in regulatory assets and liabilities or balancing accounts | - | - | (1 | ) | 1 | - | - | (2 | ) | (2 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchases, issuances, and settlements | (7 | ) | 21 | - | - | (45 | ) | 74 | - | 43 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Transfers in to Level 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (Liability) Balance as of September 30, 2009 | $ | 5 | $ | (20 | ) | $ | (157 | ) | $ | 6 | $ | 20 | $ | 101 | $ | (4 | ) | $ | (49 | ) | ||||||||||||
(1) Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PG&E Corporation Only | PG&E Corporation and the Utility | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Money Market | Dividend Participation Rights | Price Risk Management Instruments | Nuclear Decommission-ing Trusts Equity Securities (1) | Long-term Disability Equity Securities | Long-term Disability Corp. Debt Securities | Other | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (Liability) Balance as of July 1, 2009 | $ | 5 | $ | (27 | ) | $ | (189 | ) | $ | 5 | $ | 57 | $ | 24 | $ | (3 | ) | $ | (128 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Realized and unrealized gains (losses): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Included in earnings | - | - | - | - | 8 | 2 | - | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Included in regulatory assets and liabilities or balancing accounts | - | - | 32 | 1 | - | - | (1 | ) | 32 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchases, issuances, and settlements | - | 7 | - | - | (45 | ) | 75 | - | 37 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Transfers in to Level 3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Asset (Liability) Balance as of September 30, 2009 | $ | 5 | $ | (20 | ) | $ | (157 | ) | $ | 6 | $ | 20 | $ | 101 | $ | (4 | ) | $ | (49 | ) | ||||||||||||
(1) Excludes deferred taxes on appreciation of investment value. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Utility revenues from: | ||||||||||||||||
Administrative services provided to PG&E Corporation | $ | 2 | $ | - | $ | 4 | $ | 2 | ||||||||
| Utility expenses from: | ||||||||||||||||
| Administrative services received from PG&E Corporation | $ | 14 | $ | 34 | $ | 47 | $ | 86 | ||||||||
| Utility employee benefit due to PG&E Corporation | 4 | 5 | 13 | 16 | ||||||||||||
Various electricity suppliers filed claims in the Utility’s proceeding under Chapter 11 seeking payment for energy supplied to the Utility’s customers through the wholesale electricity markets operated by the CAISO and the California Power Exchange (“PX”) between May 2000 and June 2001. These claims, which the Utility disputes, are being addressed in various FERC and judicial proceedings in which the State of California, the Utility, and other electricity purchasers are seeking refunds from electricity suppliers, including municipal and governmental entities, for overcharges incurred in the CAISO and the PX wholesale electricity markets between May 2000 and June 2001.
While the FERC and judicial proceedings have been pending, the Utility entered into a number of settlements with various electricity suppliers to resolve some of these disputed claims and to resolve the Utility’s refund claims against these electricity suppliers. These settlement agreements provide that the amounts payable by the parties are, in some instances, subject to adjustment based on the outcome of the various refund offset and interest issues being considered by the FERC. The proceeds from these settlements, after deductions for contingencies based on the outcome of the various refund offset and interest issues being considered by the FERC, will continue to be refunded to customers in rates. Additional settlement discussions with other electricity suppliers are ongoing. Any net refunds, claim offsets, or other credits that the Utility receives from energy suppliers through resolution of the remaining disputed claims, either through settlement or the conclusion of the various FERC and judicial proceedings, will also be creditedrefunded to customers.
The following table presents the changes in the remaining disputed claims liability and interest accrued from December 31, 20082009 to September 30, 2009:
| (in millions) | ||||
| Balance at December 31, 2008 | $ | 1,750 | ||
| Interest accrued | 45 | |||
| Less: Supplier Settlements | (90 | ) | ||
| Less: August 26, 2009 payment | (700 | ) | ||
| Balance at September 30, 2009 | $ | 1,005 | ||
| (in millions) | ||||
Balance at December 31, 2009 | $ 946 | |||
Interest accrued | 23 | |||
Less: supplier settlements | (41 | ) | ||
Balance at September 30, 2010 | $ 928 | |||
At September 30, 2009,2010, the Utility’s net disputed claims liability was $1,005$928 million, consisting of $816$746 million of remaining disputed claims (classified on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets within Accountsaccounts payable – Disputeddisputed claims and customer refunds) and interest accrued at the FERC-ordered rate of $683$676 million (classified on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets within Interestinterest payable) partially offset by accounts receivable from the CAISO and the PX of $494 million (classified on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets within Accountsaccounts receivable – Customers)other).
Interest accrues on the liability for disputed claims at the FERC-ordered rate, which is higher than the rate earned by the Utility on the escrow balance. Although the Utility has been collecting the difference between the accrued interest and the earned interest from customers, this amount is not held in escrow. If the amount of interest accrued at the FERC-ordered rate is greater than the amount of interest ultimately determined to be owed with respect to disputed claims, the Utility would refund to customers any excess net interest collected from customers. The amount of any interest that the Utility may be required to pay will depend on the final amounts to be paid by the Utility with respect to the disputed claims.
PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to predict when the FERC or judicial proceedings that are still pending will be resolved, and the amount of any potential refunds that the Utility may receive or the amount of disputed claims, including interest that the Utility will be required to pay.
PG&E Corporation and the Utility have substantial financial commitments in connection with agreements entered into to support the Utility’s operating activities. PG&E Corporation and the Utility also have significant contingencies arising from their operations, including contingencies related to guarantees, regulatory proceedings, nuclear operations, environmental compliance and remediation, tax matters, and legal matters.
Commitments
Utility
Third-Party Power Purchase Agreements
As part of the ordinary course of business, the Utility enters into various agreements to purchase power and electric capacity. The price of purchased power may be fixed or variable. Variable pricing is generally based on the current market price of either gas or electricity at the date of purchase. Forward prices at September 30, 2009 are used to determine the undiscounted future expected payments for contracts with variable pricing terms.
At September 30, 2009,2010, the undiscounted future expected power purchase agreement payments were as follows:
| (in millions) | ||||
| 2009 | $ | 535 | ||
| 2010 | 2,165 | |||
| 2011 | 2,111 | |||
| 2012 | 2,211 | |||
| 2013 | 2,209 | |||
| Thereafter | 36,141 | |||
| Total | $ | 45,372 | ||
| (in millions) | ||||
2010 | $ 600 | |||
2011 | 2,424 | |||
2012 | 2,483 | |||
2013 | 2,958 | |||
2014 | 3,188 | |||
Thereafter | 54,375 | |||
Total | $ 66,028 | |||
Payments made by the Utility under power purchase agreements amounted to $1,809$1,791 million and $3,631$1,809 million for the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 and September 30, 2008,2009, respectively. The amounts above do not include payments related to the DWR purchases for the benefit of the Utility’s customers, as the Utility only acts as an agent for the DWR.
Some of the power purchase agreements that the Utility entered into with independent power producers that are qualifying co-generation facilities and qualifying small power production facilities (“QFs”)QF”s) are treated as capital leases. The following table shows the future fixed capacity payments due under the QF contracts that are treated as capital leases. (These amounts are also included in the third-party power purchase agreements table above.) The fixed capacity payments are discounted to their present value in the table below using the Utility’s incremental borrowing rate at the inception of the leases. The amount of this discount is shown in the table below as the Amountamount representing interest.
| (in millions) | ||||
| 2009 | $ | 11 | ||
| 2010 | 50 | |||
| 2011 | 50 | |||
| 2012 | 50 | |||
| 2013 | 50 | |||
| Thereafter | 206 | |||
| Total fixed capacity payments | 417 | |||
| Less: Amount representing interest | 95 | |||
| Present value of fixed capacity payments | $ | 322 | ||
| (in millions) | ||||
2010 | $ 11 | |||
2011 | 50 | |||
2012 | 50 | |||
2013 | 50 | |||
2014 | 42 | |||
Thereafter | 162 | |||
Total fixed capacity payments | 365 | |||
Amount representing interest | 77 | |||
Present value of fixed capacity payments | $ 288 | |||
Minimum lease payments associated with the lease obligation are included in Costcost of electricity on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income. The timing of the Utility’s recognition of the lease expense conforms to the ratemaking treatment for the Utility’s recovery of the cost of electricity. The QF contracts that are treated as capital leases expire between April 2014 and September 2021.
At September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, PG&E Corporation and the Utility had, respectively, $33 million and $32 million included in current liabilities – other, and $255 million and $282 million included in noncurrent liabilities – other, respectively representing the present value of the fixed capacity payments due under these contracts recorded on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The corresponding assets at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 of $288 million and $314 million, including amortization of $120 million and $94 million, respectively, are basedincluded in property, plant, and equipment on PG&E Corporation’s and the QF’s total available capacity and contractual capacity commitment. Capacity payments may be adjusted if the QF exceeds or fails to meet performance requirements specified in the applicable power purchase agreement.
Natural Gas Supply, Transportation, and TransportationStorage Commitments
The Utility purchases natural gas directly from producers and marketers in both Canada and the United States to serve its core customers. The contract lengths and natural gas sources of the Utility’s portfolio of natural gas procurement contracts can fluctuate based on market conditions. The Utility also contracts for natural gas transportation to transport natural gas from the points at which the Utility takes delivery (typically in Canada and the southwestern United States)States supply basins) to the points at which the Utility’s natural gas transportation system begins.
The Utility also purchases natural gas to fuel its owned-generation facilities. Contract terms typically range in length from one to three years.
At September 30, 2009,2010, the Utility’s undiscounted obligations for natural gas purchases, and gas transportation services, and gas storage were as follows:
| (in millions) | ||||
| 2009 | $ | 341 | ||
| 2010 | 610 | |||
| 2011 | 124 | |||
| 2012 | 49 | |||
| 2013 | 42 | |||
| Thereafter | 157 | |||
| Total | $ | 1,323 | ||
| (in millions) | ||||
2010 | $ 301 | |||
2011 | 550 | |||
2012 | 84 | |||
2013 | 68 | |||
2014 | 49 | |||
Thereafter | 115 | |||
Total(1) | $ 1,167 | |||
| ||||
(1) Total does not include Ruby Pipeline reservation cost commitment described below. | ||||
Payments for natural gas purchases, and gas transportation services, and gas storage amounted to $959$1,183 million and $2,227$959 million for the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 and September 30, 2008,2009, respectively.
Ruby Pipeline
On April 5, 2010, the FERC issued an order authorizing El Paso Corporation to construct, operate, and maintain its proposed 675-mile gas transmission pipeline (“Ruby Pipeline”), which would begin at the Opal Hub in Wyoming and terminate at the Malin, Oregon, interconnect, near California’s northern border and have an initial capacity of 1.5 billion cubic feet per day. Construction began in July 2010, and the facilities are scheduled to be in service in the spring of 2011. The Utility has contracted for firm service rights on the Ruby Pipeline of approximately 0.4 billion cubic feet per day beginning in 2011. Under these agreements the Utility will have a cumulative commitment of $1.4 billion over 15 years.
Nuclear Fuel Agreements
The Utility has entered into several purchase agreements for nuclear fuel. These agreements have terms ranging from 1 to 1614 years and are intended to ensure long-term fuel supply. The contracts for uranium and for conversion and enrichment services provide for 100% coverage of reactor requirements through 2013,2014, while contracts for fuel fabrication services provide for 100% coverage of reactor requirements through 2011. The Utility relies on a number of international producers of nuclear fuel in order to diversify its sources and provide security of supply. Pricing terms are also diversified, ranging from market-based prices to base prices that are escalated using published indices. New agreements are primarily based on forward market pricing and will begin to impact nuclear fuel costs starting in 2010.
At September 30, 2009,2010, the undiscounted obligations under nuclear fuel agreements were as follows:
| (in millions) | ||||
| 2009 | $ | 153 | ||
| 2010 | 108 | |||
| 2011 | 100 | |||
| 2012 | 90 | |||
| 2013 | 118 | |||
| Thereafter | 1,226 | |||
| Total | $ | 1,795 | ||
| (in millions) | ||||
2010 | $ 15 | |||
2011 | 82 | |||
2012 | 69 | |||
2013 | 107 | |||
2014 | 135 | |||
Thereafter | 1,215 | |||
Total | $ 1,623 | |||
Payments for nuclear fuel amounted to $67$140 million and $96$67 million for the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 and September 30, 2008,2009, respectively.
Contingencies
PG&E Corporation
PG&E Corporation retains a guarantee related to certain indemnity obligations of its former subsidiary, National Energy & Gas Transmission, Inc. (“NEGT”), that were issued to the purchaser of an NEGT subsidiary company.company in 2000. PG&E Corporation’s soleprimary remaining exposure relates to any potential environmental obligations that were known to NEGT at the time of the sale but not disclosed to the purchaser, and is limited to $150 million. PG&E Corporation has not received any claims nor does it consider it probable that any claims will be made under the guarantee. PG&E Corporation believes that its potential exposure under this guarantee would not have a material impact on its financial condition or results of operations.
Utility
Energy Efficiency Programs and Incentive Ratemaking
The CPUC has established a ratemaking mechanism to Recover Hydroelectric Facility Divestiture Costs
On September 28, 2010, a proposed decision was issued by the assigned CPUC administrative law judge recommending that no additional incentive revenues be awarded to the Utility. Also, on September 28, 2010, an alternate proposed decision was issued by a CPUC commissioner recommending that the Utility incurred in connection with its effortsbe awarded additional incentive revenues of $40 million, an amount equal to determine the market value of its hydroelectric generation facilities in 2000 and 2001. These efforts were undertaken as requiredamounts that had been held back from the interim awards.
The CPUC is scheduled to issue a final decision to complete the true-up process by the CPUC in connection withend of 2010. PG&E Corporation and the proposed divestitureUtility are unable to predict the amount, if any, of the facilities to further the development of a competitive generation market in California. The CPUC subsequently withdrew this requirement. The Utility continues to own its hydroelectric generation assets. The Utility expectsadditional incentive revenues that the rate adjustments necessary to recover these authorized costsUtility will be combined with other rate adjustments inreceive for the Utility’s annual electric rate true-up proceeding. These rate changes are expected to become effective in January 2010.
Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage Proceedings
As part of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Congress authorized the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) and electric utilities with commercial nuclear power plants to enter into contracts under which the DOE would be required to dispose of the utilities’ spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste no later than January 31, 1998, in exchange for fees paid by the utilities. In 1983, the DOE entered into a contract with the Utility to dispose of nuclear waste from the Utility’s two nuclear generating units at Diablo Canyon Power Plant (“Diablo Canyon”) and its retired nuclear facility at Humboldt Bay (“Humboldt Bay Unit 3”). The DOE failed to develop a permanent storage site by January 31, 1998.
Because the DOE failed to develop a permanent storage site, the Utility obtained a permit from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (“NRC”) to build an on-site dry cask storage facility to store spent fuel at Diablo Canyon through at least 2024. The construction of the dry cask storage facility is complete andcomplete. During 2009, the movement ofUtility moved all the spent nuclear fuel that was scheduled to be moved into dry cask storage began in June 2009.
As a result of the DOE’s failure to build a national repository for nuclear waste, the Utility and other nuclear power plant owners sued the DOE to recover costs that they incurred to build on-site spent nuclear fuel storage facilities. The Utility seekssought to recover $92 million of costs that it incurred through 2004. After several years of litigation, on March 30, 2010, the DOE now concedes thatU.S. Court of Federal Claims awarded the Utility is entitled to recover approximately $82 million$89 million. The DOE filed an appeal of these costs, but the DOE continues to dispute the remaining amount. The trial to determine the appropriate method to calculate the amounts owed to the Utility beganthis decision on October 15, 2009. May 28, 2010.
The Utility also will seek to recover costs incurred after 2004at least $188 million between 2005 and 2009 to build on-site storage facilities.
On January 29, 2009, the CPUC established a new rulemaking proceeding to modify the existing incentive ratemaking mechanism for programs beginning in 2009 and future years, to adopt a new framework to review the utilities’ 2006-2008 program performance for the second interim claim, and to conduct a final review of the utilities’ performance over the 2006-2008 program period. On May 21, 2009, the Utility, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Southern California Gas Company, and the Natural Resources Defense Council jointly requested that the CPUC approve a proposed settlement to resolve the utilities’ second interim claims and their final 2006-2008 true-up incentive claims. On July 10, 2009, the Utility submitted calculations, based on the methodology included in the proposed settlement, indicating that the Utility would be entitled to earn the remaining amount of the maximum incentives that could be earned for the 2006-2008 period. Based on the holdback amount proposed in the settlement, the Utility would be entitled to receive $76.6 million in incentive earnings and an additional $61.9 million would be held back and subject to verification in the final 2006-2008 true-up process to be completed in 2010. The assigned administrative law judge has ruled that there will be no hearings on the settlement proposal.
The Utility has several types of nuclear insurance for the two nuclear operating units at Diablo Canyon and for its retired nuclear generation facility at Humboldt Bay Unit 3. The Utility has insurance coverage for property damages and business interruption losses as a member of Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (“NEIL”). NEIL is a mutual insurer owned by utilities with nuclear facilities. NEIL provides property damage and business interruption coverage of up to $3.24$3.2 billion per incident for Diablo Canyon. In addition, NEIL provides $131 million of property damage insurance for Humboldt Bay Unit 3. Under this insurance, if any nuclear generating facility insured by NEIL suffers a catastrophic loss causing a prolonged outage, the Utility may be required to pay an additional premium of up to $39.7$40 million per one-year policy term.
NEIL also provides coverage for damages caused by acts of terrorism at nuclear power plants. Under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 (“TRIPRA”), acts of terrorism may be “certified” by the Secretary of the Treasury. For a certified act of terrorism, NEIL can obtain compensation from the federal government and will provide up to the full policy limits to the Utility for an insured loss. If one or more non-certified acts of terrorism cause property damagedamages covered under any of the nuclear insurance policies issued by NEIL to any NEIL member, the maximum recovery under all those nuclear insurance policies may not exceed $3.24NEIL’s policy limit of $3.2 billion within a 12-month period plus theany additional amounts recovered by NEIL for these losses from reinsurance. (TRIPRA extendsCertain acts of terrorism may be “certified” by the Terrorism Risk Insurance ActSecretary of 2002 through December 31, 2014.)
Under the Price-Anderson Act, public liability claims that arise from a nuclear incidentincidents that occur at Diablo Canyon, and that occur during the transportation of material to and from Diablo Canyon are limited to $12.5$12.6 billion. As required by the Price-Anderson Act, the Utility purchased the maximum available public liability insurance of $300$375 million for Diablo Canyon. The balance of the $12.5$12.6 billion of liability protection is covered byprovided under a loss-sharing program among utilities owning nuclear reactors. Under the Price-Anderson Act, owner participation in this loss-sharing program is required for all owners of nuclear reactors that are licensed to operate, designed for the production of electrical energy, and have a rated capacity of 100 MW or higher. If a nuclear incident results in costs in excess of $300 million, then the Utility may be responsible for up to $117.5 million per reactor, with payments in each year limited to a maximum of $17.5 million per incident until the Utility has fully paid its share of the liability. Since Diablo Canyon has two nuclear reactors, each with a rated capacity of over 100 MW, theThe Utility may be assessed up to $235 million per nuclear incident under this program, with payments in each year limited to a maximum of $35 million per incident. Both the maximum assessment per reactor and the maximum yearly assessment are adjusted for inflation at least every five years. The next scheduled adjustment is due on or before October 29, 2013.
The Price-Anderson Act does not apply to public liability claims that arise from nuclear incidents that occur during shipping of nuclear material from the nuclear fuel enricher to a fuel fabricator or that occur at the fuel fabricator’s facility. Such claims are covered by nuclear liability policies purchased by the enricher and the fuel fabricator as well as by separate supplier’s and transporter’s (“S&T”) insurance policies. The Utility has an S&T policy that provides coverage for claims arising from some of these incidents up to a maximum of $375 million per incident. The Utility could incur losses that are either not covered by insurance or exceed the amount of insurance available.
In addition, the Utility has $53.3$53 million of liability insurance for Humboldt Bay Unit 3 and has a $500 million indemnification from the NRC for public liability arising from nuclear incidents, covering liabilities in excess of the $53.3$53 million of liability insurance.
| (in millions) | ||||
| Balance at December 31, 2008 | $ | 27 | ||
| Additional severance costs accrued | 72 | |||
| Less: Payments | (23 | ) | ||
| Balance at September 30, 2009 | $ | 76 | ||
Legal Matters
PG&E Corporation and the Utility are subject to various laws and regulations and, in the normal course of business, PG&E Corporation and the Utility are named as parties in a number of claims and lawsuits.
PG&E Corporation and the Utility makerecord a provision for a liability when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. PG&E Corporation and the Utility evaluate the range of reasonably estimated costs and record a liability based on the lower end of the range, unless an amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount. These accruals, and the estimates of any additional reasonably possible losses, are reviewed quarterly and are adjusted to reflect the impacts of negotiations, discovery, settlements and payments, rulings, advice of legal counsel, and other information and events pertaining to a particular matter. In assessing such contingencies, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s policy is to exclude anticipated legal costs.
Explosion and Fires in San Bruno, California
On September 9, 2010, an underground 30-inch natural gas transmission pipeline (line 132) owned and operated by the Utility ruptured in a residential area located in the City of San Bruno, California (the “San Bruno Accident”). The ensuing explosion and fire resulted in the deaths of eight people and injuries to numerous individuals. At least thirty-four houses were destroyed and many additional houses were damaged. The cause of the rupture remains unknown. The California Governor’s office declared a state of emergency in San Mateo County, where San Bruno is located, to mobilize state emergency services and resources.
On September 10, 2010, the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”) began an investigation of the San Bruno Accident. In addition to reviewing the physical evidence collected from the site and conducting further metallurgical tests, the NTSB is expected to examine, among other aspects, the performance, qualifications and experience of the relevant employees; and the emergency preparedness and response of the Utility and of public emergency personnel and other first responders. While the NTSB investigation is pending the Utility generally is prohibited from disclosing information related to the investigation without approval from the NTSB.
On September 12, 2010, the Utility announced that it would provide up to $100 million to assist affected residents and the City of San Bruno, California, to pay for (1) affected residents’ immediate expenses not otherwise covered by insurance, including temporary living expenses, insurance deductibles and immediate medical expenses; (2) property replacement, repair or purchase (in the case of homes destroyed or substantially damaged) and (3) work needed to rebuild or replace public property damaged or destroyed in the San Bruno Accident, as well as costs incurred by emergency responders and government services to respond to the fire. These payments are not intended to satisfy any potential claims for personal injury or wrongful death, which will be addressed separately.
On October 13, 2010, the NTSB released a preliminary report. The report included a timeline of events before and after the gas line rupture, but did not identify the cause of the rupture. The NTSB also identified which tests had been performed on the section of ruptured pipeline and which tests were yet to be completed. The NTSB stated that additional factual updates will be provided and distributed via media advisory as investigative information is developed.
The CPUC also has initiated an investigation of the San Bruno Accident and the safety of the Utility’s natural gas transmission pipelines in its northern and central California service territory. The CPUC has appointed an independent review panel to gather facts, review these facts, make a technical assessment of the San Bruno Accident and its root cause, and make recommendations for action by the CPUC to ensure such an accident is not repeated. These recommendations may include changes to design, construction, operation and maintenance of natural gas facilities, management practices at the Utility in the areas of pipeline integrity and public safety, regulatory and statutory changes, and other recommendations deemed appropriate, including whether there are systemic management problems at the Utility and whether greater resources are needed to achieve fundamental infrastructure improvement. The Utility is committed to working with the NTSB, the CPUC, and the independent panel to determine the cause of the rupture.
Various lawsuits, including two class action lawsuits, have been filed by residents of San Bruno in California state courts against PG&E Corporation and the Utility. The class action lawsuits allege causes of action for strict liability, negligence, public nuisance, private nuisance, and declaratory relief, including a demand that the $100 million the Utility announced would be available for assistance (discussed above) be placed under court supervision. In addition, some of these lawsuits seek recovery for wrongful death, property damage, and personal injury. Several other residents also have submitted damage claims to the Utility.
As of September 30, 2010, the Utility has recorded a provision of $220 million for estimated third-party claims related to the San Bruno Accident, including personal injury and property damage claims, damage to infrastructure, emergency response, and other damage claims. The provision is included in operating and maintenance expense in PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income, and other current liabilities in PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets for the period ended September 30, 2010. The Utility estimates that it may incur as much as $400 million for third-party claims depending on the final outcome of the NTSB and CPUC investigations and the number, nature, and value of third-party claims. This range of estimates incorporates up to $100 million that the Utility has stated it would provide the affected residents and the City of San Bruno. The process for estimating costs associated with third-party claims relating to the San Bruno Accident requires management to exercise significant judgment based on a number of assumptions and subjective factors. As more information becomes known, including information resulting from the NTSB and CPUC investigations, management’s estimates and assumptions regarding the financial impact of the San Bruno Accident may change.
The Utility maintains liability insurance for damages in the approximate amount of $992 million in excess of a $10 million deductible. Although PG&E Corporation and the Utility currently consider it likely that most of the costs the Utility incurs for third-party claims relating to the San Bruno Accident will ultimately be covered by this insurance, no amounts for insurance recoveries have been recorded as of September 30, 2010. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to predict the amount and timing of insurance recoveries.
Other Legal Matters
The accrued liability for legal matters (other than those related to the San Bruno Accident as discussed above) is included in PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Current Liabilitiescurrent liabilities – Otherother in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets and totaled $51$46 million at September 30, 20092010 and $72$57 million at December 31, 2008. After2009. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are not able to predict the ultimate outcome of these various legal matters, but after consideration of these accruals, PG&E Corporation and the Utility do not expectbelieve that losses associated with legalthese matters would have a material adverse impact on their financial condition andor results of operations.
Environmental Matters
The Utility has been, and may be required to pay for environmental remediation at sites where it has been, or may be, a potentially responsible party under federal and state environmental laws. These sites include former manufactured gas plant (“MGP”) sites, power plant sites, gas gathering sites, sites where natural gas compressor stations are located, and sites used by the Utility for the storage, recycling, or disposal of potentially hazardous substances. Under federal and California laws, the Utility may be responsible for remediation of hazardous substances even if it did not deposit those substances on the site.
Given the complexities of the legal and regulatory environment and the inherent uncertainties involved in the early stages of a remediation project, the process for estimating remediation liabilities is subjective and requires significant judgment. The Utility records an environmental remediation liability when site assessments indicate that remediation is probable and it can reasonably estimate the loss within a range of possible amounts.
The Utility records an environmental remediation liability based on the lower end of the range of estimated costs, unless an amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount. Amounts recorded are not discounted to their present value.
The Utility had an undiscounted gross environmental remediation liability of $608 million at September 30, 2010 and $586 million at December 31, 2009. The following table presents the changes in the environmental remediation liability from December 31, 2009:
| (in millions) | ||||
Balance at December 31, 2009 | $ 586 | |||
Additional remediation costs accrued: | ||||
Transfer to regulatory account for recovery | 86 | |||
Amounts not recoverable from customers | 21 | |||
Less: Payments | (85 | ) | ||
Balance at September 30, 2010 | $ 608 | |||
The $608 million accrued at September 30, 2010 consists of the following:
$41 million for remediation at the Utility’s natural gas compressor site located near Hinkley, California;
$173 million for remediation at the Utility’s natural gas compressor site located on the California border, near Topock, Arizona;
$87 million related to remediation at divested generation facilities;
$116 million related to remediation costs for the Utility’s generation and other facilities and for third-party disposal sites;
$141 million related to investigation and/or remediation costs at former MGP sites owned by the Utility or third parties (including those sites that are the subject of remediation orders by environmental agencies or claims by the current owners of the former MGP sites); and
$50 million related to remediation decommissioning fossil-fueled sites.
The Utility has a program, in cooperation with the California Environmental Protection Agency, to evaluate and take appropriate action to mitigate any potential environmental concerns posed by certain former MGPs located throughout the Utility’s service territory. Of the forty one MGP sites owned or operated by the Utility, forty have been or are in the process of being investigated and/or remediated, and the Utility is developing a strategy to investigate and remediate the last site.
Of the $608 million environmental remediation liability, the Utility expects to recover $323 million through the CPUC-approved ratemaking mechanism that authorizes the Utility to recover 90% of hazardous waste remediation costs without a reasonableness review (excluding any remediation associated with the Hinkley natural gas compressor site) and $121 million through the ratemaking mechanism that authorizes the Utility to recover 100% of remediation costs for decommissioning fossil-fueled sites and certain of the Utility’s transmission stations. The Utility also recovers its costs from insurance carriers and from other third parties whenever possible. Any amounts collected in excess of the Utility’s ultimate obligations may be subject to refund to customers.
Although the Utility has provided for known environmental obligations that are probable and reasonably estimable, estimated costs may vary significantly from actual costs, and the amount of additional future costs may be material to results of operations in the period in which they are recognized. The Utility’s undiscounted future costs could increase to as much as $1.1 billion if the extent of contamination or necessary remediation is greater than anticipated or if the other potentially responsible parties are not financially able to contribute to these costs, and could increase further if the Utility chooses to remediate beyond regulatory requirements.
Tax Matters
PG&E Corporation and the Utility receive a federal subsidy for maintaining a retiree medical benefit plan with prescription drug benefits that is actuarially equivalent to Medicare Part D. For federal income tax purposes, the subsidy was deductible when contributed to the benefit plan maintained for these benefits. On March 30, 2010, federal healthcare legislation was signed eliminating the deduction for subsidy contributions after 2012. As a result, PG&E Corporation and the Utility recognized an expense of $20 million in the first quarter of 2010 to reverse previously recognized federal tax benefits (recorded as an increase to income tax provision and a reduction to deferred income tax assets for subsidy amounts included in the calculation of accrued retiree medical benefit obligation).
On September 29, 2010, PG&E Corporation received the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) examination report for the 2005 to 2007 audit years and resolved substantially all matters except for several items that will be discussed with the IRS Appeals office. Included in the 2005 to 2007 audit was the resolution of the change in accounting method related to the capitalization of indirect service costs for those years. As a result, PG&E Corporation recorded a $25 million reduction to income tax expense in the third quarter of 2010.
For tax years 2008 through 2010, PG&E Corporation participates in the Compliance Assurance Process (“CAP”), a real-time IRS audit intended to expedite matter resolution. The CAP audit culminates with a letter from the IRS indicating their acceptance of the return. The IRS partially accepted the 2008 return, withholding two issues for further review. The most significant of these relates to a tax accounting method change filed by PG&E Corporation to accelerate the amount of deductible repairs. While the IRS approved PG&E Corporation’s request for a change in method, the IRS will audit the methodology to determine the proper deduction. This audit has not progressed significantly because the IRS is working with the utility industry to resolve this matter in a consistent manner for all utilities before auditing individual companies.
On August 24, 2010, the IRS accepted PG&E Corporation’s 2009 tax return. The IRS has ninety days to conduct a post-filing review to ensure that the final return properly reflects the positions agreed upon.
The California Franchise Tax Board is auditing PG&E Corporation’s 2004 and 2005 combined California income tax returns, as well as the 1997-2007 amended income tax returns reflecting IRS settlements for these years and claim filings that apply only to California. It is uncertain when the Franchise Tax Board will complete the California audits.
PG&E Corporation believes that the final resolution of the federal and California audits will not have a material adverse impact on its financial condition or results of operations. PG&E Corporation is neither under audit nor subject to any material risk in any other jurisdiction.
As of September 30, 2010, PG&E Corporation has $24 million of federal and California capital loss carry forwards based on filed tax returns, of which approximately $9 million will expire if not used by December 31, 2011. For all periods presented, PG&E Corporation has provided a full valuation allowance against its deferred income tax assets for capital loss carry forwards.
For a discussion of unrecognized tax benefits, see Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2009 Annual Report. PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe there are no positions for which it is reasonably possible that the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits will significantly increase or decrease within 12 months of the reporting date.
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
PG&E Corporation, incorporated in California in 1995, is a holding company whose primary purpose is to hold interests in energy-based businesses. PG&E Corporation conducts its business principally through Pacific Gas and Electric Company (“Utility”), a public utility operating in northern and central California. The Utility engages ingenerates revenues mainly through the businessessale and delivery of electricity and natural gas distribution; electricity generation, procurement, and transmission; and natural gas procurement, transportation, and storage.to customers. PG&E Corporation became the holding company of the Utility and its subsidiaries on January 1, 1997. Both PG&E Corporation and the Utility are headquartered in San Francisco, California.
The Utility served 5.15.2 million electricity distribution customers and 4.3 million natural gas distribution customers at September 30, 2009.2010. The Utility had $42.3$44.9 billion in assets at September 30, 20092010 and generated revenues of $9.9$10.2 billion in the nine months ended September 30, 2009.
The Utility is regulated primarily by the California Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). In addition, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (“NRC”) oversees the licensing, construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Utility’s nuclear generation facilities, including the Diablo Canyon power plant (“Diablo Canyon”). The Utility generates revenues mainly throughCPUC has jurisdiction over the salerates and deliveryterms and conditions of electricityservice for the Utility’s electric and natural gas atdistribution operations, electric generation, and natural gas transportation and storage. The FERC has jurisdiction over the rates set byand terms and conditions of service governing the Utility’s electric transmission operations and over the rates and terms and conditions of service governing the Utility on its interstate natural gas transportation contracts. Before setting rates, the CPUC and the FERC. Rates are setFERC authorize the annual amount of revenue (“revenue requirements”) that the Utility is authorized to permit the Utilitycollect from its customers to recover its reasonable operating and capital costs of providing utility services. The authorized “revenue requirements” from customers. Revenuerevenue requirements are designed to allowalso provide the Utility an opportunity to recover its reasonable costs ofearn a return on “rate base” (i.e., the Utility’s net investment in facilities, equipment, and other property used or useful in providing utility services, includingservice to its customers.) The CPUC requires the Utility to maintain a returncertain capital structure (i.e., the relative weightings of common equity, preferred equity, and debt) when financing its rate base and authorizes the Utility to earn a fairspecific rate of return on its investmenteach capital component.
This is a combined quarterly report of PG&E Corporation and the Utility and should be read in Utility facilities (“rate base”). Pending regulatory proceedings that could resultconjunction with each company’s separate Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included in rate changes and affect the Utility’s revenues are discussedthis quarterly report. In addition, this quarterly report should be read in conjunction with PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s combined Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008,2009 which together withincorporates by reference each company’s audited Consolidated Financial Statements, the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, and other information incorporated by reference into(“2009 Annual Report”).
Explosion and Fires in San Bruno, California
On September 9, 2010, an underground 30-inch natural gas transmission pipeline (line 132) owned and operated by the Utility ruptured in a residential area located in the City of San Bruno, California (the “San Bruno Accident”). The ensuing explosion and fire resulted in the deaths of eight people and injuries to numerous individuals. At least thirty-four houses were destroyed and many additional houses were damaged. The cause of the rupture remains unknown. The California Governor’s office declared a state of emergency in San Mateo County, where San Bruno is located, to mobilize state emergency services and resources.
On September 10, 2010, the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”) began an investigation of the San Bruno Accident. In addition to reviewing the physical evidence collected from the site and conducting further metallurgical tests, the NTSB is expected to examine, among other aspects, the performance, qualifications and experience of the relevant employees, and the emergency preparedness and response of the Utility and of public emergency personnel and other first responders. While the NTSB investigation is pending the Utility generally is prohibited from disclosing information related to the investigation without approval from the NTSB.
On September 12, 2010, the Utility announced that it would provide up to $100 million to assist affected residents and the City of San Bruno, California, to pay for (1) affected residents’ immediate expenses not otherwise covered by insurance, including temporary living expenses, insurance deductibles, and immediate medical expenses; (2) property replacement, repair or purchase (in the case of homes destroyed or substantially damaged) and (3) work needed to rebuild or replace public property damaged or destroyed in the San Bruno Accident, as well as costs incurred by emergency responders and government services to respond to the fire. These payments are not intended to satisfy any potential claims for personal injury or wrongful death, which will be addressed separately.
On October 13, 2010, the NTSB released a preliminary report. The report included a timeline of events before and after the gas line rupture, but did not identify the cause of the rupture. The NTSB also identified which tests had been performed on the section of ruptured pipeline and which tests were yet to be completed. The NTSB stated that additional factual updates will be provided and distributed via media advisory as investigative information is developed.
The CPUC also has initiated an investigation of the San Bruno Accident and the safety of the Utility’s natural gas transmission pipelines in its northern and central California service territory. The CPUC has appointed an independent review panel to gather facts, review these facts, make a technical assessment of the San Bruno Accident and its root cause, and make recommendations for action by the CPUC to ensure such report,an accident is referrednot repeated. These recommendations may include changes to design, construction, operation and maintenance of natural gas facilities, management practices at the Utility in the areas of pipeline integrity and public safety, regulatory and statutory changes, and other recommendations deemed appropriate, including whether there are systemic management problems at the Utility and whether greater resources are needed to achieve fundamental infrastructure improvement. The Utility is committed to working with the NTSB, the CPUC, and the independent panel to determine the cause of the rupture.
Various lawsuits, including two class action lawsuits, have been filed by residents of San Bruno in California state courts against PG&E Corporation and the Utility. (See Part II, Item 1. Legal Proceedings, below.) Several other residents also have submitted damage claims to the Utility. In addition, on October 4, 2010, PG&E Corporation received a letter on behalf of a purported shareholder demanding that the PG&E Corporation Board of Directors (1) institute an independent investigation of the San Bruno Accident and related alleged safety issues; (2) seek recovery of all costs associated with such issues through legal proceedings against those determined to be responsible, including board members, officers, other employees, and third parties; and (3) adopt corporate governance initiatives and safety programs. The letter requests a response within 60 days, i.e., by December 3, 2010. PG&E Corporation intends to respond before December 3, 2010. A purported shareholder derivative action also has been filed to seek recovery on behalf of PG&E Corporation and the Utility for alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by officers and directors, among other claims.
As of September 30, 2010, the Utility has recorded a provision of $220 million for estimated third-party claims related to the San Bruno Accident, including personal injury and property damage claims, damage to infrastructure, emergency response, and other damage claims. The provision is included in operating and maintenance expense in PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income, and other current liabilities in PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets for the period ended September 30, 2010. The Utility estimates that it may incur as much as $400 million for third-party claims depending on the final outcome of the NTSB and CPUC investigations and the number, nature, and value of third-party claims. This range of estimates incorporates up to $100 million that the Utility has stated it would provide the affected residents and the City of San Bruno. The process for estimating costs associated with third-party claims relating to the San Bruno Accident requires management to exercise significant judgment based on a number of assumptions and subjective factors. As more information becomes known, including information resulting from the NTSB and CPUC investigations, management’s estimates and assumptions regarding the financial impact of the San Bruno Accident may change.
The Utility maintains liability insurance for damages in the approximate amount of $992 million in excess of a $10 million deductible. Although PG&E Corporation and the Utility currently consider it likely that most of the costs the Utility incurs for third-party claims relating to the San Bruno Accident will ultimately be covered by this quarterly reportinsurance, no amounts for insurance recoveries have been recorded as of September 30, 2010. PG&E Corporation and the “2008 Annual Report.” SignificantUtility are unable to predict the amount and timing of insurance recoveries.
Other significant developments that have occurred since the 20082009 Annual Report was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”)on February 19, 2010 are discussed in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
Summary of Changes in Earnings per Common Share and Income Available for Common Shareholders for the Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2009
PG&E Corporation’s diluted earnings per common share (“EPS”) was $0.83 for each of the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008.2010 was $0.66 compared to $0.83 for the same period in 2009. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, PG&E Corporation’s diluted EPS was $2.49$2.19 compared to $2.24$2.49 for the same period in 2008.2009. PG&E Corporation’s income available for common shareholders for the three months ended September 30, 2009 increased2010 decreased by $14$60 million, or 5%19%, to $318$258 million, compared to $304$318 million for the same period in 2008.2009. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, income available for common shareholders increaseddecreased by $126$98 million, or 15%10%, to $947$849 million, compared to $821$947 million for the same period in 2008.
Income available for common shareholders decreased for both the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, as compared to the same periods in 2009, primarily due to costs of $141 million, after tax, related to the San Bruno Accident.
For the three months ended September 30, 2009,2010, the costs related to the San Bruno Accident were partially offset by $26 million that the Utility earned on higher authorized capital investments as compared to the same period in 2008, is attributable to (1) an increase of $24 million, after tax, due to the Utility’s return on equity (“ROE”) earned on2009. In addition, net income was higher authorized capital investments, (2) a tax benefit of $10 million associated with the settlement of tax refund claims involving the 1998 and 1999 tax years, (3) a benefit of $11 million, after-tax, as compared to the same period in the prior year2009 when the Utility incurred costs to oppose certain legislation and municipalization efforts, and (4) an increase of $12 million, after tax, reflecting the sum of incentives earned for managing natural gas procurement costs and lower accrual levels for uncollectibles and environmental costs. These increases were partially offset by (1) a $30 million after tax, decrease attributable toof employee severance costs and (2) a $16 million after tax, decrease attributable toof costs to perform accelerated natural gas leak surveys and associated remedial work.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2009, as2010, the decrease in income available for common shareholders also was driven by (1) $45 million, after tax, of costs the Utility incurred to support a June 2010 ballot initiative and (2) a $19 million, after tax, charge triggered by the elimination of the tax deductibility of the Medicare Part D federal subsidy. These negative factors were partially offset by (1) an increase of $65 million, after tax, that the Utility earned on higher authorized capital investments compared to the same period in 2008, is attributable to (1) an increase2009 and (2) higher net income of $73$32 million, after tax, representing the Utility’s ROE earned on higher authorized capital investments, (2) an increase of $28 million, after tax, due to the recovery of previously incurred costs related to the Utility’s hydroelectric generation facilities, (3) a benefit of $11 million, after-tax, as compared to the same period in the prior year2009 when the Utility incurred costs to oppose certain legislation and municipalization efforts, (4)in connection with a tax benefit of $66 million associated with the settlement of tax refund claims involving the 1998 and 1999 tax years, and (5) a benefit of $24 million, after tax, as compared to the same period in the prior year when the Utility incurred higher storm andscheduled refueling outage expenses. These increases were partially offset by (1) a $39 million, after tax, decrease attributable to employee severance costs, and (2) a $32 million, after tax, decrease attributable to costs to perform accelerated natural gas leak surveys and associated remedial work.
Key Factors Affecting Results of Operations and Financial Condition
PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s results of operations and financial condition depend primarily on whether the Utility is able to operate its business within authorized revenue requirements, recover its authorized costs timely, and earn its authorized rate of return. A number of factors have had, or are expected to have, a significant impact on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s results of operations and financial condition, including:
• | The Outcome of Regulatory Proceedings. There are several rate cases that are currently pending at the CPUC and the |
| • | |
The Ability of the Utility to Control |
| • | Authorized Capital Structure, Rate of Return, and Financing.The | ||
This combined quarterly report on Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements that are necessarily subject to various risks and uncertainties. These statements are based on current estimates, expectations, and projections about future events and assumptions regarding these events and management’s knowledge of facts as of the date of this report. These forward-looking statements relate to, among other matters, estimated capital expenditures,expenditures; estimated environmental remediation, liabilities, estimated tax, liabilities,and other liabilities; estimates and assumptions used in PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s critical accounting policies; the anticipated outcome of various regulatory and legal proceedings,proceedings; estimated losses and insurance recoveries associated with the San Bruno Accident; estimated future cash flows,flows; and the level of future equity or debt issuances, andissuances. These statements are also identified by words such as “assume,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “project,” “believe,” “estimate,” “target,” “predict,” “anticipate,” “aim,” “may,” “might,” “should,” “would,” “could,” “goal,” “potential,” and similar expressions. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are not able to predict all the factors that may affect future results. Some of the factors that could cause future results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, or from historical results, include, but are not limited to:
the Utility’s ability to efficiently manage capital expenditures and its operating and maintenance expenses within authorized levels and timely recover its costs through rates;
the outcome of pending and future regulatory or legislative proceedings or investigations, including the investigations by the NTSB and CPUC into the cause of the San Bruno Accident and the safety of the Utility’s natural gas transmission pipelines in its northern and central California service territory, and whether the utility is required to incur costs to comply with regulatory or legislative mandates that it is unable to recover through rates or insurance;
the adequacy and price of electricity and natural gas supplies and whether the new day-ahead, hour-ahead, and real-time wholesale electricity markets established by the California Independent System Operator will continue to function effectively, the extent to which the Utility can manage and respond to the volatility of electricity and natural gas prices, and the ability of the Utility and its counterparties to post or return collateral;
explosions, fires, accidents, mechanical breakdowns, the disruption of information technology and systems, and similar events that may occur while operating and maintaining an electric and natural gas system in a large service territory with varying geographic conditions that can cause unplanned outages, reduce generating output, damage the Utility’s assets or operations, subject the Utility to third-party claims for property damage or personal injury, or result in the imposition of civil, criminal, or regulatory fines or penalties on the Utility;
the impact of storms, earthquakes, floods, drought, wildfires, disease, and similar natural disasters, or acts of terrorism or vandalism, that affect customer demand or that damage or disrupt the facilities, operations, or information technology and systems owned by the Utility, its customers, or third parties on which the Utility relies;
the potential impacts of climate change on the Utility’s electricity and natural gas businesses;
changes in customer demand for electricity and natural gas resulting from unanticipated population growth or decline, general economic and financial market conditions, changes in technology that include the development of alternative technologies that enable customers to increase their reliance on self-generation, or other reasons;
the occurrence of unplanned outages at the Utility’s two nuclear generating units at Diablo Canyon, the availability of nuclear fuel, the outcome of the Utility’s application to renew the operating licenses for Diablo Canyon, and potential changes in laws or regulations promulgated by the NRC or environmental agencies with respect to the storage of spent nuclear fuel, security, safety, or other matters associated with the operations at Diablo Canyon;
whether the Utility earns incentive revenues or incurs obligations under incentive ratemaking mechanisms, such as the CPUC’s incentive ratemaking mechanism relating to energy savings achieved through implementation of the utilities’ customer energy efficiency programs;
the impact of federal or state laws or regulations, or their interpretation, on energy policy and the regulation of utilities and their holding companies;
whether the Utility can successfully implement its program to install advanced meters for its electric and natural gas customers and integrate the new meters with its customer billing and other systems, the outcome of the independent investigation ordered by the CPUC and the California Legislature into customer concerns about the new meters, and the ability of the Utility to implement various rate changes including “dynamic pricing” by offering electric rates that can vary with the customer’s time of use and are more closely aligned with wholesale electricity prices;
how the CPUC interprets and enforces the financial and other conditions imposed on PG&E Corporation when it became the Utility’s holding company and the extent to which the interpretation or enforcement of these conditions has a material impact on PG&E Corporation;
the extent to which PG&E Corporation or the Utility incurs costs in connection with third-party claims or litigation, including those arising from the San Bruno Accident, that are not recoverable through insurance, rates, or from other third parties;
the ability of PG&E Corporation, the Utility, and counterparties to access capital markets and other sources of credit in a timely manner on acceptable terms;
the impact of environmental laws and regulations and the costs of compliance and remediation;
the loss of customers due to various forms of bypass and competition, including municipalization of the Utility’s electric distribution facilities, increasing levels of “direct access” by which consumers procure electricity from alternative energy providers, and implementation of “community choice aggregation,” which permits cities and counties to purchase and sell electricity for their local residents and businesses; and
the outcome of federal or state tax audits and the impact of changes in federal or state tax laws, policies, or regulations.
For more information about the significant risks that could affect the outcome of these forward-looking statements and PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s future financial condition and results of operations, see the discussion in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in the 20082009 Annual Report and the discussion below under Part II. Other Information, Item 1A. Risk Factors.in Part II below. PG&E Corporation and the Utility do not undertake an obligation to update forward-looking statements, whether in response to new information, future events, or otherwise.
The table below details certain items from the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 20092010 and 2008:2009:
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Utility | ||||||||||||||||
Electric operating revenues | $ 2,857 | $ 2,630 | $ 7,882 | $ 7,610 | ||||||||||||
Natural gas operating revenues | 656 | 605 | 2,338 | 2,250 | ||||||||||||
Total operating revenues | 3,513 | 3,235 | 10,220 | 9,860 | ||||||||||||
Cost of electricity | 1,102 | 997 | 2,885 | 2,763 | ||||||||||||
Cost of natural gas | 182 | 134 | 924 | 879 | ||||||||||||
Operating and maintenance | 1,224 | 1,047 | 3,172 | 3,143 | ||||||||||||
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 500 | 450 | 1,419 | 1,298 | ||||||||||||
Total operating expenses | 3,008 | 2,628 | 8,400 | 8,083 | ||||||||||||
Operating Income | 505 | 607 | 1,820 | 1,777 | ||||||||||||
Interest income | 3 | 3 | 7 | 29 | ||||||||||||
Interest expense | (161 | ) | (162 | ) | (481 | ) | (501 | ) | ||||||||
Other income, net | 25 | 16 | 20 | 52 | ||||||||||||
Income Before Income Taxes | 372 | 464 | 1,366 | 1,357 | ||||||||||||
Income tax provision | 107 | 111 | 498 | 374 | ||||||||||||
Net Income | 265 | 353 | 868 | 983 | ||||||||||||
Preferred stock dividend requirement | 3 | 3 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||
Income Available for Common Stock | $ 262 | $ 350 | $ 858 | $ 973 | ||||||||||||
PG&E Corporation, Eliminations, and Other(1) | ||||||||||||||||
Operating revenues | $ - | $ - | $ - | $ - | ||||||||||||
Operating expenses | 2 | - | 4 | 1 | ||||||||||||
Operating Loss | (2 | ) | - | (4 | ) | (1 | ) | |||||||||
Interest income | - | (2 | ) | - | (2 | ) | ||||||||||
Interest expense | (6 | ) | (12 | ) | (29 | ) | (32 | ) | ||||||||
Other income, net | 4 | 7 | 5 | 11 | ||||||||||||
Loss Before Income Taxes | (4 | ) | (7 | ) | (28 | ) | (24 | ) | ||||||||
Income tax provision (benefit) | - | 25 | (19 | ) | 2 | |||||||||||
Net Loss | $ (4 | ) | $ (32 | ) | $ (9 | ) | $ (26 | ) | ||||||||
Consolidated Total | ||||||||||||||||
Operating revenues | $ 3,513 | $ 3,235 | $ 10,220 | $ 9,860 | ||||||||||||
Operating expenses | 3,010 | 2,628 | 8,404 | 8,084 | ||||||||||||
Operating Income | 503 | 607 | 1,816 | 1,776 | ||||||||||||
Interest income | 3 | 1 | 7 | 27 | ||||||||||||
Interest expense | (167 | ) | (174 | ) | (510 | ) | (533 | ) | ||||||||
Other income, net | 29 | 23 | 25 | 63 | ||||||||||||
Income Before Income Taxes | 368 | 457 | 1,338 | 1,333 | ||||||||||||
Income tax provision | 107 | 136 | 479 | 376 | ||||||||||||
Net Income | 261 | 321 | 859 | 957 | ||||||||||||
Preferred stock dividend requirement of subsidiary | 3 | 3 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||
Income Available for Common Shareholders | $ 258 | $ 318 | $ 849 | $ 947 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
| (1)PG&E Corporation eliminates all intercompany transactions in consolidation. | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Utility | ||||||||||||||||
| Electric operating revenues | $ | 2,630 | $ | 2,880 | $ | 7,610 | $ | 8,039 | ||||||||
| Natural gas operating revenues | 605 | 794 | 2,250 | 2,946 | ||||||||||||
| Total operating revenues | 3,235 | 3,674 | 9,860 | 10,985 | ||||||||||||
| Cost of electricity | 997 | 1,282 | 2,763 | 3,406 | ||||||||||||
| Cost of natural gas | 134 | 351 | 879 | 1,613 | ||||||||||||
| Operating and maintenance | 1,047 | 982 | 3,143 | 3,009 | ||||||||||||
| Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 450 | 419 | 1,298 | 1,239 | ||||||||||||
| Total operating expenses | 2,628 | 3,034 | 8,083 | 9,267 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Income | 607 | 640 | 1,777 | 1,718 | ||||||||||||
| Interest income | 3 | 20 | 29 | 77 | ||||||||||||
| Interest expense | (162 | ) | (170 | ) | (501 | ) | (528 | ) | ||||||||
| Other income (expense), net | 16 | (2 | ) | 52 | 24 | |||||||||||
| Income Before Income Taxes | 464 | 488 | 1,357 | 1,291 | ||||||||||||
| Income tax provision | 111 | 167 | 374 | 421 | ||||||||||||
| Net Income | 353 | 321 | 983 | 870 | ||||||||||||
| Preferred stock dividend requirement | 3 | 3 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||
| Income Available for Common Stock | $ | 350 | $ | 318 | $ | 973 | $ | 860 | ||||||||
PG&E Corporation, Eliminations, and Other(1) | ||||||||||||||||
| Operating revenues | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | ||||||||
| Operating expenses | - | 1 | 1 | 2 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Loss | - | (1 | ) | (1 | ) | (2 | ) | |||||||||
| Interest income | (2 | ) | 3 | (2 | ) | 5 | ||||||||||
| Interest expense | (12 | ) | (8 | ) | (32 | ) | (22 | ) | ||||||||
| Other income (expense), net | 7 | (12 | ) | 11 | (28 | ) | ||||||||||
| Loss Before Income Taxes | (7 | ) | (18 | ) | (24 | ) | (47 | ) | ||||||||
| Income tax provision (benefit) | 25 | (4 | ) | 2 | (8 | ) | ||||||||||
| Net Income (Loss) | $ | (32 | ) | $ | (14 | ) | $ | (26 | ) | $ | (39 | ) | ||||
| Consolidated Total | ||||||||||||||||
| Operating revenues | $ | 3,235 | $ | 3,674 | $ | 9,860 | $ | 10,985 | ||||||||
| Operating expenses | 2,628 | 3,035 | 8,084 | 9,269 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Income | 607 | 639 | 1,776 | 1,716 | ||||||||||||
| Interest income | 1 | 23 | 27 | 82 | ||||||||||||
| Interest expense | (174 | ) | (178 | ) | (533 | ) | (550 | ) | ||||||||
| Other income (expense), net | 23 | (14 | ) | 63 | (4 | ) | ||||||||||
| Income Before Income Taxes | 457 | 470 | 1,333 | 1,244 | ||||||||||||
| Income tax provision | 136 | 163 | 376 | 413 | ||||||||||||
| Net Income | 321 | 307 | 957 | 831 | ||||||||||||
| Preferred stock dividend requirement of subsidiary | 3 | 3 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||
| Income Available for Common Shareholders | $ | 318 | $ | 304 | $ | 947 | $ | 821 | ||||||||
(1) PG&E Corporation eliminates all intercompany transactions in consolidation. | ||||||||||||||||
Utility
The following presents the Utility’s operating results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 20092010 and 2008.
Electric Operating Revenues
The Utility’s electric operating revenues consist of amounts charged to customers for electricity generation and for electric transmission and distribution services, as well as amounts charged to customers to recover the cost of electric procurement, and public purpose, energy efficiency, and demand response programs. The Utility provides electricity to residential, industrial, agricultural, and small and large commercial customers through its own generation facilities and through power purchase agreements with third parties. In addition, the Utility relies on electricity provided under long-term contracts entered into by the California Department of Water Resources (“DWR”) to meet a material portion of the Utility’s customers’ demand for electricity (“load”). The Utility’s electric operating revenues consist is satisfied by electricity provided under long-term contracts between the California Department of amounts charged to customers for electricity generationWater Resources (“DWR”) and procurement and for electric transmission and distribution services, as well as amounts charged to customers to recover the cost of public purpose, energy efficiency, and demand response programs.
The following table provides a summary of the Utility’s electric operating revenues:
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Electric revenues | $ | 3,233 | $ | 3,255 | $ | 9,066 | $ | 9,044 | ||||||||
DWR pass-through revenues(1) | (603 | ) | (375 | ) | (1,456 | ) | (1,005 | ) | ||||||||
| Total electric operating revenues | $ | 2,630 | $ | 2,880 | $ | 7,610 | $ | 8,039 | ||||||||
(1)These are revenues collected on behalf of the DWR for electricity allocated to the Utility’s customers under contracts between the DWR and power suppliers, and are not included in the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income. | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Electric revenues | $ 3,245 | $ 3,233 | $ 8,930 | $ 9,066 | ||||||||||||
DWR pass-through revenues(1) | (388 | ) | (603 | ) | (1,048 | ) | (1,456 | ) | ||||||||
Total electric operating revenues | $ 2,857 | $ 2,630 | $ 7,882 | $ 7,610 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
(1) These are revenues collected on behalf of the DWR for electricity allocated to the Utility’s customers under contracts between the DWR and power suppliers, and are not included in the Utility’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income. |
| |||||||||||||||
The Utility’s total electric operating revenues, decreasedincluding revenues intended to recover costs that are passed through to customers, increased by $250$227 million, or 9%, in the three months ended September 30, 20092010, as compared to the same period in 2009. Costs that are passed through to customers and $429do not impact net income increased by $145 million, primarily due to an increase in the cost of public purpose programs, higher costs of electric procurement, and the return of collateral from counterparties in 2009. (See “Cost of Electricity” below.) Electric operating revenues, excluding costs passed through to customers, increased by $82 million. This was primarily due to an increase in authorized base revenues of $60 million.
The Utility’s total electric operating revenues, including revenues intended to recover costs that are passed through to customers, increased by $272 million, or 5%,4% in the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, as compared to the same period in 2008,2009. Costs that are passed through to customers and do not impact net income increased by $124 million, primarily due to an increase in the following factors:
The Utility’s future electric operating revenues forwill depend on the remainderamount of 2009 and 2010 are expected to increase, as authorized by the CPUC in the 2007 GRC. The Utility’s electric operating revenues for future years are also expected to increase, asrevenue requirements authorized by the FERC in the TO rate cases and by the CPUC in the 2011 GRC. (See “Regulatory Matters” below.)
Cost of Electricity
The Utility’s cost of electricity includes purchasedcosts to purchase power costs,from third parties, certain transmission costs, the cost of fuel used in its generation facilities, and the cost of fuel supplied to other facilities under tolling agreements. These costs are passed through to customers. The Utility’s cost of electricity also includes realized gains and losses on price risk management activities. (See NotesNote 7 and 8 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.) The Utility’s cost of electricity is passed through to customers. The Utility’s cost of electricity excludes non-fuel costs associated with the Utility’s own generation facilities, which are included in Operatingoperating and maintenance expense in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income. The cost of electricity provided to the Utility customers under power purchase agreements between the DWR and various power suppliers is also excluded from the Utility’s cost of electricity.
The following table provides a summary of the Utility’s cost of electricity and the total amount and average cost of purchased power:
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Cost of purchased power | $ | 947 | $ | 1,244 | $ | 2,620 | $ | 3,286 | ||||||||
| Fuel used in own generation | 50 | 38 | 143 | 120 | ||||||||||||
| Total cost of electricity | $ | 997 | $ | 1,282 | $ | 2,763 | $ | 3,406 | ||||||||
Average cost of purchased power per kWh (1) | $ | 0.076 | $ | 0.092 | $ | 0.081 | $ | 0.090 | ||||||||
| Total purchased power (in millions of kWh) | 12,524 | 13,561 | 32,238 | 36,553 | ||||||||||||
(1) Kilowatt-hour. | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Cost of purchased power | $ 1,041 | $ 947 | $ 2,694 | $ 2,620 | ||||||||||||
Fuel used in own generation | 61 | 50 | 191 | 143 | ||||||||||||
Total cost of electricity | $ 1,102 | $ 997 | $ 2,885 | $ 2,763 | ||||||||||||
Average cost of purchased power per kWh(1) | $ 0.082 | $ 0.076 | $ 0.083 | $ 0.081 | ||||||||||||
Total purchased power (in kWh) | 12,742 | 12,524 | 32,568 | 32,238 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
(1) Kilowatt-hour |
| |||||||||||||||
The Utility’s total cost of electricity decreasedincreased by $285$105 million, or 22%11%, and $122 million, or 4%, in the three months ended September 30, 2009 and by $643 million, or 19%, in the nine months ended September 30, 2009, compared to the same periods in 2008. This was primarily due to a decrease in the average cost of purchased power of 17% for the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 10% for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, as well as a decrease in the total volume of purchased power of 8% for the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 12% for the nine months ended September 30, 2009. The decrease in the average cost of purchased power was primarily driven by lower market prices for electricity and gas. The decrease in the volume of purchased power was primarily the result of milder weather and a decrease in residential, commercial, and industrial demand due to the continued economic downturn2010, respectively, as compared to the same periods in 2008.
Various factors will affect the Utility’s future cost of electricity, including the market prices for electricity and natural gas, the level of hydroelectric and nuclear power thatproduced by the Utility, produces, the cost of procuring more renewable energy, changes in customer demand, and the amount and timing of power purchases needed to replace power previously supplied under the DWR contracts as those contracts expire or are terminated, novated, or renegotiated. The Utility will incur higher costs to purchase power during the extended scheduled outage that began at Diablo Canyon Unit 2 in October 2009 to refuel and replace the unit’s reactor vessel head. In addition, the output from the Utility’s hydroelectric generation facilities is dependent on levels of precipitation and could impact the volume of purchased power.
The Utility’s future cost of electricity may also may be affected by federal or state legislation or rules that may be adopted to regulate the emissions of greenhouse gases (“GHG”) from the Utility’s electricity generating facilities or theother generating facilities from which the Utility procures electricity. In particular, costs are likely to increase in the future when California’s statewide greenhouse gas emissions reduction lawthe California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (“AB 32”) is implemented.
Natural Gas Operating Revenues
The Utility sells natural gas, natural gas transportation services, and natural gas transportationstorage services. The Utility’s transportation services are provided by a transmission system and a distribution system. The transmission system transports gas throughout its service territory for delivery to the Utility’s distribution system, which, in turn, delivers natural gas to end-use customers. The transmission system also delivers natural gas to large end-use customers who are connected directly to the transmission system. In addition, the Utility delivers natural gas to off-system markets, primarily in southern California.
The following table provides a summary of the Utility’s natural gas operating revenues:
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Bundled natural gas revenues | $ | 525 | $ | 709 | $ | 2,003 | $ | 2,699 | ||||||||
| Transportation service-only revenues | 80 | 85 | 247 | 247 | ||||||||||||
| Total natural gas operating revenues | $ | 605 | $ | 794 | $ | 2,250 | $ | 2,946 | ||||||||
Average bundled revenue per Mcf(1) of natural gas sold | $ | 15.91 | $ | 20.85 | $ | 10.77 | $ | 13.36 | ||||||||
| Total bundled natural gas sales (in millions of Mcf) | 33 | 34 | 186 | 202 | ||||||||||||
(1) One thousand cubic feet. | ||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Bundled natural gas revenues | $ 568 | $ 525 | $ 2,062 | $ 2,003 | ||||||||||||
Transportation service-only revenues | 88 | 80 | 276 | 247 | ||||||||||||
Total natural gas operating revenues | $ 656 | $ 605 | $ 2,338 | $ 2,250 | ||||||||||||
The Utility’s total natural gas operating revenues, decreasedincluding revenues intended to recover costs that are passed through to customers, increased by $189$51 million, or 24%8%, in the three months ended September 30, 2010 as compared to the same period in 2009. This reflects a $48 million increase in the total cost of natural gas due to higher market prices which is passed through to customers and does not impact net income. (See “Cost of Natural Gas” below.) Natural gas operating revenues, excluding items passed through to customers, increased by $3 million. This was primarily due to a $16 million increase in authorized base revenues, partially offset by an $8 million decrease as compared to the same period in 2009 andwhen the Utility received a shareholder incentive award based on its core portfolio gas procurement.
The Utility’s total natural gas operating revenues, including revenues intended to recover costs that are passed through to customers, increased by $696$88 million, or 24%4%, in the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010 as compared to the same periodsperiod in 2008, primarily due to decreases2009. This reflects a $45 million increase in the total cost of natural gas of $217due to higher market prices and a $16 million increase in the three months ended September 30, 2009cost of public purpose programs, which are passed through to customers and $734do not impact net income. Natural gas operating revenues, excluding items passed through to customers, increased by $27 million. This was primarily due to a $39 million increase in the nine months ended September 30, 2009. (See “Cost of Natural Gas” below.) This decrease wasauthorized base revenues, partially offset by an $8 million decrease as compared to the following:
The Utility’s future natural gas operating revenues will depend on the amount of revenue requirements authorized by the CPUC in various regulatory proceedings. (See “Regulatory Matters” below.) Additionally, the Utility’s future natural gas operating revenues will be affectedimpacted by changes in the cost of natural gas,gas. The Utility also expects future natural gas throughput volume, previously authorized increases in 2010 revenue requirements, andoperating revenues to increase to the extent that the CPUC approves the Utility’s separately funded capital projects. The CPUC has not yet determined how the existing energy efficiency incentive mechanism will be modified, so the amount of incentive revenues that the Utility may receive toearn for the extent that it achieves the CPUC’s energy efficiency goals. The Utility’simplementation of its programs in 2009 and future natural gas operating revenues will also be affected by the outcome of the Utility’s application in its Gas Transmission and Storage rate case in which the Utility has requested the CPUC to establish revenue requirements for natural gas transmission and storage services for 2011 through 2014.years is uncertain. (See “Regulatory Matters” below.)
Cost of Natural Gas
The Utility’s cost of natural gas includes the purchase costs of natural gas, transportation costs on interstate pipelines, and intrastate pipelines, and gas storage costs, but excludes the transportation costs on intrastate pipelines for large commercialcore and industrial (or “non-core”)non-core customers, which are included in Operatingoperating and maintenance expense in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income. The Utility’s cost of natural gas also includes realized gains and losses on price risk management activities. (See NotesNote 7 and 8 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.)
The following table provides a summary of the Utility’s cost of natural gas:
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||
September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
| Cost of natural gas sold | $ | 96 | $ | 314 | $ | 760 | $ | 1,517 | ||||||||
| Transportation cost of natural gas sold | 38 | 37 | 119 | 96 | ||||||||||||
| Total cost of natural gas | $ | 134 | $ | 351 | $ | 879 | $ | 1,613 | ||||||||
| Average cost per Mcf of natural gas sold | $ | 2.91 | $ | 9.24 | $ | 4.09 | $ | 7.51 | ||||||||
| Total natural gas sold (in millions of Mcf) | 33 | 34 | 186 | 202 | ||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Cost of natural gas sold | $ 142 | $ 96 | $ 796 | $ 760 | ||||||||||||
Transportation cost of natural gas sold | 40 | 38 | 128 | 119 | ||||||||||||
Total cost of natural gas | $ 182 | $ 134 | $ 924 | $ 879 | ||||||||||||
Average cost per Mcf(1) of natural gas sold | $ 4.18 | $ 2.91 | $ 4.54 | $ 4.09 | ||||||||||||
Total natural gas sold (in Mcf) | 34 | 33 | 186 | 186 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
(1) One thousand cubic feet. |
| |||||||||||||||
The Utility’s total cost of natural gas decreasedincreased by $48 million, or 36%, and $45 million, or 5%, in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 by $217 million, or 62%, and by $734 million, or 46%,2010, respectively, as compared to the same periods in 2008,2009, primarily due to decreaseshigher market prices for natural gas, which are passed through to customers and do not impact net income. The increase in the nine months ended September 30, 2010 was partially offset by the $49 million the Utility received in the first quarter of 2010 to be refunded to customers as part of a litigation settlement arising from the manipulation of the natural gas market price of natural gas.
The Utility’s future cost of natural gas will be affected by the market price of natural gas and changes in customer demand. In addition, theThe Utility’s future cost of gas may also be affected by federal or state legislation or rules to regulate the GHG emissions of greenhouse gases from the Utility’s natural gas transportation and distribution facilities, and from natural gas consumed by the Utility’s customers.
Operating and Maintenance
Operating and maintenance expenses consist mainly of the Utility’s costs to operate and maintain its electricity and natural gas facilities, customer accountsbilling and service expenses, the cost of public purpose program expenses,programs, and administrative and general expenses. Operating and maintenance expenses are influenced by wage inflation; employee benefits; property taxes; the timing and length of Diablo Canyon refueling outages; storms, wild fires, and other events causing outages and damages in the Utility’s service territory; environmental remediation costs; legal costs; materials costs; the level of uncollectible customer accounts; and various other administrative and general expenses. The Utility seeks to recover these expenses through authorized revenue requirements collected in rates. The CPUC authorizes the majority of the Utility’s revenue requirements intended to recover these expenses in GRCs. Revenue requirements are typically based on a forecast of costs for the first (or “test”) year of a GRC cycle followed by annual attrition increases until the first year of the next GRC. The Utility’s next GRC will set revenue requirements beginning January 1, 2011. (See “Regulatory Matters” below.) In addition to authorized attrition increases in revenue requirements for 2009 and 2010 that help to offset increased expenses, the Utility seeks to achieve operational efficiencies and implement other anticipated cost-saving measures to manage expenses.
The Utility’s operating and maintenance expenses increased by $65$177 million, or 7%17%, in the three months ended September 30, 2010, as compared to the same period in 2009, primarily due to $238 million of costs associated with the San Bruno Accident. This amount includes a netprovision of $220 million for estimated third-party claims. (See Note 10 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.) This increase was partially offset by a $51 million decrease in employee severance costs of $50 million. (This amount includes an accrual of $57 million for severance costsas compared to the same period in 2009 when charges were incurred related to the reduction of approximately 2% of the Utility’s workforce.) In addition, the Utility incurredworkforce, and by a $27 million increasedecrease in labor and other costs as compared to performthe same period in 2009 when the Utility performed accelerated natural gas leak surveys and associated remedial work.
The Utility’s operating and maintenance expenses increased by $29 million, or 1%, in the nine months ended September 30, 2010, compared to the same period in 2009, primarily due to $238 million of costs associated with the San Bruno Accident, partially offset by decreases of $105 million in labor costs and other costs as compared to 2009 when costs were incurred in connection with the scheduled refueling outage at Diablo Canyon and accelerated natural gas leak surveys and associated remedial work, and $69 million in severance costs as compared to the same period in 2008. (The Utility targets completing the accelerated portion of this survey work by the second quarter of 2010.) The Utility also2009 when charges were incurred a $20 million increase in employee benefit costs (primarily driven by rising healthcare costs) and a $6 million increase in property taxes. These increases were partially offset by a $20 million decrease in CAISO collateral costs, which are passed through to customers, related to the new day-ahead market, an $8 million decrease in public purpose programreduction of approximately 2% of the Utility’s workforce. Additionally, operating and maintenance expenses decreased as a $4 million decrease in uncollectible customer accounts, andresult of a $6$35 million decrease in other miscellaneous operating and maintenance expenses.
The Utility estimates it may incur a resultmaterial amount of economic conditionsadditional expenses related to the San Bruno Accident through 2011. In addition, the Utility may incur costs in response to recommendations that may be made by the NTSB and rising unemploymentthe CPUC in the Utility’s service territory, and a $23 million increase in other miscellaneous operating and maintenance expenses. These increases were partially offset by decreases in public purpose program expensescourse of $59 million, and decreases in labor costs of $38 million compared to those incurred in 2008 as a resulttheir investigations of the January 2008 winter storm.
Depreciation, Amortization, and Decommissioning
The Utility’s depreciation and amortization expense consists of depreciation and amortization on plant and regulatory assets, and decommissioning expenses associated with fossil and nuclear decommissioning. The Utility’s depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning expenses increased by $31$50 million, or 7%11%, in the three months ended September 30, 20092010, and $59$121 million, or 5%9%, in the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, as compared to the same periods in 2008. Depreciation expense increased by $25 million and $82 million in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, respectively,2009. These changes are primarily due to authorizedan increase in capital additions and depreciation rate changes. In addition, amortization expense related to the energy recovery bonds (“ERBs”) increased by $6 million in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 compared to the same periods in 2008 primarily due to increased recovery rates. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in decommissioning expense of $22 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2009, as compared to the same period in 2008. In addition, miscellaneous amortization and decommissioning expenses decreased $7 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2009, as compared to the same period in 2008.
The Utility’s depreciation expense for the remainder of 2009 and 2010future periods is expected to increase as a result of an overall increase in net capital expenditures and implementation ofadditions. Additionally, depreciation rates authorized by the CPUC. Depreciation expensesexpense in subsequent years will be determined based onimpacted by the depreciation rates set by the CPUC in the 2011 GRC and the 2011 Gas Transmissiongas transmission and Storagestorage rate case, and by the FERC in future TO rate cases.
Interest Income
The Utility’s interest income decreased by less than $1 million, or less than 1%, in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, the Utility’s interest income decreased $17 million, or 85%, and $48 million, or 62%, respectively,2010 as compared to the same periodsperiod in 2008 primarily due to the following factors:
The Utility’s interest income in 2009 and future periods primarily will be primarily affected by changes in the balance of restricted cashfunds held in escrow pending resolution of the Chapter 11 disputed claims, changes in regulatory balancing accounts, and changes in interest rates.
Interest Expense
The Utility’s interest expense decreased by $1 million, or less than 1%, and $20 million, or 4% in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, interest expense decreased $8 million, or 5%, and $27 million, or 5%,2010, respectively, as compared to the same periods in 20082009. This decrease was primarily attributable to lower interest rates on outstanding short-term debt and decreases in the outstanding balances of the liability for Chapter 11 disputed claims and various regulatory balancing accounts and regulatory assets. This decrease was partially offset by interest that accrued on higher outstanding balances of long-term debt due to the following factors:
The Utility’s interest expense in 2009 and future periods will be impacted by changes in interest rates, changes in the balance of the liability for Chapter 11 disputed claims, changes in regulatory balancing accounts and regulatory assets, and changes in the amount of debt outstanding as long-term debt matures and additional long-term debt is issued. (See “Liquidity and Financial Resources” below.)
Other Income, (Expense), Net
The Utility’s other income (expense), net increased by $18$9 million, or 900%56%, in the three months ended September 30, 2009 and $282010, as compared to the same periods in 2009. The increase in the three months ended September 30, 2010 was primarily due to an increase in allowance for equity funds used during construction due to higher average balances of construction work in progress.
The Utility’s other income net decreased by $32 million, or 117%62%, in the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, as compared to the same periodsperiod in 2008 when the Utility incurred costs to oppose certain legislation and municipalization efforts. In addition, there was an increase2009. The decrease in the Utility’s allowance for funds used during constructionnine months ended September 30, 2010 was primarily due to an increase in spending relatedother expenses as a result of costs the Utility incurred to various projects, includingsupport the Colusa and Humboldt Bay Generating Stations. This increase was partially offset whenTaxpayers’ Right to Vote Act, a California ballot initiative that appeared on the Gateway Generating Station and Diablo Canyon steam generators replacement projects became operativeJune 2010 ballot. These costs are not recovered in 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Income Tax Provision
The Utility’s income tax provision decreased by $56$4 million, or 34%4%, for the three months ended September 30, 2009, and $47 million, or 11%, for the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, as compared to the same periodsperiod in 2008.2009. The effective tax rates for the three months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 were 29% and 2008 were 23.8% and 34.1%24%, respectively. The effective tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2010 increased as compared to the same period in 2009 when the Utility recognized (1) state tax benefits arising from accounting method changes and (2) the benefits of various audit settlements at higher levels than 2010 settlements.
The Utility’s income tax provision increased by $124 million, or 33% for the nine months ended September 30, 2010, as compared to the same period in 2009. The effective tax rates for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 were 37% and 2008 were 27.6% and 32.6%28%, respectively. The lower effective tax ratesrate for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 were primarily due to an increase in the amount of tax benefits recognized in 20092010 increased as compared to the amount ofsame period in 2009 when the Utility (1) recognized state tax benefits arising from accounting method changes, (2) recognized the benefits of various audit settlements at higher levels than 2010 settlements, and (3) received a federal tax refund. The effective tax rate also increased due to the reversal of a deferred tax asset in the first quarter of 2010 that had previously been recorded to reflect the future tax benefits attributable to the Medicare Part D subsidy after 2012 which was eliminated as part of the federal healthcare legislation passed during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2008.March 2010. (See Note 1110 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of “Tax Matters.”)
PG&E Corporation, Eliminations, and Other
Operating Revenues and Expenses
PG&E Corporation’s revenues consist mainly of billings to its affiliates for services rendered, all of which are eliminated in consolidation. PG&E Corporation’s operating expenses consist mainly of employee compensation and payments to third parties for goods and services. Generally, PG&E Corporation’s operating expenses are allocated to affiliates. These allocations are made without mark-up and are eliminated in consolidation. PG&E Corporation’s interest expense relates to its 9.50% Convertible Subordinated Notes and 5.75%5.8% Senior Notes, and is not allocated to affiliates.
There were no material changes to PG&E Corporation’s operating income in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, as compared to the same periods in 2008.
Overview
The Utility’s ability to fund operations depends on the levels of its operating cash flowflows and access to the capital markets. The levels of the Utility’s operating cash and short-term debt fluctuate as a result of seasonal demand for electricity and natural gas, volatility in energy commodity costs, collateral requirements related to price risk management activity, the timing and amount of tax payments or refunds, and the timing and effect of regulatory decisions and financings, among other factors. The Utility generally utilizes long-term senior unsecured debt issuances and equity contributions from PG&E Corporation and long-term senior unsecured debt issuances to fund debt maturities and capital expenditures and to maintain its CPUC-authorized capital structure. The Utility relies on short-term debt, including commercial paper, to fund temporary financing needs. On May 7, 2009, the CPUC increased the Utility’sThe Utility has short-term borrowing authority by $1.5 billion, for an aggregate authority of $4.0 billion, including $500 million that is restricted tofor use in certain contingencies.
PG&E Corporation’s ability to fund operations, and capital expenditures, make scheduled principal and interest payments, refinance debt, fund Utility equity contributions as needed for the Utility to maintain its CPUC-authorized capital structure, fund capital investments, and make dividend paymentspay dividends primarily depends on the level of cash distributions received from the Utility and PG&E Corporation’s access to the capital markets.
Credit Facilities
The following table summarizes PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s outstanding commercial paper and revolving credit facilities at September 30, 2009:
| (in millions) | At September 30, 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Authorized Borrower | Facility | Termination Date | Facility Limit | Letters of Credit Outstanding | Cash Borrowings | Commercial Paper Backup | Availability | |||||||||||||||
| PG&E Corporation | Revolving credit facility | February 2012 | $ | 187 | (1) | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | 187 | |||||||||
| Utility | Revolving credit facility | February 2012 | 1,940 | (2) | 273 | - | - | 1,667 | ||||||||||||||
| Total credit facilities | $ | 2,127 | $ | 273 | $ | - | $ | - | $ | 1,854 | ||||||||||||
(1) Includes an $87 million sublimit for letters of credit and $100 million sublimit for “swingline” loans, defined as loans that are made available on a same-day basis and are repayable in full within 30 days. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(2) Includes a $921 million sublimit for letters of credit and $200 million sublimit for swingline loans. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Termination Date | Facility Limit | Letters of Credit Outstanding | Cash Borrowings | Commercial Paper Backup | Availability | ||||||||||||||||||
PG&E Corporation | February 2012 | $ 187 | (1) | $ - | $ 90 | N/A | $ 97 | |||||||||||||||||
Utility | February 2012 | 1,940 | (2) | 289 | 400 | $ 586 | 665 | |||||||||||||||||
Utility | February 2012 | 750 | (3) | N/A | - | - | 750 | |||||||||||||||||
Total credit facilities |
| $ 2,877 | $ 289 | $ 490 | $ 586 | $ 1,512 | ||||||||||||||||||
(1) Includes an $87 million sublimit for letters of credit and a $100 million commitment for “swingline” loans, defined as loans that are made available on a same-day basis and are repayable in full within 30 days. (2) Includes a $921 million sublimit for letters of credit and a $200 million commitment for swingline loans. (3) Includes a $75 million commitment for swingline loans. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
In the Utility’snine months ended September 30, 2010, the average outstanding commercial paper balance was $745 million. There were no borrowings outstanding under the $1.9 billion revolving credit facilities includeuntil September 29, 2010, at which time $400 million was borrowed to pay down the then outstanding commercial paper balance. The $400 million borrowing was repaid on October 29, 2010.
On June 8, 2010, the Utility entered into a $750 million unsecured revolving credit agreement with a syndicate of lenders. The Utility will use $500 million of the credit capacity under the credit agreement to support its electric procurement hedging activities. This credit capacity replaced the $500 million Floating Rate Senior Notes that matured on June 10, 2010. The remaining credit capacity of $250 million will be used for general working capital purposes. The credit agreement contains covenants that are usual and customary covenants for credit facilities of theirthis type, including covenants limiting liens, to those permitted under the senior note indenture, mergers, substantial asset sales, of all or substantially all of the Utility’s assets, and other fundamental changes. In addition, both PG&E CorporationBoth the $750 million and the $1.9 billion revolving credit facilities require that the Utility are required to maintain a ratio of total consolidated debt to total consolidated capitalization of at most 65%, and as of the end of each fiscal quarter. In addition, the $1.9 billion revolving credit facility agreement requires that PG&E Corporation must own, directly or indirectly, at least 80% of the common stock and at least 70% of the voting securitiescapital stock of the Utility.
At September 30, 2009,2010, PG&E Corporation and the Utility were in compliance with all covenants.
2010 Financings
On April 1, 2010, the Utility issued $350$250 million and $550 million, respectively,principal amount of senior unsecured notes. Proceeds5.8% Senior Notes due March 1, 2037. The proceeds from the senior notes offeringsthis issuance were used to finance capital expenditures, for general working capital, and to repay a portion of outstanding commercial paper thatpaper.
On April 8, 2010, the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank issued $50 million of tax-exempt pollution control bonds series 2010E due November 1, 2026 and loaned the proceeds to the Utility. The proceeds were used to refund the corresponding related series of pollution control bonds issued in 2005 which were repurchased by the Utility had issuedin 2008. The series 2010E bonds bear interest at 2.25% per year through April 1, 2012 and are subject to pay $600 millionmandatory tender on April 2, 2012 at a price of senior unsecured notes that matured100% of the principal amount plus accrued interest. Thereafter, this series of bonds may be remarketed in a fixed or variable rate mode. Interest is payable semi-annually in arrears on MarchApril 1 2009. and October 1.
On June 11, 2009,September 15, 2010, the Utility issued $500$550 million of floating3.5% Senior Notes due October 1, 2020. The proceeds from this issuance were used to repay a portion of outstanding commercial paper.
On September 20, 2010, the Utility repurchased $50 million principal amount of pollution control bonds series 2008F and $45 million principal amount of pollution control bonds series 2008G that were subject to mandatory tender on the same date. The bonds will be remarketed in a fixed or variable rate senior unsecured notesmode every 30 days until the bonds are reissued. The Utility, as bondholder, will be both the payer and the recipient of principal and interest payments on each remarketing day.
On October 12, 2010, the Utility issued $250 million principal amount of Floating Rate Senior Notes due June 10, 2010.October 11, 2011. The net proceeds were used to repay outstanding commercial paper that was issued to satisfy margin calls and collateral requirements related to the Utility’s electric procurement commodity hedging activities. On September 1, 2009, the California Pollution Control Financing Authority and the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (“CIEDB”) issued $309 million of tax-exempt pollution control bonds series 2009 A through D for the benefit of the Utility. The Utility used the proceeds it received from the CIEDB to repurchase the corresponding series of 2008 pollution control bonds. The series 2009 bonds, issued at par with an initial rate of 0.20%, are variable rate demand notes with interest resetting daily and backed by direct-pay letters of credit. Unlike the series 2008 bonds, interest earned on the series 2009 bonds is not subject to the alternative minimum tax (“AMT”). A provision in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 allows certain tax-exempt bonds that are subject to AMT to be reissued or refunded in 2009 or 2010 as tax-exempt bonds that are not subject to AMT. As a result, the series 2009 bonds were issued at a lower interest rate, reducing the Utility’s interest expense.
PG&E Corporation issued 8,569,4753,766,678 shares of common stock upon the exercise of employee stock options and under its 401(k) plan and Dividend Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan, (“DRSPP”), generating $211$141 million of cash throughduring the nine months ended September 30, 2009. Also in 2009,2010. PG&E Corporation issued 16,370,779 shares of common stock upon conversion of the $247 million principal amount of PG&E Corporation’s Convertible Subordinated Notes at a conversion price of $15.09 per share between June 23 and June 29, 2010. These notes were no longer outstanding at September 30, 2010, and the conversion had no impact on cash.
PG&E Corporation also contributed $688$170 million of cash to the Utility during the nine months ended September 30, 2010 to ensure that the Utility had adequate capital to fund its capital expenditures and to maintain the 52% common equity ratio authorized by the CPUC.
Future Financing Needs
The amount and timing of the Utility’s future financing needs will depend on various factors, including the conditions in the capital markets, the timing and amount of forecasted capital expenditures, and the amount of cash internally generated through normal business operations, among other factors. The Utility’s future financing needs will also depend on the timing of the resolution of the Chapter 11 disputed claims and the amount of interest on these claims that the Utility will be required to pay.pay, the timing and amount of payments made to third parties in connection with the San Bruno Accident and the timing and amount of related insurance recoveries, the conditions in the capital markets, and other factors. (See NoteNotes 9 and 10 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.)
PG&E Corporation may issue debt or equity in the future to fund equity contributions to the Utility’s operating expensesUtility and capital expendituresto fund investments to the extent that internally generated funds are not available. Assuming that sufficient. As of September 30, 2010, PG&E Corporation made certain tax equity investments (see “PG&E Corporation” below) and may fund similar investments in the future, resulting in additional financing needs. On November 4, 2010, PG&E Corporation entered into an Equity Distribution Agreement under which various investment banks will act as PG&E Corporation’s sales agents with respect to offerings from time to time of shares of PG&E Corporation common stock having an aggregate value of up to $400 million. The sales of the shares, if any, will be made by means of ordinary brokers’ transactions on the New York Stock Exchange, or otherwise at market prices prevailing at the time of the sale or at prices related to the prevailing market prices, or at negotiated prices.
PG&E Corporation and the Utility canhave had continued access to the capital markets on reasonable terms PG&E Corporation and the Utilitycontinue to believe that the Utility’s cash flowflows from operations, existing sources of liquidity, and future financings will provide adequate resources to fund operating activities, meet anticipated obligations, make payments to third parties related to the San Bruno Accident, and finance future capital expenditures.
Dividends
During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, the Utility paid common stock dividends totaling $468 million to PG&E Corporation.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, the Utility paid cashcommon stock dividends totaling $10$537 million to PG&E Corporation.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, the Utility paid dividends totaling $11 million to holders of its outstanding series of preferred stock. On September 16, 2009,15, 2010, the Board of Directors of the Utility declared a cash dividenddividends totaling $3 million on its outstanding series of preferred stock, payable on November 15, 2009,2010, to shareholders on record as of record on October 30, 2009.29, 2010.
Utility
Operating Activities
The Utility’s cash flows from operating activities primarily consist of receipts from customers less payments of operating expenses, other than expenses such as depreciation that do not require the use of cash.
The Utility’s cash flows from operating activities for the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 and 20082009 were as follows:
| Nine Months Ended | ||||||||
September 30, | ||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||
| Net income | $ | 983 | $ | 870 | ||||
| Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: | ||||||||
| Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 1,439 | 1,388 | ||||||
| Allowance for equity funds used during construction | (71 | ) | (51 | ) | ||||
| Deferred income taxes and tax credits, net | 274 | 470 | ||||||
| Other changes in noncurrent assets and liabilities | 95 | 55 | ||||||
| Effect of changes in operating assets and liabilities: | ||||||||
| Accounts receivable | 20 | (179 | ) | |||||
| Inventories | 78 | (153 | ) | |||||
| Accounts payable | (151 | ) | (85 | ) | ||||
| Disputed claims and customer refunds | (700 | ) | - | |||||
| Income taxes receivable/payable | 534 | 208 | ||||||
| Regulatory balancing accounts, net | 226 | (94 | ) | |||||
| Other current assets | 26 | (125 | ) | |||||
| Other current liabilities | (62 | ) | (80 | ) | ||||
| Other | 3 | (4 | ) | |||||
| Net cash provided by operating activities | $ | 2,694 | $ | 2,220 | ||||
| Nine Months Ended September 30, | ||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Net income | $ 868 | $ 983 | ||||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: | ||||||||
Depreciation, amortization, and decommissioning | 1,580 | 1,439 | ||||||
Allowance for equity funds used during construction | (89 | ) | (71 | ) | ||||
Deferred income taxes and tax credits, net | 332 | 274 | ||||||
Other changes in noncurrent assets and liabilities | (286 | ) | 95 | |||||
Effect of changes in operating assets and liabilities: | ||||||||
Accounts receivable | (240 | ) | 20 | |||||
Inventories | (65 | ) | 78 | |||||
Accounts payable | 15 | (151 | ) | |||||
Disputed claims and customer refunds | - | (700 | ) | |||||
Income taxes receivable/payable | 241 | 534 | ||||||
Regulatory balancing accounts, net | (14 | ) | 226 | |||||
Other current assets | 28 | 26 | ||||||
Other current liabilities | (33 | ) | (62 | ) | ||||
Other | 14 | 3 | ||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities | $ 2,351 | $ 2,694 | ||||||
In the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, net cash provided by operating activities increaseddecreased by $474$343 million compared to the same period in 2008,2009 primarily due to the collectionan increase of $1.2 billion in rates to recover an under-collection in the Utility’s energy resource recovery balancing account that was incurred in 2008 due to higher than expected energy procurement costs. (See Note 3 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.) The increase in operating cash flows also reflects a decline of $224$523 million in net collateral paid by the Utility related to price risk management activities in 2009.2010. Collateral payables and receivables are included in Otherother changes in noncurrent assets and liabilities, Otherother current assets, and Otherother current liabilities in the table above. (See Note 7 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.) The decrease also reflects $384 million of additional net collateral paid by the Utility relatedtax refunds received in 2009 compared to price risk management2010. The remaining decreases in cash flows from operating activities fluctuates based onconsisted of miscellaneous other changes in the Utility’s net credit exposure to counterparties, which primarily depends on electricityoperating assets and gas price movement.
Decreases in operating cash flows were partially offset by a $700 million payment to the California Power Exchange (“PX”) to reduce the Utility’s liability for the remaining net disputed claims (see Note 10 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements), a refund of $230 million received by the Utility in 2008 from the California Energy Commission (“CEC”)2009 with no similar refundpayment in 2009, and the subsequent return of $172 million of the CEC refund to customers through September 30, 2009.2010. (See Note 39 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.)
Various factors can affect the Utility’s future operating cash flows, including the timing of cash collateral payments and receipts related to price risk management activity. The Utility’s cash collateral activity will fluctuate based on changes in the Utility’s net credit exposure to counterparties which primarily depends on electricity and gas price movement.
The Utility’s operating cash flows also will be impacted by electricity procurement costs and the timing of rate adjustments authorized to recover these costs. On October 15, 2009, theThe CPUC authorized the Utilityhas established a balancing account mechanism to adjust the Utility’s electric rates to refund $424 million to customers for an over-collection inwhenever the forecasted aggregate over-collections or under-collections of the Utility’s energy resource recovery balancing account by December 31, 2009.electric procurement costs for the current year exceed 5% of the Utility’s prior-year generation revenues, excluding generation revenues for DWR contracts. The Utility also will update its forecasted 20102011 electricity procurement costs in late November 20092010 for inclusion in the annual electric true-up proceeding, which will adjust electric and gas rates on January 1, 20102011 to (1) reflect over-over and under-collections in the Utility’s major electric and gas balancing accounts, and (2) implement various other electricity and gas revenue requirement changes authorized by the CPUC and the FERC.
Additionally, effective on June 1, 2010, the Utility began a program to provide expedited rate relief to customers. The program, which will continue through the end of 2010, includes a reduction in system bundled average electric rates coupled with a rebalancing of the residential rate tiers to reduce rates in the highest tiers. The rate reduction is expected to reduce 2010 retail electric billings by $268 million. To provide this reduction, the Utility has accelerated the refund of various over-collections that otherwise would not be reflected in adjusted rates until January 2011 and the Utility has suspended collection of the authorized revenue requirement for the currently under-spent funds in the California Solar Initiative Program. The rate relief program will have no impact on net income for the Utility.
Investing Activities
The Utility’s investing activities consist of construction of new and replacement facilities necessary to deliver safe and reliable electricity and natural gas services to its customers. Cash used in investing activities depends primarily upon the amount and timing of the Utility’s capital expenditures, which can be affected by many factors, including the timing of regulatory approvals and
the occurrence of storms and other events causing outages or damage to the Utility’s infrastructure, and the completion of electricity and natural gas reliability improvements projects. Net cashinfrastructure. Cash used in investing activities also includeincludes the proceeds offrom sales and maturities of nuclear decommissioning trust assetsinvestments which are largely offset by the amount of cash used to purchase new nuclear decommissioning trust investments.
The Utility’s cash flows from investing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 and 20082009 were as follows:
| Nine Months Ended | ||||||||
September 30, | ||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||
| Capital expenditures | $ | (3,022 | ) | $ | (2,691 | ) | ||
| Decrease (increase) in restricted cash | 732 | (3 | ) | |||||
| Proceeds from nuclear decommissioning trust sales | 1,177 | 1,121 | ||||||
| Purchases of nuclear decommissioning trust investments | (1,219 | ) | (1,161 | ) | ||||
| Other | 7 | 21 | ||||||
| Net cash used in investing activities | $ | (2,325 | ) | $ | (2,713 | ) | ||
| Nine Months Ended September 30, | ||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Capital expenditures | $ (2,794 | ) | $ (3,022 | ) | ||||
Decrease in restricted cash | 61 | 732 | ||||||
Proceeds from sales and maturities of nuclear decommissioning trust investments | 962 | 1,177 | ||||||
Purchases of nuclear decommissioning trust investments | (1,001 | ) | (1,219 | ) | ||||
Other | 15 | 7 | ||||||
Net cash used in investing activities | $ (2,757) | $ (2,325 | ) | |||||
Net cash used in investing activities decreasedincreased by $388$432 million in the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 compared to the same period in 2008.2009. This decreaseincrease was primarily due to a $700 million decrease in the restricted cash balance that resulted from aan August 2009 payment to the PX to reduce the Utility’s liability for the remaining net disputed claims, (seewith no similar payment in 2010. (See Note 109 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements),Statements.)
This increase was partially offset by an increasea decrease of $331$228 million in capital expenditures for installingmainly due to weather conditions in the SmartMeter™ advanced metering infrastructure, generation facility spending, replacingfirst half of 2010 as compared to the same period in 2009 which delayed construction as work was shifted to emergency response; permitting, materials, and expanding gashardware purchase delays with no similar delays in 2009; and electric distribution systems, and improvinga larger decrease in 2010 than in 2009 in the electric transmission infrastructure. (See “Capital Expenditures” below.)
Future cash flows used in investing activities are largely dependent on the timing and amount of futureexpected capital expenditures. (See “Capital Expenditures” below and in the 20082009 Annual Report.Report for further discussion of expected spending and significant capital projects.)
Financing Activities
The Utility’s cash flows from financing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 and 20082009 were as follows:
| Nine Months Ended | ||||||||
September 30, | ||||||||
| (in millions) | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||
| Net borrowings under revolving credit facility | $ | - | $ | 283 | ||||
| Net (repayment) issuance of commercial paper, net of discount of $3 million in 2009 and $9 million in 2008 | (290 | ) | 524 | |||||
| Proceeds from issuance of short-term debt, net of issuance costs of $1 million in 2009 | 499 | - | ||||||
| Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net of premium, discount, and issuance costs of $12 million in 2009 and $2 million in 2008 | 847 | 693 | ||||||
| Long-term debt matured or repurchased | (909 | ) | (454 | ) | ||||
| Energy recovery bonds matured | (273 | ) | (260 | ) | ||||
| Preferred stock dividends paid | (10 | ) | (10 | ) | ||||
| Common stock dividends paid | (468 | ) | (426 | ) | ||||
| Equity contribution | 688 | 90 | ||||||
| Other | 6 | (31 | ) | |||||
| Net cash provided by financing activities | $ | 90 | $ | 409 | ||||
| Nine Months Ended September 30, | ||||||||
| (in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Borrowings under revolving credit facilities | $ 400 | $ 300 | ||||||
Repayments under revolving credit facilities | - | (300 | ) | |||||
Net issuance (repayments) of commercial paper, net of discount of $2 in 2010 and $3 in 2009 | 251 | (290 | ) | |||||
Proceeds from issuance of short-term debt, net of issuance costs of $1 in 2009 | - | 499 | ||||||
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net of discount and issuance costs of $12 in 2010 and 2009 | 838 | 847 | ||||||
Short-term debt matured | (500 | ) | - | |||||
Long-term debt matured or repurchased | (95 | ) | (909 | ) | ||||
Energy recovery bonds matured | (285 | ) | (273 | ) | ||||
Preferred stock dividends paid | (11 | ) | (10 | ) | ||||
Common stock dividends paid | (537 | ) | (468 | ) | ||||
Equity contribution | 170 | 688 | ||||||
Other | (40 | ) | 6 | |||||
Net cash provided by financing activities | $ 191 | $ 90 | ||||||
In the nine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, net cash provided by financing activities decreasedincreased by $319$101 million compared to the same period in 2008 mainly due to less net borrowings under the Utility’s revolving credit facility in 2009. No commercial paper was outstanding at September 30, 2009 as the Utility received sufficient positive cash flows from income tax refunds and equity infusions, compared to net borrowings of $283 million in 2008. Cash provided by or used in financing activities is driven by the Utility’s financing needs, which depend on the level of cash provided by or used in operating activities and the level of cash provided by or used in investing activities. The Utility generally utilizes long-term senior unsecured debt issuances and equity contributions from PG&E Corporation to fund debt maturities and capital expenditures and to maintain its CPUC-authorized capital structure, and relies on short-term debt to fund temporary financing needs.
PG&E Corporation
As of dividend payments, interest, common stock issuance, the senior notes issuance of $350 million in March 2009, the receipt ofSeptember 30, 2010, PG&E Corporation’s affiliates had entered into four tax refunds of $139 million,equity agreements with privately held companies to fund residential and transactions betweencommercial retail solar energy installations. Under these agreements, PG&E Corporation will provide payments of up to $300 million, and in return, receive the Utility,benefits of local rebates, federal investment tax credits, and a share of these entities’ customer payments. As of September 30, 2010, PG&E Corporation had nomade total payments of $100 million under these tax equity agreements. PG&E Corporation’s financial exposure for these arrangements is primarily limited to its lease payments and investment contributions to these entities.
In addition to the investments above, PG&E Corporation had the following material cash flows on a stand-alone basis for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009; dividend payments, interest, common stock issuance, the issuance of 5.75% Senior Notes in the principal amount of $350 million in March 2009, net tax refunds of $139 million in 2009, and 2008.
PG&E Corporation and the Utility enter into contractual commitments in connection with business activities. These future obligations primarily relate to financing arrangements (such as long-term debt, preferred stock, and certain forms of regulatory financing), purchases of electricity and natural gas for customers, purchases of transportation capacity, natural gas and electricity to support customer demand,purchases of renewable energy, and the purchase of fuel and transportation to support the Utility’s generation activities. In addition(Refer to those commitments disclosed in the 20082009 Annual Report, the Liquidity and those arising from normal business activities, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s commitments at September 30, 2009 include $350 million of 5.75% Senior Notes issued by PG&E Corporation due April 1, 2014, $550 million of 6.25% Senior Notes issued by the Utility due March 1, 2039, and $500 million of Floating Rate Senior Notes issued by the Utility due June 10, 2010. (See the 2008 Annual ReportFinancial Resources section above and Notes 4 10, and 1110 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.)
Depending on conditions in the capital markets, the Utility forecasts that it will make various capital investments in its electric and gas transmission and distribution infrastructure to maintain and improve system reliability, safety, and customer service; to extend the life of or replace existing infrastructure; and to add new infrastructure to meet already authorized growth.
Most of the Utility’s revenue requirements to recover forecasted capital expenditures are authorized in the GRC, and TO rate cases, and gas transmission and storage rate cases. The Utility intends to file a GRC application with the CPUC before the end of 2009 to request an increase in authorized revenue requirements to recover capital expenditures forecast to be made in 2011 through 2013. (See “Regulatory Matters” below.) In addition, theThe Utility requests authorization to collectalso collects additional revenue requirements to recover capital expenditures related to specific projects that have been specifically authorized by the CPUC, such as new power plants, gas or electric transmissiondistribution projects, and the SmartMeterTM advanced metering infrastructure. The Utility’s proposals for significant capital projects that have been submitted for CPUC approval are discussed in the 2009 Annual Report. Recent developments in authorized or proposed capital projects since the 2009 Annual Report was filed are discussed below.
Electric Distribution Reliability Program (Cornerstone Improvement Program)
On February 23, 2009, a ruling was issued that establishes a schedule for the CPUC’s consideration of the Utility’s request for approval of a proposed six-year electric distribution reliability improvement program. On March 17, 2009, the Utility filed revised forecasts of proposed capital expenditures totaling $2.0 billion, a decrease from the original forecast of $2.3 billion, and proposed operating and maintenance expenses totaling $59 million, a slight increase from the original forecast of $43 million, over the six-year period ofJune 24, 2010, through 2016. Hearings were completed in August 2009, and a final decision is scheduled to be issued in January 2010.
New Generation Facilities
Proposed Oakley Generation Resources
In September 30, 2009, the Utility requested that the CPUC approve several agreements executed by the Utility following the completion of its April 1, 2008 request for offers of new long-term generation resources to meet forecasted customer demand, as forecasted in the Utility’s 2007-2016 long-term electricity procurement plan previously approved by the CPUC. One of theincluding three power purchase agreements submittedand an agreement for a third party to the CPUC proposes thatdevelop and construct a new 586 megawatt (“MW”) natural gas-fired facility in Oakley, California that would be developed and constructed by a third party and then transferred to the Utility after commercial operation begins.upon completion. The initial estimated on-line date for the Oakley facility was June 2014. On July 29, 2010, the CPUC approved the power purchase agreements but the CPUC denied the Utility’s request for approval of the proposed Oakley generation facility would be operationally flexible, enablingfinding that the Utility to increase its use of renewable power by balancing the fluctuating output of wind and solar resources. Thenew facility is expectednot needed to be built in Oakley, Californiameet forecasted customer demand. The Utility and completed in 2014. (The remaining agreements submitted to the CPUC are power purchase agreements.)
Humboldt Bay Generating Station
As of September 30, 2010, the Utility has incurred $227 million to construct a 163 MW power plant to re-power the Utility’s existing power plant at Humboldt Bay, which is at the end of its useful life. The CPUC has authorized the Utility to recover associated capital costs of $239 million for the construction. Humboldt Bay commenced commercial operations in the third quarter of 2010.
Colusa Generating Station
As of September 30, 2010, the Utility has incurred capital costs of $644 million to construct a 657 MW combined cycle generating facility located in Colusa County, California. The CPUC has authorized the Utility to recover capital costs of $673 million for the construction of the facility. Subject to meeting operational performance requirements and other conditions, it is anticipated that the Colusa Generating Station will commence operations by the end of 2010.
New Renewable Energy Development
On April 22, 2010, the CPUC approved the Utility’s proposed five-year program for the development and construction of up to 250 MW of Utility-owned generating facilities using solar photovoltaic technology,(“PV”) facilities and to enter into power purchase agreements for an additional 250 MW of PV facilities to be deployed over a perioddeveloped by third parties. The Utility has been authorized to build 50 MW of five years, to helputility-owned PV facilities each year of the program. If the Utility meet its obligation under California lawbuilds less than 50 MW in a program year, it may roll forward no more than 10 MW of un-deployed capacity to increasebe developed in a subsequent program year. The first year of the amount of electricity provided to customers from renewable generation resources. five-year program began on October 11, 2010.
The CPUC is expectedhas authorized the Utility to issue a final decisionrecover its actual capital costs to develop utility-owned PV facilities, subject to an aggregate price cap of up to $1.5 billion based on the maximum 250 MW authorized to be developed by the Utility. The CPUC also established an incentive mechanism that allows the Utility shareholders to retain 10% of the savings if the average capital cost per-kilowatt of the new Utility-owned PV facilities is less than a specified maximum amount per kilowatt. The remaining 90% of any such savings would be passed through to customers. As the Utility’s applicationnew PV facilities begin commercial operation, the project costs would be included in early 2010.
PG&E Corporation
PG&E Corporation, through its subsidiary, PG&E Strategic Capital, Inc., along with Fort Chicago Energy Partners, L.P. and Williams Gas Pipeline Company, LLC, have been jointly pursuing the development of the proposed Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline, an interstate gas transmission pipeline that would connect with the proposed liquefied natural gas (“LNG”) terminal in Coos Bay, Oregon being developed by Fort Chicago Energy Partners, L.P. as lead investor. The construction of the pipeline is dependent upon the construction of the LNG terminal. In December 2009, the FERC issued an order to authorize construction and operation of the LNG terminal and the pipeline. There are additional federal, state, and local permits and authorizations that must be obtained before construction can proceed. In addition, commitments must be obtained from LNG suppliers and shippers under long-term contracts of sufficient volumes to justify moving forward with construction of the LNG terminal and the pipeline. The desire of LNG suppliers to make such commitments is dependent on the world market for LNG, the price in various markets compared to the U.S. price, and the overall level of supply and demand for LNG. In the U.S., the gas supply landscape has changed considerably since the LNG terminal and pipeline were first contemplated. Enhanced drilling techniques have increased access to shale gas and created significant gas reserves which may decrease the need for LNG sourced natural gas. As such, PG&E Corporation cannot predict whether construction of the proposed LNG terminal and associated pipeline will occur nor whether PG&E Corporation will continue to invest in the proposed pipeline project.
PG&E Corporation and the Utility do not have any off-balance sheet arrangements that have had, or are reasonably likely to have, a current or future material effect on their financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures, or capital resources.
PG&E Corporation and the Utility have significant contingencies,contingencies; including Chapter 11 disputed claims, claims arising from the San Bruno Accident, tax matters, legal matters, and environmental matters, which are discussed in Notes 109 and 1110 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
This section of MD&A discusses significant regulatory developments that have occurred in significant pending regulatory proceedings discussed in the 2008 Annual Report and significant new pending regulatory proceedings that were initiated since the 20082009 Annual Report was filed with the SEC. The outcome of these proceedings could have a significant effect on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s results of operations and financial condition.
2011 General Rate Case Application
On October 21, 2009,15, 2010, the Utility, together with the CPUC’s Division of Ratepayer Advocates (“DRA”) notified the Utility that the DRA had conditionally accepted the Utility’s draft 2011 GRC application that the Utility filed on July 20, 2009., The Utility must wait 60 days before filing the GRC application. Assuming the Utility timely meets the DRA’s conditions, the Utility intends to file the applicationReform Network (“TURN”), Aglet Consumer Alliance and nearly all other intervening parties, filed a motion with the CPUC seeking approval of a settlement agreement to resolve almost all of the issues raised by the endparties in the Utility’s 2011 GRC. The proposed settlement agreement will be subject to public comment in the GRC proceeding and then considered by the full CPUC. In the GRC, the Utility requested an overall increase in electric distribution, gas distribution and utility-owned generation revenue requirements of 2009. $1.1 billion over currently authorized amounts effective January 1, 2011.
Revenue Requirements
The Utility intends to requestsettlement agreement proposes that the CPUC issueUtility’s total 2011 revenue requirements be increased by $395 million, including $103 million related to depreciation rate changes. In addition, the settlement agreement proposes to (1) establish a final decision bynew balancing account for meter reading costs outside of the endGRC that offsets $113 million requested in the GRC application and (2) remove $30 million of 2010. Ifrequested revenue requirements from the decision is delayed, the Utility will, consistent with CPUC practiceGRC for consideration in prior GRCs, request the CPUC to issue an order directing thatother ratemaking proceedings. Furthermore, approximately $44 million of the revenue requirement changes incorporatedthe Utility requested in the CPUC’s decisionGRC application remains subject to litigation in the case will be effective asGRC.
The following table shows the differences, based on cost category, between the amount of January 1, 2011, even ifrevenue requirements included in the decision is issued subsequentGRC application and the amount proposed in the settlement agreement:
(in millions) | Amounts Included in the GRC Application | Amounts Proposed in the Settlement Agreement | Difference | |||||||||
Operations and maintenance | $ 1,437 | $ 1,308 | $ (129 | ) | ||||||||
Customer services | 498 | 329 | (169 | ) | ||||||||
Administrative and general | 857 | 768 | (89 | ) | ||||||||
Less: Revenue credits | (151 | ) | (149 | ) | 2 | |||||||
Franchise fees and uncollectible customer accounts, taxes (other than income taxes), and other adjustments | 188 | 120 | (68 | ) | ||||||||
Depreciation, return, and income taxes | 3,817 | 3,601 | (216 | ) | ||||||||
Total Revenue Requirements | $ 6,646 | $ 5,977 | $ (669 | ) | ||||||||
The following paragraphs describe the revenue requirement reductions proposed in the settlement agreement compared to that date.
The $129 million reduction in revenue requirements for a four-year period (2007 through 2010), it is expected that the next GRC will set revenue requirements for the Utility’s electric and natural gas distribution operations and electric generation operations formaintenance costs reflects a three-year period (2011 through 2013). The Utility’s broad goals in this GRC are to fund continued investments in safe and reliable service, meet the economic needs of the communities served by the Utility, and work toward a greener, smarter energy future consistent with state and national goals for long-term environmental sustainability.
The draft$169 million reduction in revenue requirements for customer services costs reflects the reduction of costs related to customer retention and economic development efforts, information technology, dynamic pricing, and meter reading. While the Utility’s GRC application indicatesrequested recovery of $113 million for meter reading costs in 2011, the settlement agreement proposes that these costs will instead be recovered via a new balancing account. The balancing account would track and recover incurred meter reading costs, subject to a cap of $76 million, and the Utility also would retain the cost savings attributable to decreased meter reading costs due to the installation of SmartMeter™ devices. The total of the balancing account recovery plus retained cost savings is estimated to approximate the $113 million originally requested.
The $89 million reduction in administrative and general reflects lower funding for various PG&E Corporation and Utility corporate service functions and lower funding for employee incentive compensation. The Utility also agreed to seek recovery of $5 million of costs incurred in connection with the sale of property in another proceeding rather than the GRC.
| • | The $68 million reduction in revenue requirements relating to franchise fees and uncollectible customer accounts, taxes (other than income), and other adjustments, includes $44 million related to return and income taxes on the Utility’s unrecovered investment in conventional electric meters that have been replaced by SmartMeterTM devices. The parties have agreed that this part of the Utility’s request will be litigated as part of the GRC proceeding. If the Utility is successful, the $44 million will be added back to the Utility’s 2011 electric distribution revenue requirement. The settlement agreement also would adopt a higher uncollectible revenue factor that would be used in another CPUC proceeding to determine the amount of revenue the Utility can collect to offset uncollectible customer accounts. This is expected to result in additional revenues of approximately $4 million. |
The $216 million reduction in revenue requirements for depreciation, return, and income taxes consists of a $105 million decrease driven by lower depreciation rates and a $111 million decrease related to lower capital expenditures and other rate base adjustments. About $49 million of the $111 million reduction is related to the treatment of nuclear fuel and fuel oil inventory balances. Under the settlement agreement, the Utility agreed to continue recovering carrying costs on these balances at short-term interest rates (estimated to be $1 million per year based on current rates) through the energy resource recovery balancing account (“ERRA”) in accordance with the current regulatory treatment of these costs, rather than as part of the authorized GRC rate base. Another $20 million of the reduction relates to costs to implement the California Independent System Operator’s Market Redesign and Technology Update (“MRTU”). Consistent with the settlement agreement, the Utility plans to request aseek recovery of MRTU-related costs through the ERRA or other proceedings.
In summary, the settlement agreement proposes revenue increaserequirements of $3.2 billion for 2011 ofelectric distribution (as compared to $3.5 billion included in the GRC application), $1.1 billion or 6.5%for natural gas distribution (as compared to $1.3 billion included in the GRC application), aboveand $1.7 billion for electric generation operations (as compared to $1.8 billion included in the 2010 total revenue forecast.
Attrition Year Revenues
The Utility plans to request that the CPUC adopt new flexible cost recovery mechanisms by establishing balancing accountssettlement agreement provides for several categories of costs that are subject to a high degree of volatility based on economic conditions and other uncontrollable factors, including costs incurred to establish new customer connections, uncollectible accounts, and employee healthcare costs.
Balancing Accounts
The settlement agreement proposes to establish a new “one-way” balancing account for the Utility would adviseto recover up to approximately $20 million per year for costs associated with the Utility’s natural gas distribution integrity management program. If these costs are not spent during the GRC period, the unspent funds must be refunded to customers. With the exception of this proposed new one-way balancing account and the proposed meter reading balancing account discussed above, the settlement agreement proposes to retain the existing balancing account structure without any substantial changes.
Capital Additions and Rate Base
The settlement agreement is consistent with capital expenditures for 2011-2013, averaging $2.2 billion to $2.3 billion per year for the portions of the Utility’s business addressed in the GRC. Proposed capital expenditures are lower than the amount included in the Utility’s GRC application, which averaged $2.7 billion per year, based on a lower forecast for new customer connections and lower capital expenditures for hydroelectric generation facilities, information technology systems, and fleet replacement. The ultimate amounts of capital expenditures will depend on a number of factors, including the level of operations and maintenance, administrative and general, and other costs.
The settlement agreement proposes a 2011 annual average rate base of $16.6 billion for the portions of the Utility’s business reviewed in the GRC compared with the Utility’s request of $17.2 billion. The difference of approximately $600 million is based on the reduction of capital expenditures described above, the removal of MRTU-related capital expenditures, the continued funding of nuclear fuel and fuel oil inventory through the ERRA proceeding rather than through rate base, and the adjustment of deferred taxes to reflect the Utility’s updated estimate of the impact of 2009 bonus depreciation.
Schedule
In order to allow settlement discussions to proceed, the CPUC suspended the procedural schedule for the GRC, which had previously provided for a final decision in December 2010. It is possible that the CPUC will not issue a decision until after the end of the actual amountyear. On August 6, 2010, the Utility filed a motion requesting that, regardless of these proposed increases in October 2011 and October 2012 for years 2012 and 2013, respectively.
PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to predict what amount of revenue requirementswhether the CPUC will authorize forapprove the period from 2011 through 2013, when a final decision in this proceeding will be received, or how the final decision will impact their financial condition or results of operations.
Electric Transmission Owner Rate Cases
On June 18, 2009,July 27, 2010, the FERC approved aan uncontested settlement thatof the Utility’s 12th TO rate case. The settlement sets the Utility’s annual retail transmission base revenue requirement at $776$875 million effective March 1, 2009. (For purposes of determining wholesale transmission2010. Retail electric rates this retailwere adjusted on June 1, 2010 to reflect the revenue requirement is adjusted to $763.5 million.) As part ofadopted in the settlement and the Utility has reserved the difference between revenues collected in the rates requested by the Utility in its TO rate application, from March 1, 2010 until May 31, 2010, and the rates agreed to in the settlement. As a result, the settlement will not impact the Utility’s results of operations or financial condition. The Utility will refund any over-collected amounts to customers, with interest, through an adjustment to rates in 2011.
On July 30, 2009,28, 2010, the Utility filed an application with the FERC requesting an annual retail transmission revenue requirement of $946 million. (For purposes of determining wholesale transmission rates, this retail revenue requirement request has been adjusted to $932 million.)$1.0 billion. The proposed rates represent an increase of $170$150 million over current authorized revenue requirements. On September 30, 2009,2010, the FERC accepted the Utility’s application makingand also permitted the proposed rates to become effective on March 1, 20102011, subject to refund following the conclusion of hearings and the outcome of judge-supervised settlement discussions.
On June 17, 2010, the FERC issued a notice of proposed rulemaking and Incentive Ratemaking
2011 Gas Transmission and Storage Rate Case
In the Utility’s 2011 Gas Transmissiongas transmission and Storagestorage rate case, so that the CPUC canwill determine the rates and terms and conditions of the Utility’s gas transmission and storage services for a four-year period beginning January 1, 2011. The rates,2011 and termscontinuing through 2014.
Proposed Settlement Agreement
On August 20, 2010, the Utility and conditions ofother parties, including TURN and the Utility’s gas transmission and storage services for 2008 through 2010 were set byDRA, requested the terms ofCPUC to approve a CPUC-approved all-partyproposed settlement agreement, known as the Gas Accord IV that was approved byV Settlement Agreement (“Gas Accord V”), to set the CPUC in September 2007.Utility’s gas transmission and storage rates and associated revenue requirements, as well as the market structure, for 2011 through 2014. The Utility proposes to continueproposed Gas Accord V also would extend a majority of the Gas Accord IV’s terms and conditions of natural gas transportation and storage services.
The Gas Accord V proposes a 2011 natural gas transmission and storage revenue requirement of $529.1$514 million, an increase of $67.3$52 million over the 2010 adopted revenue requirement. The Utility also seeks attrition increasesproposed revenue requirement for 2012 is $541 million, $565 million for 2013, and 2014$582 million for 2014. The Gas Accord V proposes average annual capital expenditures of $32.4 million, $30.7$174 million and $22.6average annual depreciation costs of $112 million. The Gas Accord V provides for a 2011 operating and maintenance expense level of $105 million respectively.
Under the Utility’s proposal, a substantial portionproposed Gas Accord V, approximately 45% of the authorized revenue requirements, primarily those costs allocated to residential and small commercialcore customers, (called “core” customers) would continue to be assured of recovery through balancing account mechanisms and/orand fixed reservation charges. The Utility has proposed to simplify the current rate structure by, among other changes, setting rates for core and “non-core” customers based on forecast demand. The Utility’s ability to recover its remaining revenue requirements would continue to depend on throughput volumes gas prices, and the extent to which non-core customers and other shippers contract for firm transmission services. To reduce the Utility’s financial risk of non-recovery on these remaining revenue requirements, the proposed settlement agreement includes a revenue sharing mechanism. An under-collection or over-collection of the remaining revenue requirements associated with these factors,backbone transmission services (35% of authorized revenue requirement) would be shared equally between the Utility has proposed to share equally withand customers (both core and non-core). Customers would be allocated 75% of any under-collection or over-collection of natural gasremaining revenue requirements associated with local transmission andservices (13% of authorized revenue requirement). Customers also would be allocated 75% of any over-collection in
remaining revenue requirements associated with storage services (7% of authorized revenue requirements.requirement), but the Utility would be at risk for 100% of a net under-collection. The Utility has proposedGas Accord V provides for additional cost recovery mechanisms for costs that are difficult to forecast, such as the cost of electricity used to operate natural gas compressor stations and costs that are determined in other Utility regulatory proceedings.
Safety Phase
On October 15, 2010, an additional phase was added to complythe Utility’s 2011 Gas Transmission and Storage Rate Case to address the Utility’s natural gas pipeline safety, integrity, and reliability measures and the Utility’s emergency response procedures used in its natural gas transmission and storage operations. This new “safety phase” will focus on ensuring the safety and reliability of the Utility’s natural gas transmission and storage system. The CPUC will review and consider the types of protocols and procedures that the Utility should have in place or that the CPUC should immediately order to ensure the safe operation of the Utility’s gas transmission and storage operations over the next four years. The ruling notes that the new safety phase is distinct from the NTSB’s and the CPUC’s pending investigations into the cause of the San Bruno Accident, any proceedings that may be opened as a result of the CPUC’s investigation, and any federal or state legislation that may be adopted. Opening comments on the safety phase issues are due November 22, 2010, with greenhouse gas regulations.
Request to Make Rate Changes Effective on January 1, 2011
On October 8, 2010, the parties requested that the CPUC issue a final decision by December 21, 2010 to allow the end of 2010.Utility to adjust 2011 rates (upward or downward) from the date the CPUC issues a final decision on the Gas Accord V assuming the final decision is issued after January, 1, 2011. If the CPUC does not issue a decision on this request by January 1, 2011, the terms of the Gas Accord IV provide that the interim transmission and storage rates beginning January 1, 2011 will equal the rates in effect on December 31, 2010, plus a two percent escalator for local transmission rates.
Procedural Schedule
The CPUC’s procedural schedule calls for the CPUC to issue a final decision on the Gas Accord V and the litigated issues on or before March 10, 2011. It is expected that the CPUC’s procedural schedule for the safety phase will be set in early January 2011.
PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to predict whether or when the CPUC will approve the proposed Gas Accord V. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are also unable to predict what actions the CPUC may require the Utility to take as a result of the new safety phase and whether the costs the Utility incurs to take such actions would be recoverable in whole or part.
Finally, the costs contemplated under the Gas Accord V do not include potential costs associated with the Utility’s proposed Pipeline 2020 program of initiatives, announced on October 12, 2010, to work with regulators and industry experts to strengthen the natural gas system over the next decade. The program is expected to focus on the modernization of critical pipeline infrastructure, the use of automatic or remotely operated shut-off valves, the development of industry-leading best practices, and enhancing public safety. As part of this program, the Utility plans to create a new non-profit entity to research and develop next-generation pipeline inspection and diagnostic tools. The Utility will provide $10 million to fund this new entity at no cost to customers.
Energy Efficiency Programs and Incentive Ratemaking
The CPUC has established a ratemaking mechanism to provide incentives to the California investor-owned utilities to meet the CPUC’s energy savings goals through implementation of the utilities’ 2006-2008 energy efficiency programs. In accordance with this mechanism, the CPUC has awarded the Utility interim incentive revenues totaling $75 million through December 31, 2009 based on the energy savings achieved through implementation of the Utility’s energy efficiency programs during the 2006 through 2008 program cycle.
On September 28, 2010, a proposed decision was issued by the assigned CPUC administrative law judge recommending that no additional incentive revenues be awarded to the Utility. Also on September 28, 2010, an alternate proposed decision was issued by a CPUC commissioner that recommends that the Utility be awarded additional incentive revenues of $40 million, an amount equal to the amounts that had been held back from the interim awards.
The CPUC is scheduled to issue a final decision to complete the true-up process by the end of 2010. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to predict the amount, if any, of additional incentive revenues the Utility may receive for the 2006-2008 program cycle.
The CPUC’s rulemaking proceeding to consider modifications to the existing incentive ratemaking mechanism that would apply to future energy efficiency program cycles is still pending. It is uncertain when the CPUC will issue a decision in this proceeding.
Direct Access
As authorized by California Senate Bill 695, on March 11, 2010, the CPUC adopted a plan to approvere-open “direct access” on a limited and gradual basis to allow eligible customers of the three California investor-owned utilities to purchase electricity from independent electric service providers rather than from a utility. Effective April 11, 2010, all qualifying non-residential customers became eligible to take direct access service subject to annual and absolute caps. It is estimated that the total amount of direct access that will be allowed in the Utility’s service territory by the end of the four-year phase-in period will be equal to approximately 11% of the Utility’s total annual retail sales at the end of the period, roughly the highest level that was reached before the CPUC suspended direct access. Further legislative action is required to exceed these limits. The adopted phase-in schedule is designed to provide enough lead time for the utilities to account for small shifts in load and avoid unwarranted cost shifting and stranded costs.
2009 Energy Resource Recovery Account Compliance Proceeding
The Utility recovers its electricity procurement costs and the fuel costs for the Utility’s own generation facilities (but excluding the costs of electricity allocated to the Utility’s customers under DWR contracts) through ERRA, a balancing account that tracks the difference between (1) billed/unbilled ERRA revenues and (2) electric procurement costs incurred under the Utility’s authorized procurement plans. To determine rates used to collect ERRA revenues, each year the CPUC reviews the Utility’s forecasted procurement costs related to power purchase agreements and generation fuel expense and approves a forecasted revenue requirement. The CPUC also performs an annual compliance review of the procurement activities recorded in the ERRA to ensure that the Utility’s procurement activities are in compliance with its approved procurement plans.
The Utility’s 2009 ERRA compliance review proceeding is currently pending before the CPUC. On July 9, 2010, the DRA filed testimony to recommend that the CPUC disallow $176 million of costs that the DRA estimates the Utility incurred in 2009 to buy power during 110 outages of the Utility’s own generation facilities. The DRA argued that since the Utility did not present evidence of the reasonableness of its outage management activities and the related replacement costs in its initial application and testimony, these costs should be disallowed. On August 4, 2010, the CPUC administrative law judge overseeing the proceeding granted the Utility’s request to strike the DRA’s testimony. The CPUC is expected to issue a final decision in this proceeding by December 31, 2010.
The Utility’s operations are subject to extensive federal, state, and local laws and permits relating to the protection of the environment and the safety and health of the Utility’s personnel and the public. (See “Risk Factors” in the 2009 Annual Report.) These laws and requirements relate to a broad range of the Utility’s activities, including the discharge of pollutants into the air, water, and soil; the transportation, handling, storage, and disposal of spent nuclear fuel; remediation of hazardous wastes; and the reporting and reduction of carbon dioxide and other GHG emissions. (In July 2010, PG&E Corporation and the Utility posted their annual Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability Report athttp://www.pgecorp.com. This report includes the Utility’s third-party verified GHG emissions data for 2008. This report is not incorporated by reference into this quarterly report.)
Recent developments since the 2009 Annual Report was filed are discussed below.
Climate Change
AB 32 requires the gradual reduction of GHG emissions in California to 1990 levels by 2020 on a schedule beginning in 2012. (See “Environmental Matters” in the 2009 Annual Report.) On November 2, 2010, California voters defeated a ballot initiative, Proposition 23, to suspend AB 32.
In December 2008, the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”), the state agency charged with setting and monitoring GHG and other emission limits, adopted a scoping plan that contains recommendations for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG reductions to meet the 2020 reduction target. These recommendations include increasing renewable energy supplies, increasing energy efficiency goals, expanding the use of combined heat and power facilities, and developing a multi-sector cap-and-trade program.
On September 23, 2010, the CARB adopted regulations that require virtually all load-serving entities, including the Utility, to increase their deliveries of renewable energy to meet specific annual targets. For 2012, 2013, and 2014, the amount of electricity delivered from renewable energy resources must equal at least 20% of total energy deliveries, increasing to 24% in 2015, 2016, and 2017, 28% in 2018 and 2019, and 33% in 2020 and beyond. Regulated load-serving entities are allowed to use an unlimited number of tradable renewable energy credits (“RECs”) to comply. (A tradable REC refers to a certificate of proof of the procurement of the
green attributes unbundled from the associated energy. The certificate may be transferred to any third party and resold.) The CARB can impose penalties for failure to meet the targets but it is unclear how the penalties would be calculated or whether the total penalties are subject to an annual maximum. For example, the CPUC has established an annual maximum penalty of $25 million for failure to meet the existing renewable portfolio standard (“RPS”) established under California law. Further, the CARB did not adopt “flexible compliance rules” such as those used by the CPUC to determine compliance with current RPS requirements. The CARB has directed its staff to modify the regulations to address concerns about the potential for excessive penalties. It is uncertain when the modified final regulations will be issued.
In addition, on October 28, 2010, the CARB issued proposed cap-and-trade regulations and proposed amendments to the existing regulation for the mandatory reporting of GHG emissions. Following a 45-day public comment period, these regulations will be presented for the CARB’s consideration in mid-December 2010. If adopted by the CARB and approved by the Office of Administrative Law, the regulations would set an annual cap on GHG emissions from 2012 to 2020 and allow companies to buy and sell emission allowances or offsets to meet the applicable cap. Some emission allowances would be allocated to the electric sector utilities at no cost for the benefit of their customers. The price of other emission allowances would be subject to a price collar. The CARB has indicated that the natural gas and transportation-fuel sectors will not be included in the cap-and-trade program until 2015. The ultimate financial impact of the new rates effective Januarycap-and-trade system will depend on various factors, including the quantity of allowances that are freely allocated to utilities for customer benefit, the actual market price of emissions allowances over time, the availability of emission offsets, and the extent to which California’s cap-and-trade program is linked to other state, regional or national programs.
Renewable Energy Resources
Current California law establishes a RPS that requires California retail sellers of electricity, such as the Utility, to increase their deliveries of renewable energy (such as biomass, hydroelectric facilities with a capacity of 30 MW or less, wind, solar, and geothermal energy) each year, so that the amount of electricity delivered from these eligible renewable resources equals at least 20% of their total retail sales by the end of 2010. If a retail seller is unable to meet its target for a particular year, the current CPUC “flexible compliance” rules allow the retail seller to use future energy deliveries from already-executed contracts to satisfy any shortfalls, provided those deliveries occur within three years of the shortfall. For the year ended December 31, 2009, the Utility’s RPS-eligible renewable resource deliveries equaled 14.4% of its total retail electricity sales. Most of the renewable energy that was delivered was purchased by the Utility from third parties, mainly under agreements with qualifying facility generators, irrigation districts, and other bilateral contracts. As of September 30, 2010, the Utility believes it will meet the RPS mandate for 2010 through reliance on the CPUC’s flexible compliance rules. On September 1, 2011,2010, the September 2007California Legislature failed to pass Senate Bill 722 which proposed to establish a 33% RPS by 2020. Additional legislation may be considered and adopted in the future. In addition, as described above, the CARB has adopted regulations imposing a 33% renewable energy standard to be met by 2020 to help reduce GHG emissions as required by AB 32.
Uncertainty still exists regarding whether RECs can be used to comply with the current RPS requirements. The
CPUC issued a decision in March 2010 which, among other provisions, imposes a price cap of fifty dollars per tradable REC, and permits investor-owned utilities to use tradable RECs to comply with up to 25% of their annual RPS procurement target in any year and carry over any excess RECs for compliance in future years. For purposes of computing the annual limit, the CPUC decision approvingclassifies power-purchase contracts with out-of-state renewable generation facilities as RECs. Most of the Gas Accord IVUtility’s power-purchase contracts with out-of-state renewable generation facilities would be included in the computation of the 25% limit, negatively affecting the Utility’s ability to meet the RPS. The CPUC stayed its decision in May 2010 after various parties, including the Utility, requested the CPUC to modify the decision. A proposed decision has been issued which, if adopted by the CPUC, would lift the stay, reaffirm the price cap, increase the REC limit to 30%, and exclude power-purchase contracts for out-of state-renewable resources from the 30% limit if the contracts had been executed and approved by the CPUC before March 11, 2010. The proposed decision provides that the ratesannual 30% limit and termsprice cap would expire automatically on December 31, 2013. On October 25, 2010, an alternate proposed decision was issued that, if approved by the CPUC, would lift the stay, reaffirm the price cap and conditions of serviceannual 25% limit on REC transactions as approved in effectthe CPUC’s March 2010 decision, and reinstate provisions in the March 2010 decision that would increase the REC usage cap if approved contracts as of December 31, 2010, willthe effective date of that decision would cause a utility to be over the cap. Otherwise, if a utility subsequently exceeds the cap, the utility may bank forward the deliveries to a year in which the cap is not exceeded. Furthermore, the alternate proposed decision would require the annual limit and price cap to remain in effect until it is superseded by a CPUC decision or an act of California Legislature. If the alternate proposed decision is approved, renewable energy contracts submitted after May 6, 2010 (the date the stay becomes effective) must be re-filed to comply with an automatic 2% escalationthe CPUC’s March 2010 decision. It is uncertain when the CPUC will take action on the proposed decisions.
Water Quality
There is continuing uncertainty about the status of state and federal regulations issued under Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act, which require that cooling water intake structures at electric power plants, such as the nuclear generation facilities at Diablo Canyon, reflect the best technology available to minimize adverse environmental impacts. Although the U.S. EPA will not issue draft revised regulations until February 2011, on May 4, 2010, the California Water Resources Control Board (“Water Board”) adopted a policy on once-through cooling. The policy, effective October 1, 2010, generally requires the installation of cooling towers or other significant measures to reduce the impact on marine life from existing power generation facilities by at least 85%. However, with respect to the state’s nuclear power generation facilities, the policy allows other compliance measures to be taken if the costs to install cooling towers are “wholly out of proportion” to the costs considered by the Water Board in developing its policy or if the installation of cooling towers would be “wholly unreasonable” after considering non-cost factors such as engineering and permitting constraints and adverse environmental impacts. The Utility believes that the costs to install cooling towers at Diablo Canyon, which could be as much as $4.5 billion, will meet the “wholly out of proportion” test. The Utility also believes that the installation of cooling towers at Diablo Canyon would be “wholly unreasonable.” If the Water Board disagreed and if the installation of cooling towers at Diablo Canyon were not technically or economically feasible, the Utility may be forced to cease operations at Diablo Canyon and may incur a material charge. (See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2009 Annual Report for more information.) Assuming the Water Board does not require the installation of cooling towers at Diablo Canyon, the Utility could incur significant costs to comply with alternative compliance measures or to make payments to support various environmental mitigation projects. The Utility would seek to recover such costs in rates. The Utility’s Diablo Canyon operations must be in compliance with the Water Board’s policy by December 31, 2024.
Remediation
The Utility has been, and may be, required to pay for environmental remediation at sites where it has been, or may be, a potentially responsible party under federal and state environmental laws. These sites include former manufactured gas plant sites, power plant sites, gas gathering sites, sites where natural gas compressor stations are located, and sites used by the Utility for the storage, recycling, or disposal of potentially hazardous substances. Under federal and California laws, the Utility may be responsible for remediation of hazardous substances even if it did not deposit those substances on the site. (See Note 10 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, for a discussion of estimated environmental remediation liabilities.)
SmartMeterTM Technology
The CPUC has authorized the Utility to recover $2.2 billion in estimated project costs, including $1.8 billion of capital expenditures to install approximately 10 million advanced electric and gas meters throughout the Utility’s service territory by the end of 2012. As of September 30, 2010, the Utility has incurred $1.9 billion in connection with its SmartMeter™ program. In light of unanticipated cost pressures, including those relating to customer-related communications and outreach issues that have arisen since the summer of 2009, the Utility forecasts that total costs may exceed $2.2 billion. The CPUC also has authorized the Utility to recover in rates 90% of up to $100 million in costs that exceed $2.2 billion without a reasonableness review. Costs incurred by the Utility in
excess of $2.3 billion would be subject to a reasonableness review for recovery. The Utility is unable to predict whether it will incur a material amount of costs in excess of these authorized amounts and whether the Utility would be able to recover such additional costs through rates.
Advanced electric meters, which record energy usage in hourly or quarter-hourly increments, allow customers to track energy usage throughout the billing month and thus enable greater customer control over electricity costs. Usage data is collected through a wireless communication network and transmitted to the Utility’s information system where the data is stored and used for billing and other Utility business purposes. These meters will allow the implementation of “dynamic pricing” rates that are designed to reflect the higher cost of electricity during periods of high demand. The CPUC has ordered the Utility to implement certain dynamic pricing rates for some customer classes by February 2011. The Utility has requested that the CPUC extend the date to November 2011 to allow the Utility more time to develop the web-based tools necessary for customers to evaluate the new rates.
As of September 30, 2010, the Utility has 6.9 million meters installed. Based on the tests that the Utility has performed, more than 99% of the meters perform accurately as designed and within expectations. The Utility has not found any material design defects, but has found, as is to be expected with any new technology applied on this scale, that a small percentage of January 1, 2011.
On June 17, 2010, the City and County of San Francisco (“CCSF”) filed a petition requesting the CPUC to temporarily suspend the installation of additional SmartMeter™ devices until the CPUC has completed its independent assessment. CCSF also filed a motion requesting expedited treatment of its petition. Several municipalities filed pleadings in support of CCSF’s petition. On September 2, 2010, the CPUC released the report of its independent consultant that was engaged by the CPUC to assess the Utility’s SmartMeter™ program, including meter and billing accuracy, customer complaints, end-to-end operational processes, and overall program planning and performance. The consultant’s evaluation report found that the Utility’s SmartMeter™ devices and related billing processes perform accurately and as designed. On September 22, 2010, a CPUC administrative law judge denied CCSF’s request for expedited treatment of its petition and requested the parties to submit comments on CCSF’s petition in light of the consultant’s report. On October 15, 2010, the Utility filed comments urging the CPUC to dismiss CCSF’s petitiongiven the reports’ findings on meter and billing accuracy. Other parties have requested that the CPUC take additional steps before concluding its investigation.
The CPUC is also considering two additional requests from private groups to halt the installation of SmartMeter™ devices based on concerns about the health, environmental, and safety impacts of the radio frequency (“RF”) technology on which the Utility’s SmartMeter™ program relies. On October 26, 2010, a proposed decision was issued that, if adopted by the CPUC, would dismiss one of the requests on the basis that the SmartMeter™ devices are licensed and certified by the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) and comply with all FCC requirements.
On October 25, 2010, the Superior Court in Bakersfield, California, granted the Utility’s request to dismiss a class action lawsuit that had alleged that the new meters, wireless network, and software and billing system led to electric bill overcharges. The court agreed with the Utility that the lawsuit should be dismissed because, among other reasons, the CPUC retains exclusive jurisdiction over the issues raised in the lawsuit. The court’s order permits the plaintiffs to file a new lawsuit within 20 days in lieu of appealing the dismissal. In addition, on September 17, 2010, the lawyer that filed the Superior Court class action lawsuit filed an application at the CPUC, on behalf of customers, requesting that the CPUC modify its prior decisions and shift the costs of the Utilitys SmartMeter™ technology upgrade to the Utility.On October 27, 2010, the Utility requested that the CPUC dismiss the application because it improperly seeks to re-litigate issues the CPUC has already decided on.
A California State Senate committee is continuing to investigate and review the deployment of the “smart grid” throughout California, focusing on the Utility’s SmartMeter™ program and the integrity and reliability of new metering technologies and the consumer protections in place with respect to billing, disconnection, and real-time pricing. The Utility has provided all requested information to the committee about the installed meters. The committee is expected to submit its report to the California Senate, including recommendations for appropriate legislation, by November 30, 2010.
In addition, class action complaints have been filed in federal and California state court against the various companies that have supplied SmartMeter™ devices, components, and software to the Utility. (These complaints do not name the Utility as a defendant.) These complaints allege that the new meters report electric consumption in amounts materially greater than the electricity that the class members actually consumed, resulting in electric bill overcharges.
The Utility is continuing to install the new meters. Various municipalities in the Utility’s service territory have approved ordinances to either suspend or prohibit the installation of SmartMeter™ devices primarily based on concerns about the health, environmental, and safety impacts of the RF technology on which the Utility’s SmartMeter™ program relies. The CPUC has stated that such ordinances would interfere with the CPUC’s exclusive jurisdiction over the Utility’s SmartMeter™ program.
The outcome of the matters discussed above may have an effect on the Utility’s ability to recover costs to implement advanced metering if the CPUC finds that the costs are not reasonable or are otherwise disallowed. Further, if the Utility is prohibited from continuing to install the new meters or if the Utility otherwise fails to recognize the expected benefits of its advanced metering infrastructure, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows could be materially adversely affected.
The Utility and PG&E Corporation, mainly through its ownership of the Utility, are exposed to market risk, which is the risk that changes in market conditions will adversely affect net income or cash flows. PG&E Corporation and the Utility face market risk associated with their operations; their financing arrangements; the marketplace for electricity, natural gas, electricity transmission, natural gas transportation, and storage; other goods and services; and other aspects of their businesses. PG&E Corporation and the Utility categorize market risks as price risk“price risk” and interest“interest rate risk.” The Utility is also exposed to credit“credit risk, which is” the risk that counterparties fail to perform their contractual obligations. For
The Utility actively manages market risks through risk management programs designed to support business objectives, discourage unauthorized risk-taking, reduce commodity cost volatility, and manage cash flows. The Utility uses derivative instruments only for risk mitigation purposes and not for speculative purposes. The Utility’s risk management activities include the use of energy and financial instruments such as forward contracts, futures, swaps, options, and other instruments and agreements, most of which are accounted for as derivative instruments. Some contracts are accounted for as leases.
On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law new federal financial reform legislation, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are evaluating the new legislation, and will review future regulations to assess compliance requirements as well as potential impacts on the Utility’s procurement activities and risk management programs.
Price Risk
The Utility is exposed to commodity price risk as a comprehensive discussionresult of PG&E Corporation’s market risk, seeits electricity and natural gas procurement activities, including the section entitled “Risk Management Activities” inprocurement of natural gas and nuclear fuel necessary for electricity generation and natural gas procurement for core customers. As long as the 2008 Annual Report.
The Utility’s natural gas transportation and storage costs for non-core customers may not be fully recoverable. The Utility is subject to bid capsprice and volumetric risk for the portion of intrastate natural gas transportation and storage capacity that increase over time.has not been sold under long-term contracts providing for the recovery of all fixed costs through the collection of fixed reservation charges. The Utility expects to continue to relysells most of its capacity based on electricity from a diverse mixthe volume of resources, including third-party contracts, amounts allocated under DWR contracts, and its own electricity generation facilities to meet customer demand. A relatively small proportion ofgas that the Utility’s total customer demand must be met through purchases incustomers actually ship, which exposes the MRTU markets. As a result, exposureUtility to price volatility in the new MRTU markets is minimal. The CAISO must implement additional FERC-ordered changes over the next several years. Market risks, if any, associated with these changes will be assessed as the design and timelines are finalized during the 2009-2010 period.
The Utility uses value-at-risk to measure the shareholders’ exposure to price and volumetric risks resulting from variability in the price of, and demand for, natural gas transportation and storage services.services that could impact revenues due to changes in market prices and customer demand. Value-at-risk measures this exposure over a rolling 12-month forward period and assumes that the contract positions are held through expiration. This calculation is based on a 95% confidence level, which means that there is a 5% probability that the impact to revenues on a pre-tax basis, over the rolling 12-month forward period, will be at least as large as the reported value-at-risk. Value-at-risk uses market data to quantify the Utility’s price exposure. When market data is not available, the Utility uses historical data or market proxies to extrapolate the required market data. Value-at-risk as a measure of portfolio risk has several limitations, including, but not limited to, inadequate indication of the exposure to extreme price movements and the use of historical data or market proxies that may not adequately capture portfolio risk.
The Utility’s value-at-risk calculated under the methodology described above was $17$14 million at September 30, 2009.2010. The Utility’s high, low, and average values-at-risk at September 30, 20092010 were $34$20 million, $9$10 million, and $17$14 million, respectively.
See Note 7 of the Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of price risk management activities.
Interest Rate Risk
Interest rate risk sensitivity analysis is used to measure interest rate risk by computing estimated changes in cash flows as a result of assumed changes in market interest rates. At September 30, 2009,2010, if interest rates changed by 1% for all current PG&E Corporation and the Utility variable rate and short-term debt and investments, the change would have an immaterial impact toaffect net income overfor the next twelve months.
Credit Risk
The Utility conducts business with counterparties mainly in the energy industry, including other California investor-owned electric utilities, municipal utilities, energy trading companies, financial institutions, and oil and natural gas production companies located in the United States and Canada. If a counterparty failed to perform on its contractual obligation to deliver electricity or gas, then the Utility may find it necessary to procure electricity or gas at current market prices, which may be higher than the contract prices.
The Utility manages credit risk associated with its wholesale customers and counterparties by assigning credit limits based on evaluations of their financial conditions, net worth, credit ratings, and other credit criteria as deemed appropriate. Credit limits and credit quality are monitored periodically, and a detailed credit analysis is performed at least annually.periodically. The Utility executesties many energy contracts to master commodity enabling agreements that may require security (referred to as “credit collateral”)“Credit Collateral” in the table below). Credit Collateral may be in the form of cash or letters of credit,credit. The Utility may accept other forms of performance assurance in the form of corporate guarantees of acceptable credit quality or other eligible securities if(as deemed appropriate by the Utility). Credit Collateral or performance assurance may be required from counterparties when current net receivables and replacement cost exposure exceed contractually specified limits.
The following table summarizes the Utility’s net credit risk exposure to its wholesale customers and counterparties, as well as the Utility’s credit risk exposure to its wholesale customers or counterparties with aaccounting for greater than 10% net credit exposure, atas of September 30, 20092010 and December 31, 2008:
| (in millions) | Gross Credit Exposure Before Credit Collateral(1) | Credit Collateral | Net Credit Exposure(2) | Number of Wholesale Customers or Counterparties >10% | Net Exposure to Wholesale Customers or Counterparties >10% | |||||||||||||||
| September 30, 2009 | $ | 227 | $ | 45 | $ | 182 | 3 | $ | 148 | |||||||||||
| December 31, 2008 | $ | 240 | $ | 84 | $ | 156 | 2 | $ | 107 | |||||||||||
(1) Gross credit exposure equals mark-to-market value on financially settled contracts, notes receivable, and net receivables (payables) where netting is contractually allowed. Gross and net credit exposure amounts reported above do not include adjustments for time value or liquidity. | ||||||||||||||||||||
(2) Net credit exposure is the gross credit exposure minus credit collateral (cash deposits and letters of credit). For purposes of this table, parental guarantees are not included as part of the calculation. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| (in millions) | Gross Exposure | Credit Collateral | Net Credit Exposure (2) | Number of Wholesale Customers or >10% | Net Exposure to Wholesale Customers or >10% | |||||||||||||||
September 30, 2010 | $ 189 | $ 26 | $ 163 | 2 | $ 117 | |||||||||||||||
December 31, 2009 | $ 202 | $ 24 | $ 178 | 3 | $ 154 | |||||||||||||||
| (1) Gross credit exposure equals mark-to-market value on physically and financially settled contracts, notes receivable, and net receivables (payables) where netting is contractually allowed. Gross and net credit exposure amounts reported above do not include adjustments for time value or liquidity. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| (2) Net credit exposure is the Gross Credit Exposure Before Credit Collateral minus Credit Collateral (cash deposits and letters of credit). For purposes of this table, parental guarantees are not included as part of the calculation. | ||||||||||||||||||||
The preparation of Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in accordance with GAAPU.S. generally accepted accounting principles involves the use of estimates and assumptions that affect the recorded amounts of assets and liabilities as of the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. The accounting policies described below are considered to be critical accounting policies, due, in part, to their complexity and because their application is relevant and material to the financial position and results of operations of PG&E Corporation and the Utility, and because these policies require the use of material judgments and estimates. In addition, management has made significant estimates and assumptions about accruals related to the rupture of a natural gas transmission pipeline owned and operated by the Utility in the City of San Bruno, California on September 9, 2010, as well as accruals for various legal matters. Actual results may differ substantially from these estimates. These policies and their key characteristics are discussed in detail in the 20082009 Annual Report. They include:
regulatory assets and liabilities;
environmental remediation liabilities;
asset retirement obligations;
accounting for income taxes; and
pension and other postretirement plans.
For the periodnine months ended September 30, 2009,2010, there were no changes in the methodology for computing critical accounting estimates no additional accounting estimates met the standards for critical accounting policies, and no material changes to the important assumptions underlying the critical accounting estimates.
PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s primary market risk results from changes in energy prices. PG&E Corporation and the Utility engage in price risk management activities for non-trading purposes only. Both PG&E Corporation and the Utility may engage in these price risk management activities using forward contracts, futures, options, and swaps to hedge the impact of market fluctuations on energy commodity prices and interest rates (see “Risk Management Activities” above under Item 2: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations).
Based on an evaluation of PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s disclosure controls and procedures as of September 30, 2009,2010, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s respective principal executive officers and principal financial officers have concluded that such controls and procedures arewere effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by PG&E Corporation and the Utility in reports that the companies file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“1934 Act”) is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC rules and forms. In addition, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s respective principal executive officers and principal financial officers have concluded that such controls and procedures were effective in ensuring that information required to be disclosed by PG&E Corporation and the Utility in the reports that PG&E Corporation and the Utility file or submit under the 1934 Act is accumulated and communicated to PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s management, including PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s respective principal executive officers and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
There were no changes in internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended September 30, 20092010 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, PG&E Corporation’s or the Utility’s internal control over financial reporting.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Diablo Canyon Power Plant
On October 1, 2010, the state Water Board adopted a policy on once-through cooling. The policy, effective October 1, 2010, generally requires the installation of cooling towers or other significant measures to reduce the impact on marine life from existing power generation facilities by at least 85%. However, with respect to the state’s nuclear power generation facilities, the policy allows other compliance measures to be taken if the costs to install cooling towers are “wholly out of proportion” to the costs considered by the California Attorney GeneralWater Board in developing its policy or if the installation of cooling towers would be “wholly unreasonable” after considering non-cost factors such as engineering and permitting constraints and adverse environmental impacts. The policy could affect future negotiations between the Water Board and the CityUtility regarding the status of the 2003 settlement agreement concerning a proposed draft Cease and County of San Francisco
PG&E Corporation and the Utility believe that the ultimate outcome of this matter will not have a material adverse impact on the Utility’s financial condition or results of operations.
San Bruno Accident
Following the San Bruno Accident, various lawsuits, including two class action lawsuits, have been filed by residents of San Bruno in the San Mateo County Superior Court and San Francisco County Superior Court against PG&E Corporation and the Utility. The class action lawsuits include a demand that the $100 million the Utility announced would be available for assistance be placed under court supervision. These lawsuits allege causes of action for strict liability, negligence, public nuisance, private nuisance, and declaratory relief. Another lawsuit was filed in San Mateo County Superior Court as a purported shareholder derivative lawsuit to seek recovery on behalf of PG&E Corporation and the Utility for alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by officers and directors, among other claims. The other lawsuits, including some that have been filed in San Francisco County Superior Court, seek to recover damages for wrongful death, property damage, and personal injury.
The Utility maintains liability insurance for damages in the approximate amount of $992 million in excess of a $10 million deductible. Although PG&E Corporation and the Utility currently consider it likely that most of the costs the Utility incurs for third-party claims relating to the San Bruno Accident will ultimately be covered by this insurance, no amounts for insurance recoveries have been recorded as of September 30, 2010. PG&E Corporation and the Utility are unable to predict the amount and timing of such recoveries.
For more information regarding the San Bruno Accident and the related NTSB and CPUC investigations, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Explosion and Fires in San Bruno, California.”
A discussion of the significant risks associated with investments in the securities of PG&E Corporation and the Utility is set forth under the heading “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Risk Factors” in the 20082009 Annual Report.
The discussionultimate amount of loss the potential impact of climate change appearingUtility bears in connection with the 2008 Annual Report under the heading “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Risk Factors” under the following caption “The Utility’s future operations may be impacted by climate change that maySan Bruno Accident could have a material adverse impact on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition and results of operationsoperations.” is updated as follows
PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial statements for the period ended September 30, 2010 reflect a provision of $220 million for estimated third-party claims related to reflect new scientific evidence regarding climate change:
As more information becomes known, including increased frequencyinformation resulting from the NTSB and severity of hot weather, reduced runoff from snow pack,CPUC investigations, management’s estimates and increased sea levels. Theassumptions regarding the financial impact of eventsthe San Bruno Accident may change. A change in management’s estimates or conditions caused by climate change could range widely, from highly localized to worldwide, and the extent to which the Utility’s operations may be affected is uncertain. For example, if reduced snowpack decreases the Utility’s hydroelectric generation capacity, there will be a need for additional generation capacity from other sources. Under certain conditions, the events or conditions caused by climate changeassumptions could result in an adjustment that would have a full or partial disruptionmaterial impact on PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition and results of operations during the period in which such change occurred.
The Utility maintains liability insurance for damages in the approximate amount of $992 million after a $10 million deductible. PG&E Corporation and the Utility currently consider it likely that most of the ability ofcosts the Utility or one or more entities on which it relies,incurs for third-party claims relating to generate, transmit, transport or distribute electricity or natural gas. The Utility has been studying the potential effects of climate change on the Utility’s operationsSan Bruno Accident will ultimately be covered by this insurance. However, PG&E Corporation and is developing contingency plans to adapt to those events and conditions that the Utility believes are most likelyunable to occur. Events or conditions caused by climate change could have a greater impact onpredict the Utility’s operations than has been forecasttiming and could result in lower revenues or increased expenses, or both. amount of insurance recoveries.
If the CPUC wereUtility records losses in connection with third-party claims related to fail to adjust the Utility’s rates to reflectSan Bruno Accident that materially exceed the impact of events or conditions caused by climate change,amount it has accrued for these liabilities, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows could be materially adversely affected in the reporting periods during which additional charges are recorded depending on whether and when the Utility is able to record or collect insurance recoveries in amounts sufficient to offset such additional accruals during the same reporting periods.
In addition, the Utility currently anticipates that it will incur additional unbudgeted costs for inspection and maintenance of its natural gas transmission system. The Utility also may incur costs, beyond the amount currently anticipated, in response to NTSB or CPUC orders or requests as the investigations continue. Further, state or federal legislation may be enacted that would require the Utility to incur additional costs by mandating various changes, including changes to its operating practice standards for natural gas transmission operations and safety, use of certain types of inspection methods and equipment, and installations of certain types of valves. If the Utility incurs a material amount of costs that it is unable to recover through rates or offset through operational or other cost savings, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows would be materially and adversely affected.
Finally, if it is determined that the Utility did not comply with applicable statutes, regulations, rules, tariffs, or orders in connection with the San Bruno Accident or in connection with the operations or maintenance of the Utility’s natural gas system, and the Utility is ordered to pay a material amount in customer refunds, penalties, or other amounts, PG&E Corporation’s and the Utility’s financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows would be materially and adversely affected.
During the quarter ended September 30, 2010, PG&E Corporation contributedmade equity of $35contributions totaling $40 million to the Utility in order to maintain the 52% common equity target authorized by the CPUCcomponent of its CPUC-authorized capital structure and to ensure that the Utility has adequate capital to fund its capital expenditures. The Utility did not make any sales of unregistered equity securities during the quarter ended September 30, 2010.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
PG&E Corporation common stock:
Period | Total Number of Shares Purchased | Average Price Per Share | Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs | Approximate Dollar Value of Shares that May Yet be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs | ||||||||||||
July 1 through July 31, 2010 | 496 (1) | $ 42.56 | - | $ - | ||||||||||||
August 1 through August 31, 2010 | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||
September 1 through September 30, 2010 | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||
Total | 496 | $ 42.56 | - | $ - | ||||||||||||
(1) Shares of PG&E Corporation common stock tendered to pay stock option exercise price.
During the quarter ended September 30, 2009, PG&E Corporation issued 331,404 shares of common stock at a conversion price of $15.09 per share in an unregistered offering upon conversion of $5 million principal amount of PG&E Corporation 9.50% Convertible Subordinated Notes originally issued in an unregistered offering in 2002.
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock Dividends
The Utility’s earnings to fixed charges ratio for the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 was 3.19.3.32. The Utility’s earnings to combined fixed charges and preferred stock dividends ratio for the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 was 3.13.3.26. The statement of the foregoing ratios, together with the statements of the computation of the foregoing ratios filed as Exhibits 12.1 and 12.2 hereto, are included herein for the purpose of incorporating such information and Exhibits into the Utility’s Registration Statement Nos. 33-62488 and 333-149361 relating to various series of the Utility’s first preferred stock and its senior notes, respectively.
PG&E Corporation’s earnings to fixed charges ratio for the nine months ended September 30, 20092010 was 2.99.3.10. The statement of the foregoing ratio, together with the statement of the computation of the foregoing ratio filed as Exhibit 12.3 hereto, is included herein for the purpose of incorporating such information and Exhibit into PG&E Corporation’s Registration Statement No. 333-149360 relating to its senior notes.
| 4.1 | ||
| 4.2 | Eleventh Supplemental Indenture dated as of October 12, 2010 relating to the issuance of $250,000,000 aggregate principal amount of Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Floating Rate Senior Notes due October 11, 2011 (incorporated by reference to Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 12, 2010 (File No. 1-2348), Exhibit 4.1) | |
| *10.1 | Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan of PG&E Corporation as amended effective as of September | |
| *10.2 | PG&E Corporation Executive Stock Ownership Program Guidelines as amended effective September 15, 2010 | |
| *10.3 | PG&E Corporation 2010 Executive Stock Ownership Guidelines as adopted September 14, 2010, effective January 1, 2011 | |
| 12.1 | Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges for Pacific Gas and Electric Company | |
| 12.2 | Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock Dividends for Pacific Gas and Electric Company | |
| 12.3 | Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges for PG&E Corporation | |
| 31.1 | Certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of PG&E Corporation required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
| 31.2 | Certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Pacific Gas and Electric Company required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
| Certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of PG&E Corporation required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | ||
| Certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Pacific Gas and Electric Company required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | ||
| ***101.INS | XBRL Instance Document | |
| ***101.SCH | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema | |
| ***101.CAL | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation | |
| ***101.DEF | XBRL Extension Definition | |
| ***101.LAB | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label | |
| ***101.PRE | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation | |
| * | Management contract or compensatory agreement. |
| ** | Pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of SEC Regulation S-K, these |
| *** | Pursuant to Rule 406T of SEC Regulation S-T, these interactive data files are deemed not filed or part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of Sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 or Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and otherwise are not subject to liability under these sections. These files are being submitted only by PG&E Corporation and not by its subsidiary, Pacific Gas and Electric Company. |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrants have duly caused this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q to be signed on their behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
| PG&E CORPORATION |
KENT M. HARVEY |
Kent M. Harvey Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (duly authorized officer and principal financial officer) |
| PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY |
SARA A. CHERRY |
Sara A. Cherry Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer (duly authorized officer and principal financial officer) |
Dated: October 29, 2009
EXHIBIT INDEX
| 4.1 | ||
| 4.2 | Eleventh Supplemental Indenture dated as of October 12, 2010 relating to the issuance of $250,000,000 aggregate principal amount of Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Floating Rate Senior Notes due October 11, 2011 (incorporated by reference to Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 12, 2010 (File No. 1-2348), Exhibit 4.1) | |
| *10.1 | Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan of PG&E Corporation as amended effective as of September | |
| *10.2 | PG&E Corporation Executive Stock Ownership Program Guidelines as amended effective September 15, 2010 | |
| *10.3 | PG&E Corporation 2010 Executive Stock Ownership Guidelines as adopted September 14, 2010, effective January 1, 2011 | |
| 12.1 | Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges for Pacific Gas and Electric Company | |
| 12.2 | Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock Dividends for Pacific Gas and Electric Company | |
| 12.3 | Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges for PG&E Corporation | |
| 31.1 | Certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of PG&E Corporation required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
| 31.2 | Certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Pacific Gas and Electric Company required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
| Certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of PG&E Corporation required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | ||
| Certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Pacific Gas and Electric Company required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | ||
| ***101.INS | XBRL Instance Document | |
| ***101.SCH | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema | |
| ***101.CAL | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation | |
| ***101.DEF | XBRL Extension Definition | |
| ***101.LAB | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label | |
| ***101.PRE | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation | |
| * | Management contract or compensatory agreement. |
| ** | Pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of SEC Regulation S-K, these |
| *** | Pursuant to Rule 406T of SEC Regulation S-T, these interactive data files are deemed not filed or part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of Sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 or Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and otherwise are not subject to liability under these sections. These files are being submitted only by PG&E Corporation and not by its subsidiary, Pacific Gas and Electric Company. |
72