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, 2012 orMarch 31, 2013

OR

¨

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the transition period from              to

 

Commission
file number

Exact name of registrants as specified in theircharters, addresses of principal executiveoffices, 

telephone numbers and states of incorporation

IRS Employer

Identification No.

1-32853_________________________

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

550 South Tryon Street

Charlotte, NC 28202-1803

704-382-3853

State of Incorporation: Delaware

20-2777218

 

 

 

1-4928Commission file number

Registrant, State of Incorporation or Organization,

Address of Principal Executive Offices, and Telephone Number

IRS Employer Identification No.

1-32853

 

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

(a Delaware corporation)

550 South Tryon Street

Charlotte, North Carolina 28202-1803

704-382-3853

20-2777218

Commission file number

Registrant, State of Incorporation or Organization, Address of Principal Executive Offices, and Telephone Number

Commission file number

Registrant, State of Incorporation or Organization, Address of Principal Executive Offices, and Telephone Number

1-4928

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC

(a North Carolina limited liability company)

526 South Church Street

Charlotte, NC 28202-1803

704-382-3853

State of Incorporation: North Carolina 28202-1803

704-382-3853

56-0205520

1-3274

56-0205520DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC.

(a Florida corporation)

299 First Avenue North

St. Petersburg, Florida 33701

704-382-3853

59-0247770

 

 

1-15929

1-1232PROGRESS ENERGY, INC.

(a North Carolina corporation)

410 South Wilmington Street

Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1748

704-382-3853

56-2155481

1-1232

DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC.

(an Ohio corporation)

139 East Fourth Street

Cincinnati, OHOhio 45202

704-382-3853

State of Incorporation: Ohio31-0240030

31-0240030

 

 

1-3382

1-3543DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC.

(a North Carolina corporation)

410 South Wilmington Street

Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1748

704-382-3853

56-0165465

1-3543

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

(an Indiana corporation)

1000 East Main Street

Plainfield, INIndiana 46168

704-382-3853

State of Incorporation: Indiana35-0594457

35-0594457

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Duke Energy Corporation (Duke Energy)

Yes

No ¨ 

 

Duke Energy Florida, Inc. (Duke Energy Florida)

Yes

No ¨ 

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy Carolinas)

Yes

No ¨ 

Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. (Duke Energy Ohio)

Yes

No ¨ 

Progress Energy, Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy Carolinas)Inc. (Progress Energy)

Yes

No ¨ 

 

Duke Energy Indiana, Inc. (Duke Energy Indiana)

Yes

No ¨ 

Duke Energy Progress, Inc. (Duke Energy Progress)

Yes

No ¨ 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, 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).

Duke Energy

Yes

No ¨ 

 

Duke Energy OhioFlorida

Yes

No ¨ 

Duke Energy Carolinas

Yes

No ¨ 

 

Duke Energy Ohio

Yes

No ¨ 

Progress Energy

Yes

No ¨ 

Duke Energy Indiana

Yes

No ¨ 

Duke Energy Progress

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 the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check

(Check one):

Duke Energy

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer ¨ 

Non-accelerated filer ¨ 

Smaller reporting company ¨ 

Duke Energy Carolinas

Large accelerated filer ¨ 

Accelerated filer ¨ 

Non-accelerated filer

Smaller reporting company ¨ 

Progress Energy

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer ¨ 

Non-accelerated filer ¨ 

Smaller reporting company ¨ 

Duke Energy Progress

Large accelerated filer ¨ 

Accelerated filer ¨ 

Non-accelerated filer

Smaller reporting company ¨ 

Duke Energy Florida

Large accelerated filer ¨ 

Accelerated filer ¨ 

Non-accelerated filer

Smaller reporting company ¨ 

Duke Energy Ohio

Large accelerated filer ¨ 

Accelerated filer ¨ 

Non-accelerated filer

Smaller reporting company ¨ 

Duke Energy Indiana

Large accelerated filer ¨ 

Accelerated filer ¨ 

Non-accelerated filer

Smaller reporting company ¨ 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Duke Energy

Yes ¨ 

No

 

Duke Energy OhioFlorida

Yes ¨ 

No

Duke Energy Carolinas

Yes ¨ 

No

 

Duke Energy Ohio

Yes ¨ 

No

Progress Energy

Yes ¨ 

No

Duke Energy Indiana

Yes ¨ 

No

Duke Energy Progress

Yes ¨ 

No

 

Indicate the numberNumber of shares of Common Stock outstanding of each of the Issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.at May 6, 2013:

Outstanding as of

November 5, 2012

Registrant

Description

Shares

Duke Energy

Common Stock, $0.001 par value $0.001

      704,243,727 705,739,261

Duke Energy Carolinas

All of the registrant’s limited liability company member interests are directly owned by Duke Energy.

Progress Energy

All of the registrant’s common stock is directly owned by Duke Energy.

Duke Energy Progress

All of the registrant’s common stock is indirectly owned by Duke Energy.

Duke Energy Florida

All of the registrant’s common stock is indirectly owned by Duke Energy.

Duke Energy Ohio

All of the registrant’s common stock is indirectly owned by Duke Energy.

Duke Energy Indiana

All of the registrant’s common stock is indirectly owned by Duke Energy.

 

This combined Form 10-Q is filed separately by fourseven registrants: Duke Energy, Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy, Duke Energy Progress, Duke Energy Florida, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana (collectively the Duke Energy Registrants). Information contained herein relating to any individual registrant is filed by such registrant solely on its own behalf. Each registrant makes no representation as to information relating exclusively to the other registrants.

 

Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy, Duke Energy Progress, Duke Energy Florida, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana meet the conditions set forth in General Instructions H(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-Q and are therefore filing this form with the reduced disclosure format specified in General Instructions H(2) of Form 10-Q.

 

 


 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Safe Harbor for Forward-Looking Statements

 

 

 

 

 

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.

Financial Statements

 

  

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Corporation (Duke Energy)Financial Statements

4

  

 

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations

5

 

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Comprehensive Income

6

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

7

Unaudited Condensed ConsolidatedDuke Energy Carolinas, LLC Financial Statements of Cash Flows

8

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Equity

9

  

 

 

 

 

DukeProgress Energy, Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy Carolinas)Inc. Financial Statements

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

10

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

11

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

12

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Member’s Equity

13

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Ohio,Progress, Inc. (Duke Energy Ohio)Financial Statements

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

14

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

15

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

16

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Common Stockholder’s Equity

17

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Indiana,Florida, Inc. (Duke Energy Indiana)Financial Statements

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

18

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

19

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

20

Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Common Stockholder’s Equity

21

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. Financial Statements

25

Duke Energy Indiana, Inc. Financial Statements

29

Combined Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

 

 

Note 1 - Organization and Basis of Presentation

2233

 

 

Note 2 - Acquisitions and Sales of Other AssetsDispositions

2335

 

 

Note 3 - Business Segments

2737

 

 

Note 4 - Regulatory Matters

3040

 

 

Note 5 - Commitments and Contingencies

3947

 

 

Note 6 - Debt and Credit Facilities

4554

 

 

Note 7 - Goodwill Intangible Assets and Impairments

4757

 

 

Note 8 - Risk Management, Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

4857

 

 

Note 9 - Fair Value of Financial Instruments

5473

 

 

Note 10 - Investments in Debt and Equity Securities

6183

 

 

Note 11 - Variable Interest Entities

6490

 

 

Note 12 - Earnings Per Common Share

6995

 

 

Note 13 - Stock-Based Compensation

7095

 

 

Note 14 - Employee Benefit Plans

7195

 

 

Note 15 - Severance

7497

 

 

Note 16 - Income Taxes and Other Taxes

7498

 

 

Note 17 - Related Party Transactions

7599

 

 

Note 18 - Guarantees and IndemnificationsAccumulated Other Comprehensive Income

76100

 

 

Note 19 - New Accounting Standards

77101

 

 

Note 20 - Subsequent Events

77101

  

 

 

 

 

Item 2.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

78102

  

 

 

 

 

Item 3.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

94119

  

 

 

 

 

Item 4.

Controls and Procedures

94119

  

 

 

 

 

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1.

Legal Proceedings

95121

  

 

 

 

 

Item 1A.

Risk Factors

95121

  

 

 

 

 

Item 2.

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds

95121

  

 

 

 

 

Item 6.

Exhibits

96122

  

 

 

 

 

 

Signatures

97124

 


 

 

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION

This document includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements are based on management’s beliefs and assumptions. These forward-looking statements, which are intended to cover Duke Energy and the applicable Duke Energy Registrants, are identified by terms and phrases such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “intend,” “estimate,” “expect,” “continue,” “should,” “could,” “may,” “plan,” “project,” “predict,” “will,” “potential,” “forecast,” “target,” “guidance,” “outlook,” and similar expressions. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to be materially different from the results predicted. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated in any forward-looking statement include, but are not limited to:

·       State, federal and foreign legislative and regulatory initiatives, including costs of compliance with existing and future environmental requirements, as well as rulings that affect cost and investment recovery or have an impact on rate structures;structures or market prices;

·       The ability to recover eligible costs and earn an adequate return on investment through the regulatory process;

·       The scopecosts of necessary repairs of the delamination ofretiring Duke Energy Florida’s Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Plant could prove to be more extensive or costly than is currently identified, such repairs could prove not to be feasible resulting in earlyidentified. All costs associated with the retirement of the unit, the cost of repair and/orCrystal River Unit 3 asset, including replacement power could exceed estimates and insurance coverage or may not be fully recoverable through the regulatory process;

·       The ability to maintain relationships with customers, employees or suppliers post-merger;

·       The ability to successfully integrate the Progress Energy businesses and realize cost savings and any other synergies expected from the merger;

·       The risk that the credit ratings of the combined company or its subsidiaries may be different from what the companies expect;

·       The impact of compliance with material restrictions ofor conditions related to the Progress Energy merger imposed by regulators could exceed our expectations;

·       Costs and effects of legal and administrative proceedings, settlements, investigations and claims;

·       Industrial, commercial and residential growth or decline in the respective Duke Energy Registrants’ service territories customer base or customer bases resulting from customer usage patterns;patterns, including energy efficiency efforts and uses of alternative energy sources;

·       Additional competition in electric markets and continued industry consolidation;

·       Political and regulatory uncertainty in other countries in which Duke Energy conducts business;

·       The influence of weather and other natural phenomena on each of the Duke Energy Registrants’ operations, including the economic, operational and other effects of storms, hurricanes, droughts and tornadoes;

·       The ability to successfully operate electric generating facilities and deliver electricity to customers;

·       The ability to recover, in a timely manner, if at all, costs associated with future significant weather events through the regulatory process;

·       The impact on the Duke Energy Registrants’ facilities and business from a terrorist attack, cyber security threats and other catastrophic events;

·       The inherent risks associated with the operation and potential construction of nuclear facilities, including environmental, health, safety, regulatory and financial risks;

·       The timing and extent of changes in commodity prices, interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates and the ability to recover such costs through the regulatory process, where appropriate;

·       Unscheduled generation outages, unusual maintenance or repairs and electric transmission system constraints;

·       The performance of electric generation facilities and of projects undertaken by Duke Energy’s non-regulatednonregulated businesses;

·       The results of financing efforts, including the Duke Energy Registrants’ ability to obtain financing on favorable terms, which can be affected by various factors, including the respective Duke Energy Registrants’ credit ratings and general economic conditions;

·       Declines in the market prices of equity securities and resultant cash funding requirements for Duke Energy’s defined benefit pension plans and nuclear decommissioning trust funds;

·       The level of creditworthiness of counterparties to Duke Energy Registrants’ transactions;

·       Employee workforce factors, including the potential inability to attract and retain key personnel;

·       Growth in opportunities for the respective Duke Energy Registrants’ business units, including the timing and success of efforts to develop domestic and international power and other projects;

·       Construction and development risks associated with the completion of Duke Energy Registrants’ capital investment projects in existing and new generation facilities, including risks related to financing, obtaining and complying with terms of permits, meeting construction budgets and schedules, and satisfying operating and environmental performance standards, as well as the ability to recover costs from ratepayers in a timely manner or at all;

·       The Subsidiary Registrants ability to pay dividends or distributions to Duke Energy Corporation holding company (the Parent);

·       The effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by accounting standard-setting bodies;

·       The impact of potential goodwill impairments;

·The ability to reinvest retained earnings of foreign subsidiaries or repatriate such earnings on a tax free basis; and

·       The ability to successfully complete future merger, acquisition or divestiture plans.


In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the events described in the forward-looking statements might not occur or might occur to a different extent or at a different time than Duke Energy has described. The Duke Energy Registrants undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

 


PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Three Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

  

  

  

September 30,

  

September 30,

(in millions, except per-share amounts)

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Operating Revenues

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Regulated electric

$

 5,763 

  

$

 3,016 

  

$

 10,892 

  

$

 8,165 

  

Non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

  

 882 

  

  

 867 

  

  

 2,708 

  

  

 2,586 

  

Regulated natural gas

  

 77 

  

  

 81 

  

  

 329 

  

  

 410 

  

Total operating revenues

  

 6,722 

  

  

 3,964 

  

  

 13,929 

  

  

 11,161 

Operating Expenses

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - regulated

  

 2,222 

  

  

 957 

  

  

 3,848 

  

  

 2,603 

  

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - non-regulated

  

 484 

  

  

 383 

  

  

 1,328 

  

  

 1,147 

  

Cost of natural gas and coal sold

  

 40 

  

  

 48 

  

  

 184 

  

  

 262 

  

Operation, maintenance and other

  

 1,654 

  

  

 866 

  

  

 3,262 

  

  

 2,705 

  

Depreciation and amortization

  

 666 

  

  

 455 

  

  

 1,620 

  

  

 1,346 

  

Property and other taxes

  

 326 

  

  

 183 

  

  

 681 

  

  

 538 

  

Impairment charges

  

 266 

  

  

 300 

  

  

 668 

  

  

 309 

  

  

Total operating expenses

  

 5,658 

  

  

 3,192 

  

  

 11,591 

  

  

 8,910 

Gains (Losses) on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

  

 14 

  

  

 (5) 

  

  

 21 

  

  

 9 

Operating Income

  

 1,078 

  

  

 767 

  

  

 2,359 

  

  

 2,260 

Other Income and Expenses

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates

  

 33 

  

  

 43 

  

  

 118 

  

  

 123 

  

Impairments and gains on sales of unconsolidated affiliates

  

 ― 

  

  

 (3) 

  

  

 (6) 

  

  

 11 

  

Other income and expenses, net

  

 132 

  

  

 83 

  

  

 291 

  

  

 297 

  

  

Total other income and expenses

  

 165 

  

  

 123 

  

  

 403 

  

  

 431 

Interest Expense

  

 401 

  

  

 213 

  

  

 857 

  

  

 635 

Income From Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes

  

 842 

  

  

 677 

  

  

 1,905 

  

  

 2,056 

Income Tax Expense from Continuing Operations

  

 248 

  

  

 208 

  

  

 565 

  

  

 633 

Income From Continuing Operations

  

 594 

  

  

 469 

  

  

 1,340 

  

  

 1,423 

Income From Discontinued Operations, net of tax

  

 4 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 1 

Net Income

  

 598 

  

  

 470 

  

  

 1,345 

  

  

 1,424 

Less: Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests

  

 4 

  

  

 (2) 

  

  

 12 

  

  

 6 

Net Income Attributable to Duke Energy Corporation

$

 594 

  

$

 472 

  

$

 1,333 

  

$

 1,418 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Earnings Per Share - Basic and Diluted

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Income from continuing operations attributable to Duke Energy Corporation common shareholders

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Basic

$

 0.84 

  

$

 1.06 

  

$

 2.50 

  

$

 3.19 

  

  

Diluted

$

 0.84 

  

$

 1.06 

  

$

 2.50 

  

$

 3.19 

  

Income from discontinued operations attributable to Duke Energy Corporation common shareholders

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Basic

$

 0.01 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 0.01 

  

$

 ― 

  

  

Diluted

$

 0.01 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 0.01 

  

$

 ― 

  

Net Income attributable to Duke Energy Corporation common shareholders

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Basic

$

 0.85 

  

$

 1.06 

  

$

 2.51 

  

$

 3.19 

�� 

  

Diluted

$

 0.85 

  

$

 1.06 

  

$

 2.51 

  

$

 3.19 

  

Dividends declared per share

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 2.265 

  

$

 2.22 

  

Weighted-average shares outstanding

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Basic

  

 699 

  

  

 444 

  

  

 531 

  

  

 444 

  

  

Diluted

  

 699 

  

  

 444 

  

  

 531 

  

  

 444 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 


 

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(Unaudited)

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Three Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

  

   

September 30,

  

September 30,

(in millions)  

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Net income  

$

 598 

  

$

 470 

  

$

 1,345 

  

$

 1,424 

Other comprehensive (loss) income, net of tax  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Foreign currency translation adjustments  

  

 2 

  

  

 (246) 

  

  

 (85) 

  

  

 (150) 

  

Pension and OPEB adjustments(a)

  

 (21) 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 (15) 

  

  

 (6) 

  

Net unrealized loss on cash flow hedges(b)

  

 (2) 

  

  

 (47) 

  

  

 (19) 

  

  

 (52) 

  

Reclassification into earnings from cash flow hedges(c)

  

 (2) 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

  

Unrealized gain on investments in auction rate securities(d)

  

 1 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 7 

  

  

 7 

  

Unrealized gain on investments in available for sale securities(e)

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 6 

  

  

 ― 

  

Reclassification into earnings from available for sale securities(f)

  

 (1) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (4) 

  

  

 ― 

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax  

  

 (20) 

  

  

 (288) 

  

  

 (110) 

  

  

 (198) 

Comprehensive income    

  

 578 

  

  

 182 

  

  

 1,235 

  

  

 1,226 

Less:  Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to Noncontrolling Interests  

  

 4 

  

  

 (13) 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 (2) 

Comprehensive income attributable to Duke Energy Corporation  

$

 574 

  

$

 195 

  

$

 1,227 

  

$

 1,228 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Net of $10 million tax benefit and $7 million tax benefit for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and insignificant tax expense and $3 tax benefit for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.

(b)

Net of $1 million tax benefit and $10 million tax benefit for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and $26 million tax benefit and $28 million tax benefit for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.

(c)

Net of insignificant tax benefit for each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and insignificant tax expense and $1 million tax expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively.

(d)

Net of $1 million tax benefit and $2 million tax expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and $5 million tax expense and $6 million tax expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.

(e)

Net of $2 million tax expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012.

(f)

Net of $2 million tax benefit for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012.

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS


DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

September 30,

  

December 31,

(in millions, except per-share amounts)

2012 

  

2011 

ASSETS

  

  

  

  

  

Current Assets

  

  

  

  

  

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 1,761 

  

$

 2,110 

Short-term investments

  

 335 

  

  

 190 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $31 at September 30, 2012 and $35 at December 31, 2011)

  

 1,596 

  

  

 784 

Restricted receivables of variable interest entities (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $43 at September 30, 2012 and $40 at December 31, 2011)

  

 1,250 

  

  

 1,157 

Inventory

  

 3,041 

  

  

 1,588 

Other

  

 2,123 

  

  

 1,051 

  

Total current assets

  

 10,106 

  

  

 6,880 

Investments and Other Assets

  

  

  

  

  

Investments in equity method unconsolidated affiliates

  

 542 

  

  

 460 

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

  

 4,155 

  

  

 2,060 

Goodwill

  

 16,180 

  

  

 3,849 

Intangibles, net

  

 359 

  

  

 363 

Notes receivable

  

 74 

  

  

 62 

Restricted other assets of variable interest entities

  

 115 

  

  

 135 

Other

  

 2,186 

  

  

 2,231 

  

Total investments and other assets

  

 23,611 

  

  

 9,160 

Property, Plant and Equipment

  

  

  

  

  

Cost

  

 100,156 

  

  

 60,377 

Cost, variable interest entities

  

 961 

  

  

 913 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

  

 (32,318) 

  

  

 (18,709) 

Generation facilities to be retired, net

  

 232 

  

  

 80 

  

Net property, plant and equipment

  

 69,031 

  

  

 42,661 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

  

  

  

  

  

Regulatory assets

  

 9,097 

  

  

 3,672 

Other

  

 163 

  

  

 153 

  

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

  

 9,260 

  

  

 3,825 

Total Assets

$

 112,008 

  

$

 62,526 

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY

  

  

  

  

  

Current Liabilities

  

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable

$

 1,912 

  

$

 1,433 

Notes payable and commercial paper

  

 600 

  

  

 154 

Non-recourse notes payable of variable interest entities

  

 275 

  

  

 273 

Taxes accrued

  

 601 

  

  

 431 

Interest accrued

  

 474 

  

  

 252 

Current maturities of long-term debt

  

 2,488 

  

  

 1,894 

Other

  

 2,206 

  

  

 1,091 

  

Total current liabilities

  

 8,556 

  

  

 5,528 

Long-term Debt

  

 35,198 

  

  

 17,730 

Non-recourse long-term debt of variable interest entities

  

 911 

  

  

 949 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

  

  

  

  

  

Deferred income taxes

  

 10,317 

  

  

 7,581 

Investment tax credits

  

 462 

  

  

 384 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

  

 2,542 

  

  

 856 

Asset retirement obligations

  

 4,846 

  

  

 1,936 

Regulatory liabilities

  

 5,739 

  

  

 2,919 

Other

  

 2,349 

  

  

 1,778 

  

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

  

 26,255 

  

  

 15,454 

Commitments and Contingencies

  

  

  

  

  

Preferred stock of subsidiaries

  

 93 

  

  

 ― 

Equity

  

  

  

  

  

Common stock, $0.001 par value, 2 billion shares authorized; 704 million  and 445 million shares outstanding at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

Additional paid-in capital

  

 39,249 

  

  

 21,132 

Retained earnings

  

 1,995 

  

  

 1,873 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

  

 (340) 

  

  

 (234) 

  

Total Duke Energy Corporation shareholders' equity

  

 40,905 

  

  

 22,772 

Noncontrolling interests

  

 90 

  

  

 93 

  

Total equity

  

 40,995 

  

  

 22,865 

Total Liabilities and Equity

$

 112,008 

  

$

 62,526 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Operations

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions, except per-share amounts)

 

2013 

 

 

2012 

Operating Revenues

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regulated electric

$

 4,889 

 

$

 2,501 

 

Nonregulated electric, natural gas, and other

 

 824 

 

 

 958 

 

Regulated natural gas

 

 185 

 

 

 171 

 

Total operating revenues

 

 5,898 

 

 

 3,630 

Operating Expenses

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - regulated

 

 1,703 

 

 

 777 

 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - nonregulated

 

 454 

 

 

 448 

 

Cost of natural gas and coal sold

 

 104 

 

 

 102 

 

Operation, maintenance and other

 

 1,421 

 

 

 746 

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 660 

 

 

 479 

 

Property and other taxes

 

 343 

 

 

 184 

 

Impairment charges

 

 ― 

 

 

 402 

 

 

Total operating expenses

 

 4,685 

 

 

 3,138 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 2 

 

 

 3 

Operating Income

 

 1,215 

 

 

 495 

Other Income and Expenses

 

 

 

 

 

 

Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates

 

 36 

 

 

 45 

 

Impairments on sales of unconsolidated affiliates

 

 ― 

 

 

 (5) 

 

Other income and expenses, net

 

 80 

 

 

 89 

 

 

Total other income and expenses

 

 116 

 

 

 129 

Interest Expense

 

 367 

 

 

 224 

Income From Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes

 

 964 

 

 

 400 

Income Tax Expense from Continuing Operations

 

 330 

 

 

 103 

Income From Continuing Operations

 

 634 

 

 

 297 

Income From Discontinued Operations, net of tax

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

Net Income

 

 634 

 

 

 299 

Less: Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests

 

 ― 

 

 

 4 

Net Income Attributable to Duke Energy Corporation

$

 634 

 

$

 295 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Earnings Per Share - Basic and Diluted

 

 

 

 

 

 

Income from continuing operations attributable to Duke Energy Corporation common shareholders

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Basic

$

 0.89 

 

$

 0.65 

 

 

Diluted

$

 0.89 

 

$

 0.65 

 

Income from discontinued operations attributable to Duke Energy Corporation common shareholders

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Basic

$

 ― 

 

$

 0.01 

 

 

Diluted

$

 ― 

 

$

 0.01 

 

Net Income attributable to Duke Energy Corporation common shareholders

 

 

 

 

 

Basic

$

 0.89 

 

$

 0.66 

 

 

Diluted

$

 0.89 

 

$

 0.66 

 

Dividends declared per share

$

 0.765 

 

$

 0.75 

 

Weighted-average shares outstanding

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Basic

 

 705 

 

 

 446 

 

 

Diluted

 

 705 

 

 

 446 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

5 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Nine Months Ended

  

  

  

  

  

September 30,

(in millions)

2012 

  

2011 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Net income

$

 1,345 

  

$

 1,424 

  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Depreciation, amortization and accretion (including amortization of nuclear fuel)

  

 1,865 

  

  

 1,508 

  

  

  

Equity component of AFUDC

  

 (209) 

  

  

 (193) 

  

  

  

Severance expense

  

 73 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

FERC mitigation costs

  

 117 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

Community support and charitable contributions expense

  

 100 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

Gains on sales of other assets

  

 (21) 

  

  

 (19) 

  

  

  

Impairment of other long-lived assets

  

 588 

  

  

 309 

  

  

  

Deferred income taxes

  

 437 

  

  

 526 

  

  

  

Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates

  

 (118) 

  

  

 (123) 

  

  

  

Voluntary opportunity cost deferral

  

 (101) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

Contributions to qualified pension plans

  

 (79) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

  

 152 

  

  

 78 

  

  

  

(Increase) decrease in

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions

  

 68 

  

  

 37 

  

  

  

  

Receivables

  

 (83) 

  

  

 115 

  

  

  

  

Inventory

  

 (22) 

  

  

 (87) 

  

  

  

  

Other current assets

  

 101 

  

  

 248 

  

  

  

Increase (decrease) in

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable

  

 (222) 

  

  

 (455) 

  

  

  

  

Taxes accrued

  

 (7) 

  

  

 30 

  

  

  

  

Other current liabilities

  

 128 

  

  

 (172) 

  

  

  

Other assets

  

 (167) 

  

  

 91 

  

  

  

Other liabilities

  

 34 

  

  

 (290) 

  

  

  

  

Net cash provided by operating activities

  

 3,979 

  

  

 3,027 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Capital expenditures

  

 (3,845) 

  

  

 (2,990) 

  

Investment expenditures

  

 (7) 

  

  

 (36) 

  

Acquisitions

  

 (36) 

  

  

 (50) 

  

Cash acquired from the merger with Progress Energy

  

 71 

  

  

 ― 

  

Purchases of available-for-sale securities

  

 (2,159) 

  

  

 (2,409) 

  

Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities

  

 1,947 

  

  

 2,313 

  

Net proceeds from the sales of other assets, and sales of and collections on notes receivable

  

 29 

  

  

 115 

  

Change in restricted cash

  

 (27) 

  

  

 (19) 

  

Other

  

 38 

  

  

 6 

  

  

  

  

Net cash used in investing activities

  

 (3,989) 

  

  

 (3,070) 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Proceeds from the:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Issuance of long-term debt

  

 2,626 

  

  

 1,015 

  

  

Issuance of common stock related to employee benefit plans

  

 16 

  

  

 13 

  

Payments for the redemption of long-term debt

  

 (1,934) 

  

  

 (179) 

  

Notes payable and commercial paper

  

 98 

  

  

 537 

  

Distributions to noncontrolling interests

  

 (14) 

  

  

 (19) 

  

Contributions from noncontrolling interests

  

 76 

  

  

 ― 

  

Dividends paid

  

 (1,211) 

  

  

 (994) 

  

Other

  

 4 

  

  

 32 

  

  

  

  

Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities

  

 (339) 

  

  

 405 

  

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents

  

 (349) 

  

  

 362 

  

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

  

 2,110 

  

  

 1,670 

  

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

 1,761 

  

$

 2,032 

  

Supplemental Disclosures:

  

  

  

  

  

  

Merger with Progress Energy

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Fair value of assets acquired

$

 48,698 

  

$

 ― 

  

  

Fair value of liabilities assumed

$

 30,627 

  

$

 ― 

  

  

Issuance of common stock

$

 18,071 

  

$

 ― 

  

Significant non-cash transactions:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 407 

  

$

 276 

  

  

Extinguishment of debt related to investment in Attiki Gas Supply, S. A.

$

 66 

  

$

 ― 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Comprehensive Income

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Net Income

$

 634 

 

$

 299 

Other Comprehensive Income (Loss), Net of Tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

Foreign currency translation adjustments

 

 4 

 

 

 44 

 

Pension and OPEB adjustments(a)

 

 3 

 

 

 4 

 

Net unrealized gain on cash flow hedges(b)

 

 10 

 

 

 13 

 

Reclassification into earnings from cash flow hedges(c)

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

Unrealized gain on investments in available for sale securities(d)

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

Reclassification into earnings from available for sale securities(e)

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

Other Comprehensive Income, Net of Tax

 

 17 

 

 

 60 

Comprehensive Income 

 

 651 

 

 

 359 

Less: Comprehensive Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests

 

 ― 

 

 

 4 

Comprehensive Income Attributable to Duke Energy Corporation

$

 651 

 

$

 355 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Net of $1 million tax expense in 2013 and $2 million tax expense in 2012.

(b)

Net of $4 million tax expense in 2013 and $5 million tax expense in 2012.

(c)

Net of $1 million tax expense in 2013 and insignificant tax expense in 2012.

(d)

Net of insignificant tax expense in 2012.

(e)

Net of insignificant tax expense in 2012.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

6 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY

(Unaudited)

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy Corporation Shareholders

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Net Gains

  

  

  

  

Pension and

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Common

  

  

  

  

Additional

  

  

  

  

Foreign

  

(Losses) on

  

  

  

  

OPEB Related

  

Common

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Stock

  

Common

  

Paid-in

  

Retained

  

Currency

  

Cash Flow

  

  

  

  

Adjustments

  

Stockholders'

  

Noncontrolling

  

Total

(in millions)   

Shares

  

Stock

  

Capital

  

Earnings

  

Adjustments

  

Hedges

  

Other

  

to AOCI

  

Equity

  

Interests

  

Equity

Balance at December 31, 2010  

 443 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 21,023 

  

$

 1,496 

  

$

 97 

  

$

 (18) 

  

$

 (17) 

  

$

 (60) 

  

$

 22,522 

  

$

 131 

  

$

 22,653 

  

Net income  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1,418 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1,418 

  

  

 6 

  

  

 1,424 

  

Other comprehensive (loss) income  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (142) 

  

  

 (49) 

  

  

 7 

  

  

 (6) 

  

  

 (190) 

  

  

 (8) 

  

  

 (198) 

  

Common stock issuances, including dividend reinvestment and employee benefits  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 38 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 38 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 38 

  

Common stock dividends  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (994) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (994) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (994) 

  

Changes in noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (24) 

  

  

 (24) 

Balance at September 30, 2011  

 444 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 21,061 

  

$

 1,920 

  

$

 (45) 

  

$

 (67) 

  

$

 (10) 

  

$

 (66) 

  

$

 22,794 

  

$

 105 

  

$

 22,899 

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at December 31, 2011  

 445 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 21,132 

  

$

 1,873 

  

$

 (45) 

  

$

 (71) 

  

$

 (9) 

  

$

 (109) 

  

$

 22,772 

  

$

 93 

  

$

 22,865 

  

Net income (a)

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1,333 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1,333 

  

  

 11 

  

  

 1,344 

  

Other comprehensive (loss) income  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (81) 

  

  

 (19) 

  

  

 9 

  

  

 (15) 

  

  

 (106) 

  

  

 (4) 

  

  

 (110) 

  

Common stock issued in connection with the Progress Energy Merger  

 258 

  

  

  

  

  

 18,071 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 18,071 

  

  

  

  

  

 18,071 

  

Common stock issuances, including dividend reinvestment and employee benefits  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 46 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 46 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 46 

  

Common stock dividends  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (1,211) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (1,211) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (1,211) 

  

Deconsolidation of DS Cornerstone, LLC(b)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 (82) 

  

  

 (82) 

  

Contribution from noncontrolling interest in DS Cornerstone, LLC(b)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 76 

  

  

 76 

  

Changes in noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries(c)

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (4) 

  

  

 (4) 

Balance at September 30, 2012  

 704 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 39,249 

  

$

 1,995 

  

$

 (126) 

  

$

 (90) 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 (124) 

  

$

 40,905 

  

$

 90 

  

$

 40,995 

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

For the nine months ended September 30, 2012, consolidated net income of $1,345 million includes $1 million attributable to preferred shareholders of subsidiaries. Income attributable to preferred shareholders of subsidiaries is not a component of total equity and is excluded from the table above.

(b)

Refer to Note 2 for further information on the deconsolidation of DS Cornerstone, LLC.

(c)

 Includes $14 million of payments to noncontrolling interests.

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(Unaudited)

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31,

2013

 

December 31,

2012

ASSETS

 

 

 

 

 

Current Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 1,296 

 

$

 1,424 

Short-term investments

 

 288 

 

 

 333 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $32 at March 31, 2013 and $34 at December 31, 2012)

 

 1,503 

 

 

 1,516 

Restricted receivables of variable interest entities (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $42 at March 31, 2013 and $44 at December 31, 2012)

 

 1,304 

 

 

 1,201 

Inventory

 

 3,096 

 

 

 3,223 

Other

 

 2,062 

 

 

 2,425 

 

Total current assets

 

 9,549 

 

 

 10,122 

Investments and Other Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Investments in equity method unconsolidated affiliates

 

 478 

 

 

 483 

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

 

 4,536 

 

 

 4,242 

Goodwill

 

 16,371 

 

 

 16,365 

Intangibles, net

 

 356 

 

 

 372 

Notes receivable

 

 69 

 

 

 71 

Restricted other assets of variable interest entities

 

 54 

 

 

 62 

Other

 

 2,466 

 

 

 2,399 

 

Total investments and other assets

 

 24,330 

 

 

 23,994 

Property, Plant and Equipment

 

 

 

 

 

Cost

 

 99,605 

 

 

 98,833 

Cost, variable interest entities

 

 1,579 

 

 

 1,558 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

 

 (32,501) 

 

 

 (31,969) 

Generation facilities to be retired, net

 

 130 

 

 

 136 

 

Net property, plant and equipment

 

 68,813 

 

 

 68,558 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory assets

 

 10,778 

 

 

 11,004 

Other

 

 196 

 

 

 178 

 

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

 

 10,974 

 

 

 11,182 

Total Assets

$

 113,666 

 

$

 113,856 

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY

 

 

 

 

 

Current Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

$

 1,985 

 

$

 2,444 

Notes payable and commercial paper

 

 1,361 

 

 

 745 

Non-recourse notes payable of variable interest entities

 

 325 

 

 

 312 

Taxes accrued

 

 425 

 

 

 459 

Interest accrued

 

 478 

 

 

 448 

Current maturities of long-term debt

 

 3,323 

 

 

 3,110 

Other

 

 2,068 

 

 

 2,511 

 

Total current liabilities

 

 9,965 

 

 

 10,029 

Long-term Debt

 

 35,084 

 

 

 35,499 

Non-recourse Long-term debt of Variable Interest Entities

 

 1,255 

 

 

 852 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 10,518 

 

 

 10,490 

Investment tax credits

 

 454 

 

 

 458 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 2,380 

 

 

 2,520 

Asset retirement obligations

 

 5,229 

 

 

 5,169 

Regulatory liabilities

 

 5,555 

 

 

 5,584 

Other

 

 2,196 

 

 

 2,221 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

 

 26,332 

 

 

 26,442 

Commitments and Contingencies

 

 

 

 

 

Preferred Stock of Subsidiaries

 

 ― 

 

 

 93 

Equity

 

 

 

 

 

Common stock, $0.001 par value, 2 billion shares authorized; 706 million and 704 million shares outstanding at March 31, 2013 and  December 31, 2012, respectively

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

Additional paid-in capital

 

 39,263 

 

 

 39,279 

Retained earnings

 

 1,978 

 

 

 1,889 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

 (289) 

 

 

 (306) 

 

Total Duke Energy Corporation shareholders' equity

 

 40,953 

 

 

 40,863 

Noncontrolling interests

 

 77 

 

 

 78 

 

Total equity

 

 41,030 

 

 

 40,941 

Total Liabilities and Equity

$

 113,666 

 

$

 113,856 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

7 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(Unaudited)

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Three Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

  

  

   

September 30,

  

September 30,

(in millions)   

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Operating Revenues-Regulated Electric  

$

 1,939 

  

$

 1,868 

  

$

 5,056 

  

$

 5,027 

Operating Expenses  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power  

  

 576 

  

  

 577 

  

  

 1,398 

  

  

 1,557 

  

Operation, maintenance and other  

  

 562 

  

  

 447 

  

  

 1,369 

  

  

 1,377 

  

Depreciation and amortization  

  

 233 

  

  

 210 

  

  

 687 

  

  

 601 

  

Property and other taxes  

  

 100 

  

  

 94 

  

  

 279 

  

  

 259 

  

Impairment charges  

  

 31 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 31 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

Total operating expenses  

  

 1,502 

  

  

 1,328 

  

  

 3,764 

  

  

 3,794 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net  

  

 3 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 9 

  

  

 2 

Operating Income  

  

 440 

  

  

 541 

  

  

 1,301 

  

  

 1,235 

Other Income and Expenses, net  

  

 48 

  

  

 47 

  

  

 130 

  

  

 139 

Interest Expense  

  

 95 

  

  

 93 

  

  

 285 

  

  

 264 

Income Before Income Taxes  

  

 393 

  

  

 495 

  

  

 1,146 

  

  

 1,110 

Income Tax Expense  

  

 135 

  

  

 184 

  

  

 411 

  

  

 401 

Net Income   

  

 258 

  

  

 311 

  

  

 735 

  

  

 709 

Other comprehensive income, net of tax  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

       Reclassification into earnings from cash flow hedges(a)

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 3 

Comprehensive Income  

$

 258 

  

$

 313 

  

$

 737 

  

$

 712 

  

(a)

Net of insignificant tax expense and $2 million tax expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, and $1 million tax benefit and $1 million tax expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Cash Flows

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net income

$

 634 

 

$

 299 

 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Depreciation, amortization and accretion (including amortization of nuclear fuel)

 

 762 

 

 

 544 

 

 

 

Equity component of AFUDC

 

 (42) 

 

 

 (59) 

 

 

 

Gains on sales of other assets

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 

Impairment of other long-lived assets

 

 ― 

 

 

 407 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 353 

 

 

 65 

 

 

 

Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates

 

 (36) 

 

 

 (45) 

 

 

 

Voluntary opportunity cost deferral

 

 ― 

 

 

 (101) 

 

 

 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 87 

 

 

 28 

 

 

 

(Increase) decrease in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions

 

 36 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 

 

Receivables

 

 (118) 

 

 

 172 

 

 

 

 

Inventory

 

 126 

 

 

 (162) 

 

 

 

 

Other current assets

 

 (38) 

 

 

 110 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

 

 (246) 

 

 

 (270) 

 

 

 

 

Taxes accrued

 

 (31) 

 

 

 (62) 

 

 

 

 

Other current liabilities

 

 (312) 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 

Other assets

 

 (78) 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 

Other liabilities

 

 (4) 

 

 

 (62) 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by operating activities

 

 1,091 

 

 

 872 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capital expenditures

 

 (1,375) 

 

 

 (988) 

 

Investment expenditures

 

 (3) 

 

 

 (13) 

 

Acquisitions

 

 (32) 

 

 

 (42) 

 

Purchases of available-for-sale securities

 

 (1,255) 

 

 

 (948) 

 

Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities

 

 1,179 

 

 

 821 

 

Net proceeds from the sales of other assets, and sales of and collections on notes receivable

 

 20 

 

 

 17 

 

Change in restricted cash

 

 (34) 

 

 

 (35) 

 

Other

 

 35 

 

 

 8 

 

 

 

 

Net cash used in investing activities

 

 (1,465) 

 

 

 (1,180) 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceeds from the:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Issuance of long-term debt

 

 1,009 

 

 

 392 

 

 

Issuance of common stock related to employee benefit plans

 

 5 

 

 

 8 

 

Payments for the:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Redemption of long-term debt

 

 (747) 

 

 

 (821) 

 

 

Redemption of preferred stock of a subsidiary

 

 (96) 

 

 

 ― 

 

Notes payable and commercial paper

 

 627 

 

 

 28 

 

Distributions to noncontrolling interests

 

 (3) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

Dividends paid

 

 (542) 

 

 

 (335) 

 

Other

 

 (7) 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities

 

 246 

 

 

 (731) 

 

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents

 

 (128) 

 

 

 (1,039) 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

 

 1,424 

 

 

 2,110 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

 1,296 

 

$

 1,071 

 

Supplemental Disclosures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Significant non-cash transactions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 465 

 

$

 270 

 

 

Extinguishment of debt related to investment in Attiki Gas Supply, S. A.

 

 ― 

 

 

 66 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

8 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

September 30,

  

December 31,

(in millions)

2012 

  

2011 

ASSETS

  

  

  

  

  

Current Assets

  

  

  

  

  

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 314 

  

$

 289 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $3 at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011)

  

 135 

  

  

 262 

Restricted receivables of variable interest entities (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $6 at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011)

  

 738 

  

  

 581 

Receivables from affiliated companies

  

 2 

  

  

 2 

Note receivable from affiliated companies

  

 811 

  

  

 923 

Inventory

  

 993 

  

  

 917 

Other

  

 445 

  

  

 278 

  

Total current assets

  

 3,438 

  

  

 3,252 

Investments and Other Assets

  

  

  

  

  

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

  

 2,311 

  

  

 2,060 

Other

  

 804 

  

  

 968 

  

Total investments and other assets

  

 3,115 

  

  

 3,028 

Property, Plant and Equipment

  

  

  

  

  

Cost

  

 33,961 

  

  

 32,840 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

  

 (11,553) 

  

  

 (11,269) 

Generation facilities to be retired, net

  

 68 

  

  

 80 

  

Net property, plant and equipment

  

 22,476 

  

  

 21,651 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

  

  

  

  

  

Regulatory assets

  

 1,814 

  

  

 1,894 

Other

  

 72 

  

  

 71 

  

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

  

 1,886 

  

  

 1,965 

Total Assets

$

 30,915 

  

$

 29,896 

LIABILITIES AND MEMBER'S EQUITY

  

  

  

  

  

Current Liabilities

  

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable

$

 426 

  

$

 637 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

  

 148 

  

  

 156 

Taxes accrued

  

 142 

  

  

 126 

Interest accrued

  

 145 

  

  

 115 

Current maturities of long-term debt

  

 427 

  

  

 1,178 

Other

  

 519 

  

  

 398 

  

Total current liabilities

  

 1,807 

  

  

 2,610 

Long-term Debt

  

 8,139 

  

  

 7,496 

Non-recourse long-term debt of variable interest entities

  

 300 

  

  

 300 

Long-term debt payable to affiliated companies

  

 300 

  

  

 300 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

  

  

  

  

  

Deferred income taxes

  

 5,063 

  

  

 4,555 

Investment tax credits

  

 216 

  

  

 233 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

  

 226 

  

  

 248 

Asset retirement obligations

  

 1,934 

  

  

 1,846 

Regulatory liabilities

  

 2,034 

  

  

 1,928 

Other

  

 955 

  

  

 926 

  

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

  

 10,428 

  

  

 9,736 

Commitments and Contingencies

  

  

  

  

  

Member's Equity

  

  

  

  

  

Member's Equity

  

 9,958 

  

  

 9,473 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

  

 (17) 

  

  

 (19) 

  

Total member's equity

  

 9,941 

  

  

 9,454 

Total Liabilities and Member's Equity

$

 30,915 

  

$

 29,896 

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Equity

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

Common

Stock

Shares

 

Common

Stock

 

Additional

Paid-in

Capital

 

Retained

Earnings

 

Accumulated

Other

Comprehensive

Loss

 

Common

Stockholders'

Equity

 

Noncontrolling

Interests

 

Total

Equity

Balance at December 31, 2011

 445 

 

 

 1 

 

$

 21,132 

 

$

 1,873 

 

$

 (234) 

 

$

 22,772 

 

$

 93 

 

$

 22,865 

Net income

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 295 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 295 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 299 

Other comprehensive income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 60 

 

 

 60 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 60 

Common stock issuances, including dividend reinvestment and employee benefits

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (11) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (11) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (11) 

Common stock dividends

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (335) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (335) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (335) 

Balance at March 31, 2012

 446 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 21,121 

 

$

 1,833 

 

$

 (174) 

 

$

 22,781 

 

$

 97 

 

$

 22,878 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

 704 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 39,279 

 

$

 1,889 

 

$

 (306) 

 

$

 40,863 

 

$

 78 

 

$

 40,941 

Net income

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 634 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 634 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 634 

Other comprehensive income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 17 

 

 

 17 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 17 

Common stock issuances, including dividend reinvestment and employee benefits

 2 

 

 

 

 

 

 (16) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (16) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (16) 

Common stock dividends

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (542) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (542) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (542) 

Premium on the redemption of preferred stock of subsidiaries

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 

 

 

 (3) 

Changes in noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 (1) 

Balance at March 31, 2013

 706 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 39,263 

 

$

 1,978 

 

$

 (289) 

 

$

 40,953 

 

$

 77 

 

$

 41,030 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

9 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Nine Months Ended

  

  

  

  

  

September 30,

(in millions)

2012 

  

2011 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Net income

$

 735 

  

$

 709 

  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Depreciation and amortization (including amortization of nuclear fuel)

  

 860 

  

  

 752 

  

  

  

Equity component of AFUDC

  

 (116) 

  

  

 (125) 

  

  

  

FERC mitigation costs

  

 46 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

Community support and charitable contributions expense

  

 59 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net

  

 (9) 

  

  

 (2) 

  

  

  

Deferred income taxes

  

 400 

  

  

 498 

  

  

  

Voluntary opportunity cost deferral

  

 (101) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

  

 32 

  

  

 25 

  

  

  

(Increase) decrease in

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

  

  

Receivables

  

 (28) 

  

  

 7 

  

  

  

  

Receivables from affiliated companies

  

 ― 

  

  

 89 

  

  

  

  

Inventory

  

 (62) 

  

  

 (25) 

  

  

  

  

Other current assets

  

 42 

  

  

 122 

  

  

  

Increase (decrease) in

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable

  

 (152) 

  

  

 (218) 

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

  

 (9) 

  

  

 (70) 

  

  

  

  

Taxes accrued

  

 16 

  

  

 18 

  

  

  

  

Other current liabilities

  

 202 

  

  

 (34) 

  

  

  

Other assets

  

 (53) 

  

  

 25 

  

  

  

Other liabilities

  

 (99) 

  

  

 (206) 

  

  

  

  

Net cash provided by operating activities

  

 1,763 

  

  

 1,567 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Capital expenditures

  

 (1,453) 

  

  

 (1,604) 

  

Purchases of available-for-sale securities

  

 (672) 

  

  

 (1,598) 

  

Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities

  

 644 

  

  

 1,561 

  

Change in restricted cash

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

  

 112 

  

  

 (250) 

  

Other

  

 (6) 

  

  

 (7) 

  

  

  

  

Net cash used in investing activities

  

 (1,375) 

  

  

 (1,896) 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt

  

 645 

  

  

 499 

  

Payments for the redemption of long-term debt

  

 (752) 

  

  

 (2) 

  

Distributions to parent

  

 (250) 

  

  

 ― 

  

Other

  

 (6) 

  

  

 (3) 

  

  

  

  

Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities

  

 (363) 

  

  

 494 

  

Net increase in cash and cash equivalents

  

 25 

  

  

 165 

  

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

  

 289 

  

  

 153 

  

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

 314 

  

$

 318 

  

Supplemental Disclosures:

  

  

  

  

  

  

Significant non-cash transactions:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 126 

  

$

 122 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Operations And Comprehensive Income

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

 

2012 

Operating Revenues

$

 1,729 

 

$

 1,501 

Operating Expenses

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power

 

 518 

 

 

 380 

 

Operation, maintenance and other

 

 457 

 

 

 331 

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 222 

 

 

 228 

 

Property and other taxes

 

 100 

 

 

 90 

 

 

Total operating expenses

 

 1,297 

 

 

 1,029 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 2 

 

 

 3 

Operating Income

 

 434 

 

 

 475 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 36 

 

 

 39 

Interest Expense

 

 82 

 

 

 97 

Income Before Income Taxes

 

 388 

 

 

 417 

Income Tax Expense

 

 144 

 

 

 151 

Net Income and Comprehensive Income

$

 244 

 

$

 266 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

10 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF MEMBER’S EQUITY

(Unaudited)

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

Accumulated

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

Other Comprehensive Income

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

(Loss)

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

Net  Gains

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

(Losses) on

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Member's

  

Cash Flow

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)   

Equity

  

Hedges

  

Other

  

Total

Balance at December 31, 2010  

$

 8,938 

  

$

 (20) 

  

$

 (2) 

  

$

 8,916 

  

Net income   

  

 709 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 709 

  

Other comprehensive income  

  

  

  

  

 3 

  

  

  

  

  

 3 

Balance at September 30, 2011  

$

 9,647 

  

$

 (17) 

  

$

 (2) 

  

$

 9,628 

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at December 31, 2011  

$

 9,473 

  

$

 (17) 

  

$

 (2) 

  

$

 9,454 

  

Net income  

  

 735 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 735 

  

Other comprehensive income  

  

  

  

  

 2 

  

  

  

  

  

 2 

  

Distributions to Parent  

  

 (250) 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 (250) 

Balance at September 30, 2012  

$

 9,958 

  

$

 (15) 

  

$

 (2) 

  

$

 9,941 

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31,

2013

 

December 31,

2012

ASSETS

 

 

 

 

 

Current Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 5 

 

$

 19 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $3 at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012)

 

 150 

 

 

 188 

Restricted receivables of variable interest entities (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $6 at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012)

 

 680 

 

 

 637 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 57 

 

 

 3 

Note receivable from affiliated companies

 

 397 

 

 

 382 

Inventory

 

 1,010 

 

 

 1,062 

Other

 

 428 

 

 

 439 

 

Total current assets

 

 2,727 

 

 

 2,730 

Investments and Other Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

 

 2,519 

 

 

 2,354 

Other

 

 941 

 

 

 934 

 

Total investments and other assets

 

 3,460 

 

 

 3,288 

Property, Plant and Equipment

 

 

 

 

 

Cost

 

 34,559 

 

 

 34,190 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

 

 (11,663) 

 

 

 (11,437) 

Generation facilities to be retired, net

 

 68 

 

 

 73 

 

Net property, plant and equipment

 

 22,964 

 

 

 22,826 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory assets

 

 1,707 

 

 

 1,727 

Other

 

 69 

 

 

 71 

 

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

 

 1,776 

 

 

 1,798 

Total Assets

$

 30,927 

 

$

 30,642 

LIABILITIES AND MEMBER'S EQUITY

 

 

 

 

 

Current Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

$

 520 

 

$

 599 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 112 

 

 

 128 

Taxes accrued

 

 65 

 

 

 114 

Interest accrued

 

 139 

 

 

 96 

Current maturities of long-term debt

 

 406 

 

 

 406 

Other

 

 409 

 

 

 490 

 

Total current liabilities

 

 1,651 

 

 

 1,833 

Long-term Debt

 

 7,734 

 

 

 7,735 

Non-recourse Long-term Debt of Variable Interest Entities

 

 300 

 

 

 300 

Long-term Debt Payable to Affiliated Companies

 

 300 

 

 

 300 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 5,281 

 

 

 5,181 

Investment tax credits

 

 214 

 

 

 215 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 215 

 

 

 221 

Asset retirement obligations

 

 1,990 

 

 

 1,959 

Regulatory liabilities

 

 2,214 

 

 

 2,102 

Other

 

 912 

 

 

 924 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

 

 10,826 

 

 

 10,602 

Commitments and Contingencies

 

 

 

 

 

Member's Equity

 

 

 

 

 

Member's Equity

 

 10,132 

 

 

 9,888 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

 (16) 

 

 

 (16) 

 

Total member's equity

 

 10,116 

 

 

 9,872 

Total Liabilities and Member's Equity

$

 30,927 

 

$

 30,642 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

11 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(Unaudited)

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Three Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

  

  

   

September 30,

  

September 30,

(in millions)   

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Operating Revenues  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Regulated electric  

$

 387 

  

$

 442 

  

$

 1,047 

  

$

 1,175 

  

Non-regulated electric and other  

  

 292 

  

  

 315 

  

  

 1,008 

  

  

 825 

  

Regulated natural gas  

  

 78 

  

  

 81 

  

  

 331 

  

  

 411 

  

  

Total operating revenues  

  

 757 

  

  

 838 

  

  

 2,386 

  

  

 2,411 

Operating Expenses  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - regulated  

  

 141 

  

  

 111 

  

  

 375 

  

  

 299 

  

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - non-regulated  

  

 234 

  

  

 189 

  

  

 649 

  

  

 500 

  

Cost of natural gas   

  

 8 

  

  

 12 

  

  

 95 

  

  

 153 

  

Operation, maintenance and other  

  

 208 

  

  

 186 

  

  

 579 

  

  

 606 

  

Depreciation and amortization  

  

 86 

  

  

 83 

  

  

 249 

  

  

 259 

  

Property and other taxes  

  

 38 

  

  

 64 

  

  

 166 

  

  

 200 

  

Impairment charges  

  

 ― 

  

  

 79 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 88 

  

  

Total operating expenses  

  

 715 

  

  

 724 

  

  

 2,113 

  

  

 2,105 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 4 

Operating Income   

  

 42 

  

  

 116 

  

  

 275 

  

  

 310 

Other Income and Expenses, net  

  

 5 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 13 

  

  

 17 

Interest Expense  

  

 21 

  

  

 27 

  

  

 70 

  

  

 78 

Income Before Income Taxes  

  

 26 

  

  

 97 

  

  

 218 

  

  

 249 

Income Tax Expense  

  

 12 

  

  

 46 

  

  

 85 

  

  

 92 

Net Income   

  

 14 

  

  

 51 

  

  

 133 

  

  

 157 

Other Comprehensive Income, net of tax  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Pension and OPEB adjustments(a)

  

 ― 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

Comprehensive Income  

$

 14 

  

$

 50 

  

$

 134 

  

$

 157 

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Net of insignificant tax expense and $1 million tax expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, and $1 million tax benefit for the three months ended September 30, 2011.

  

  

    

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Cash Flows

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net income

$

 244 

 

$

 266 

 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Depreciation and amortization (including amortization of nuclear fuel)

 

 281 

 

 

 288 

 

 

 

Equity component of AFUDC

 

 (26) 

 

 

 (36) 

 

 

 

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 146 

 

 

 154 

 

 

 

Voluntary opportunity cost deferral

 

 ― 

 

 

 (101) 

 

 

 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 10 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 

(Increase) decrease in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions

 

 (7) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 

 

Receivables

 

 (8) 

 

 

 134 

 

 

 

 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 (54) 

 

 

 (17) 

 

 

 

 

Inventory

 

 50 

 

 

 (100) 

 

 

 

 

Other current assets

 

 (25) 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

 

 (16) 

 

 

 (196) 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 (16) 

 

 

 (37) 

 

 

 

 

Taxes accrued

 

 (48) 

 

 

 (65) 

 

 

 

 

Other current liabilities

 

 (34) 

 

 

 109 

 

 

 

Other assets

 

 (28) 

 

 

 (18) 

 

 

 

Other liabilities

 

 (15) 

 

 

 (32) 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by operating activities

 

 452 

 

 

 353 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capital expenditures

 

 (435) 

 

 

 (483) 

 

Purchases of available-for-sale securities

 

 (504) 

 

 

 (627) 

 

Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities

 

 492 

 

 

 615 

 

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

 

 (15) 

 

 

 625 

 

Other

 

 (3) 

 

 

 (5) 

 

 

 

 

Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities

 

 (465) 

 

 

 125 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Payments for the redemption of long-term debt

 

 ― 

 

 

 (751) 

 

Other

 

 (1) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 

 

Net cash used in financing activities

 

 (1) 

 

 

 (752) 

 

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents

 

 (14) 

 

 

 (274) 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

 

 19 

 

 

 289 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

 5 

 

$

 15 

 

Supplemental Disclosures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Significant non-cash transactions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 132 

 

$

 115 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

12 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

September 30,

  

December 31,

(in millions)

2012 

  

2011 

ASSETS

  

  

  

  

  

Current Assets

  

  

  

  

  

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 13 

  

$

 99 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $2 at September 30, 2012 and $16 at December 31, 2011)

  

 96 

  

  

 137 

Receivables from affiliated companies

  

 92 

  

  

 143 

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

  

 84 

  

  

 401 

Inventory

  

 221 

  

  

 243 

Other

  

 259 

  

  

 220 

  

Total current assets

  

 765 

  

  

 1,243 

Investments and Other Assets

  

  

  

  

  

Goodwill

  

 921 

  

  

 921 

Intangibles, net

  

 132 

  

  

 143 

Other

  

 62 

  

  

 58 

  

Total investments and other assets

  

 1,115 

  

  

 1,122 

Property, Plant and Equipment

  

  

  

  

  

Cost

  

 10,708 

  

  

 10,632 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

  

 (2,646) 

  

  

 (2,594) 

  

Net property, plant and equipment

  

 8,062 

  

  

 8,038 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

  

  

  

  

  

Regulatory assets

  

 538 

  

  

 520 

Other

  

 14 

  

  

 16 

  

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

  

 552 

  

  

 536 

Total Assets

$

 10,494 

  

$

 10,939 

LIABILITIES AND COMMON STOCKHOLDER'S EQUITY

  

  

  

  

  

Current Liabilities

  

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable

$

 248 

  

$

 318 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

  

 68 

  

  

 84 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

  

 86 

  

  

 ― 

Taxes accrued

  

 131 

  

  

 180 

Interest accrued

  

 30 

  

  

 23 

Current maturities of long-term debt

  

 261 

  

  

 507 

Other

  

 105 

  

  

 122 

  

Total current liabilities

  

 929 

  

  

 1,234 

Long-term Debt

  

 1,785 

  

  

 2,048 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

  

  

  

  

  

Deferred income taxes

  

 1,882 

  

  

 1,853 

Investment tax credits

  

 6 

  

  

 8 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

  

 140 

  

  

 147 

Asset retirement obligations

  

 28 

  

  

 27 

Regulatory liabilities

  

 264 

  

  

 273 

Other

  

 187 

  

  

 182 

  

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

  

 2,507 

  

  

 2,490 

Commitments and Contingencies

  

  

  

  

  

Common Stockholder's Equity

  

  

  

  

  

Common stock, $8.50 par value, 120,000,000 shares authorized; 89,663,086  shares outstanding at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011

  

 762 

  

  

 762 

Additional paid-in capital

  

 5,057 

  

  

 5,085 

Accumulated deficit

  

 (519) 

  

  

 (652) 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

  

 (27) 

  

  

 (28) 

  

Total common stockholder's equity

  

 5,273 

  

  

 5,167 

Total Liabilities and Common Stockholder's Equity

$

 10,494 

  

$

 10,939 

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Equity

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss

 

 

(in millions)

 

Member's

Equity

 

Net Losses on Cash Flow Hedges

 

Net Losses on Available for Sale Securities

 

Total

Balance at December 31, 2011

 

$

 9,473 

 

$

 (17) 

 

$

 (2) 

 

$

 9,454 

Net income

 

 

 266 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 266 

Balance at March 31, 2012

 

$

 9,739 

 

$

 (17) 

 

$

 (2) 

 

$

 9,720 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

 

$

 9,888 

 

$

 (15) 

 

$

 (1) 

 

$

 9,872 

Net income

 

 

 244 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 244 

Balance at March 31, 2013

 

$

 10,132 

 

$

 (15) 

 

$

 (1) 

 

$

 10,116 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

13 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Nine Months Ended

  

  

  

  

  

  

September 30,

(in millions)

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Net income

$

 133 

  

$

 157 

  

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Depreciation and amortization

  

 252 

  

  

 261 

  

  

  

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net

  

 (2) 

  

  

 (4) 

  

  

  

Impairment charges

  

 ― 

  

  

 88 

  

  

  

Deferred income taxes

  

 78 

  

  

 165 

  

  

  

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

  

 8 

  

  

 11 

  

  

  

(Increase) decrease in

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions

  

 18 

  

  

 15 

  

  

  

  

Receivables

  

 40 

  

  

 163 

  

  

  

  

Receivables from affiliated companies

  

 51 

  

  

 7 

  

  

  

  

Inventory

  

 21 

  

  

 (29) 

  

  

  

  

Other current assets

  

 17 

  

  

 (35) 

  

  

  

Increase (decrease) in

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable

  

 (56) 

  

  

 (121) 

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

  

 (16) 

  

  

 (29) 

  

  

  

  

Taxes accrued

  

 (49) 

  

  

 2 

  

  

  

  

Other current liabilities

  

 (16) 

  

  

 18 

  

  

  

Other assets

  

 (39) 

  

  

 9 

  

  

  

Other liabilities

  

 (73) 

  

  

 (55) 

  

  

  

  

Net cash provided by operating activities

  

 367 

  

  

 623 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Capital expenditures

  

 (386) 

  

  

 (344) 

  

Net proceeds from the sales of other assets

  

 82 

  

  

 ― 

  

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

  

 317 

  

  

 221 

  

Change in restricted cash

  

 (46) 

  

  

 (18) 

  

Other

  

 1 

  

  

 (2) 

  

  

  

  

Net cash used in investing activities

  

 (32) 

  

  

 (143) 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Payments for the redemption of long-term debt

  

 (507) 

  

  

 (7) 

  

Notes payable to affiliated companies

  

 86 

  

  

 ― 

  

Dividends to parent

  

 ― 

  

  

 (485) 

  

  

  

  

Net cash used in financing activities

  

 (421) 

  

  

 (492) 

  

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents

  

 (86) 

  

  

 (12) 

  

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

  

 99 

  

  

 228 

  

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

 13 

  

$

 216 

  

Supplemental Disclosures:

  

  

  

  

  

  

Significant non-cash transactions:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 26 

  

$

 18 

  

  

Transfer of Vermillion Generating Station to Duke Energy Indiana

$

 28 

  

$

 ― 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

PROGRESS ENERGY, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Operations And Comprehensive Income

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Operating Revenues

$

 2,186 

 

$

 2,102 

Operating Expenses

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power

 

 860 

 

 

 901 

 

Operation, maintenance and other

 

 561 

 

 

 535 

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 194 

 

 

 166 

 

Property and other taxes

 

 141 

 

 

 138 

 

 

Total operating expenses

 

 1,756 

 

 

 1,740 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Operating Income

 

 430 

 

 

 363 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 23 

 

 

 39 

Interest Expense

 

 198 

 

 

 185 

Income From Continuing Operations Before Taxes

 

 255 

 

 

 217 

Income Tax Expense From Continuing Operations

 

 101 

 

 

 76 

Income From Continuing Operations

 

 154 

 

 

 141 

Income From Discontinued Operations, net of tax

 

 ― 

 

 

 11 

Net Income

 

 154 

 

 

 152 

Less: Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interest

 

 1 

 

 

 2 

Net Income Attributable to Parent

$

 153 

 

$

 150 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net Income

$

 154 

 

$

 152 

Other Comprehensive Income, net of tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reclassification into earnings from pension and OPEB adjustments(a)

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

 

Net unrealized gain on cash flow hedges(b)

 

 1 

 

 

 2 

 

Reclassification into earnings from cash flow hedges(c)

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

Other Comprehensive Income, net of tax

 

 2 

 

 

 5 

Comprehensive Income

$

 156 

 

$

 157 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Net of insignificant tax expense in 2013 and 2012.

(b)

Net of insignificant tax expense in 2013 and $2 million tax expense in 2012.

(c)

Net of $2 million tax expense in 2012.

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

14 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accumulated Other

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Comprehensive Income (Loss)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Additional

  

Retained

  

Pension and

  

  

  

  

  

Common

  

Paid-in

  

Earnings

  

OPEB

  

  

  

(in millions)

  

Stock

  

Capital

  

(Deficit)

  

Adjustments

  

Total

Balance at December 31, 2010

  

$

 762 

  

$

 5,570 

  

$

 (846) 

  

$

 (22) 

  

$

 5,464 

  

Net income 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 157 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 157 

  

Dividend to parent

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (485) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (485) 

Balance at September 30, 2011

  

$

 762 

  

$

 5,085 

  

$

 (689) 

  

$

 (22) 

  

$

 5,136 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at December 31, 2011

  

$

 762 

  

$

 5,085 

  

$

 (652) 

  

$

 (28) 

  

$

 5,167 

  

Net income

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 133 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 133 

  

Other comprehensive income

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

  

Transfer of Vermillion Generating Station to Duke Energy Indiana

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (28) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (28) 

Balance at September 30, 2012

  

$

 762 

  

$

 5,057 

  

$

 (519) 

  

$

 (27) 

  

$

 5,273 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

PROGRESS ENERGY, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31,

2013

 

December 31,

2012

ASSETS

 

 

 

 

 

Current Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 35 

 

$

 231 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $15 at March 31, 2013 and $16 at December 31, 2012)

 

 812 

 

 

 790 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 18 

 

 

 15 

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

 

 20 

 

 

 ― 

Inventory

 

 1,405 

 

 

 1,441 

Other

 

 709 

 

 

 766 

 

Total current assets

 

 2,999 

 

 

 3,243 

Investments and Other Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

 

 2,017 

 

 

 1,888 

Goodwill

 

 3,655 

 

 

 3,655 

Other

 

 531 

 

 

 530 

 

Total investments and other assets

 

 6,203 

 

 

 6,073 

Property, Plant and Equipment

 

 

 

 

 

Cost

 

 35,369 

 

 

 35,130 

Cost, variable interest entities

 

 16 

 

 

 16 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

 

 (12,624) 

 

 

 (12,512) 

Generation facilities to be retired, net

 

 62 

 

 

 63 

 

Net property, plant and equipment

 

 22,823 

 

 

 22,697 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory assets

 

 5,158 

 

 

 5,292 

Other

 

 102 

 

 

 100 

 

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

 

 5,260 

 

 

 5,392 

Total Assets

$

 37,285 

 

$

 37,405 

LIABILITIES AND COMMON STOCKHOLDER'S EQUITY

 

 

 

 

 

Current Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

$

 822 

 

$

 1,066 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 64 

 

 

 30 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

 

 980 

 

 

 455 

Taxes accrued

 

 155 

 

 

 83 

Interest accrued

 

 195 

 

 

 192 

Current maturities of long-term debt

 

 718 

 

 

 843 

Other

 

 924 

 

 

 1,118 

 

Total current liabilities

 

 3,858 

 

 

 3,787 

Long-term Debt

 

 13,506 

 

 

 13,311 

Long-term Debt Payable to Affiliated Companies

 

 ― 

 

 

 274 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 2,540 

 

 

 2,558 

Investment tax credits

 

 93 

 

 

 95 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 1,610 

 

 

 1,608 

Asset retirement obligations

 

 2,441 

 

 

 2,413 

Regulatory liabilities

 

 2,324 

 

 

 2,469 

Other

 

 578 

 

 

 612 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

 9,586 

 

 

 9,755 

Commitments and Contingencies

 

 

 

 

 

Preferred Stock of Subsidiaries

 

 ― 

 

 

 93 

Common Stockholder's Equity

 

 

 

 

 

Common stock, $0.01 par value, 100 shares authorized and outstanding at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

Additional paid-in capital

 

 7,465 

 

 

 7,465 

Retained earnings

 

 2,933 

 

 

 2,783 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

 (65) 

 

 

 (67) 

 

Total common stockholder's equity

 

 10,333 

 

 

 10,181 

Noncontrolling interests

 

 2 

 

 

 4 

 

Total equity

 

 10,335 

 

 

 10,185 

Total Liabilities and Common Stockholder's Equity

$

 37,285 

 

$

 37,405 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

15 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(Unaudited)

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Three Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

  

  

   

September 30,

  

September 30,

(in millions)   

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Operating Revenues-Regulated Electric  

$

 718 

  

$

 718 

  

$

 2,091 

  

$

 1,997 

Operating Expenses  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power  

  

 283 

  

  

 270 

  

  

 853 

  

  

 748 

  

Operation, maintenance and other  

  

 162 

  

  

 148 

  

  

 473 

  

  

 472 

  

Depreciation and amortization  

  

 100 

  

  

 100 

  

  

 292 

  

  

 297 

  

Property and other taxes  

  

 23 

  

  

 20 

  

  

 61 

  

  

 61 

  

Impairment charges  

  

 180 

  

  

 222 

  

  

 580 

  

  

 222 

  

  

Total operating expenses  

  

 748 

  

  

 760 

  

  

 2,259 

  

  

 1,800 

Operating (Loss) Income   

  

 (30) 

  

  

 (42) 

  

  

 (168) 

  

  

 197 

Other Income and Expenses, net  

  

 24 

  

  

 26 

  

  

 66 

  

  

 70 

Interest Expense  

  

 35 

  

  

 34 

  

  

 105 

  

  

 104 

(Loss) Income Before Income Taxes  

  

 (41) 

  

  

 (50) 

  

  

 (207) 

  

  

 163 

Income Tax (Benefit) Expense   

  

 (22) 

  

  

 (19) 

  

  

 (98) 

  

  

 50 

Net (Loss) Income   

  

 (19) 

  

  

 (31) 

  

  

 (109) 

  

  

 113 

Other Comprehensive Income, net of tax  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

     Reclassification into earnings from cash flow hedges(a)

  

 ― 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 (1) 

Comprehensive (Loss) Income  

$

 (19) 

  

$

 (32) 

  

$

 (110) 

  

$

 112 

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Net of insignificant tax benefit for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, and $1 million tax benefit for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

PROGRESS ENERGY, INC.

 

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Cash Flows

 

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

 

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net income

$

 154 

 

$

 152 

 

 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Depreciation, amortization and accretion (including amortization of nuclear fuel)

 

 235 

 

 

 195 

 

 

 

 

Equity component of AFUDC

 

 (13) 

 

 

 (24) 

 

 

 

 

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net

 

 ― 

 

 

 (19) 

 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 118 

 

 

 106 

 

 

 

 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 53 

 

 

 38 

 

 

 

 

Contributions to qualified pension plans

 

 ― 

 

 

 (18) 

 

 

 

 

(Increase) decrease in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions

 

 12 

 

 

 (60) 

 

 

 

 

 

Receivables

 

 (25) 

 

 

 75 

 

 

 

 

 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 (3) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 

 

 

Inventory

 

 36 

 

 

 (8) 

 

 

 

 

 

Other current assets

 

 (115) 

 

 

 (18) 

 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

 

 (191) 

 

 

 (23) 

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 34 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 

 

 

Taxes accrued

 

 72 

 

 

 60 

 

 

 

 

 

Other current liabilities

 

 (95) 

 

 

 (72) 

 

 

 

 

Other assets

 

 (76) 

 

 

 (34) 

 

 

 

 

Other liabilities

 

 69 

 

 

 (35) 

 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by operating activities

 

 265 

 

 

 315 

 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capital expenditures

 

 (622) 

 

 

 (600) 

 

 

Purchases of available-for-sale securities

 

 (401) 

 

 

 (363) 

 

 

Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities

 

 391 

 

 

 359 

 

 

Change in restricted cash

 

 ― 

 

 

 (14) 

 

 

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

 

 (20) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

Other

 

 9 

 

 

 66 

 

 

 

 

 

Net cash used in investing activities

 

 (643) 

 

 

 (552) 

 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceeds from the:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Issuance of long-term debt

 

 496 

 

 

 444 

 

 

 

Issuance of common stock related to employee benefit plans

 

 ― 

 

 

 3 

 

 

Payments for the:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Redemption of long-term debt

 

 (736) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 

Redemption of preferred stock of subsidiaries

 

 (96) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

Proceeds from issuance of short-term debt with original maturities greater than 90 days

 

 ― 

 

 

 65 

 

 

Notes payable and commercial paper

 

 ― 

 

 

 321 

 

 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

 

 525 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

Distributions to noncontrolling interests

 

 (3) 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

Dividends paid 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (260) 

 

 

Other

 

 (4) 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by financing activities

 

 182 

 

 

 572 

 

 

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents

 

 (196) 

 

 

 335 

 

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period

 

 231 

 

 

 230 

 

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period

$

 35 

 

$

 565 

 

 

Supplemental Disclosures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Significant non-cash transactions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 248 

 

$

 225 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

16 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

September 30,

  

December 31,

(in millions)

2012 

  

2011 

ASSETS

  

  

  

  

  

Current Assets

  

  

  

  

  

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 18 

  

$

 16 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $1 at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011)

  

 23 

  

  

 42 

Receivables from affiliated companies

  

 133 

  

  

 156 

Inventory

  

 356 

  

  

 330 

Other

  

 124 

  

  

 135 

  

Total current assets

  

 654 

  

  

 679 

Investments and Other Assets

  

  

  

  

  

Intangibles, net

  

 43 

  

  

 50 

Other

  

 110 

  

  

 113 

  

Total investments and other assets

  

 153 

  

  

 163 

Property, Plant and Equipment

  

  

  

  

  

Cost

  

 11,843 

  

  

 11,791 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

  

 (3,638) 

  

  

 (3,393) 

  

Net property, plant and equipment

  

 8,205 

  

  

 8,398 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

  

  

  

  

  

Regulatory assets

  

 784 

  

  

 798 

Other

  

 23 

  

  

 24 

  

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

  

 807 

  

  

 822 

Total Assets

$

 9,819 

  

$

 10,062 

LIABILITIES AND COMMON STOCKHOLDER'S EQUITY

  

  

  

  

  

Current Liabilities

  

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable

$

147 

  

$

201 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

  

 52 

  

  

 72 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

  

55 

  

  

300 

Taxes accrued

  

58 

  

  

74 

Interest accrued

  

49 

  

  

50 

Current maturities of long-term debt

  

404 

  

  

Other

  

170 

  

  

93 

  

Total current liabilities

  

 935 

  

  

 796 

Long-term Debt

  

 3,150 

  

  

 3,303 

Long-term Debt payable to affiliated companies

  

 150 

  

  

 150 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

  

  

  

  

  

Deferred income taxes

  

826 

  

  

927 

Investment tax credits

  

142 

  

  

143 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

  

152 

  

  

161 

Asset retirement obligations

  

44 

  

  

43 

Regulatory liabilities

  

706 

  

  

683 

Other

  

64 

  

  

122 

  

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

  

 1,934 

  

  

 2,079 

Commitments and Contingencies

  

  

  

  

  

Common Stockholder's Equity

  

  

  

  

  

Common Stock, no par; $0.01 stated value, 60,000,000 shares authorized; 53,913,701 shares outstanding at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

Additional paid-in capital

  

 1,384 

  

  

 1,358 

Retained earnings

  

 2,259 

  

  

 2,368 

Accumulated other comprehensive income

  

 6 

  

  

 7 

  

Total common stockholder's equity

  

 3,650 

  

  

 3,734 

Total Liabilities and Common Stockholder's Equity

$

 9,819 

  

$

 10,062 

PROGRESS ENERGY, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Equity

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

Common

Stock

 

Additional

Paid-in

Capital

 

Retained

Earnings

 

Net Losses on Cash Flow Hedges

 

Pension and OPEB Related Adjustments

 

Common

Stockholders'

Equity

 

Noncontrolling

Interests

 

Total

Equity

Balance at December 31, 2011

 

$

 7,418 

 

$

 16 

 

$

 2,752 

 

$

 (142) 

 

$

 (23) 

 

$

 10,021 

 

$

 4 

 

$

 10,025 

Net income(a)

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 150 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 150 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 150 

Other comprehensive income

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 5 

Common stock issuances, including dividend reinvestment and employee benefits

 

 

 12 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 17 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 17 

Common stock dividends

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (184) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (184) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (184) 

Distributions to noncontrolling interests

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (2) 

Balance at March 31, 2012

 

$

 7,430 

 

$

 21 

 

$

 2,718 

 

$

 (138) 

 

$

 (22) 

 

$

 10,009 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 10,011 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 7,465 

 

$

 2,783 

 

$

 (42) 

 

$

 (25) 

 

$

 10,181 

 

$

 4 

 

$

 10,185 

Net income

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 153 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 153 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 154 

Other comprehensive income

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

Premium on the redemption of preferred stock of subsidiaries

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (3) 

Distributions to noncontrolling interests

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 (3) 

Balance at March 31, 2013

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 7,465 

 

$

 2,933 

 

$

 (41) 

 

$

 (24) 

 

$

 10,333 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 10,335 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

For the three months ended March 31, 2012, consolidated net income of $152 million includes $2 million attributable to preferred shareholders of subsidiaries. Income attributable to preferred shareholders of subsidiaries is not a component of total equity and is excluded from the table above.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

17 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

Nine Months Ended

  

  

  

  

  

September 30,

(in millions)

2012 

  

2011 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Net (loss) income

$

 (109) 

  

$

 113 

  

Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash provided by operating activities:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Depreciation and amortization

  

 296 

  

  

 301 

  

  

  

Equity component of AFUDC

  

 (61) 

  

  

 (64) 

  

  

  

Impairment charges

  

 580 

  

  

 222 

  

  

  

Deferred income taxes and investment tax credit amortization

  

 (97) 

  

  

 (67) 

  

  

  

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

  

 12 

  

  

 16 

  

  

  

(Increase) decrease in

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Receivables

  

 16 

  

  

 93 

  

  

  

  

Receivables from affiliated companies

  

 23 

  

  

 4 

  

  

  

  

Inventory

  

 (26) 

  

  

 (17) 

  

  

  

  

Other current assets

  

 5 

  

  

 18 

  

  

  

Increase (decrease) in

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable

  

 20 

  

  

 (22) 

  

  

  

  

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

  

 (20) 

  

  

 (13) 

  

  

  

  

Taxes accrued

  

 (35) 

  

  

 76 

  

  

  

  

Other current liabilities

  

 (7) 

  

  

 (9) 

  

  

  

Other assets

  

 15 

  

  

 19 

  

  

  

Other liabilities

  

 (28) 

  

  

 (47) 

  

  

  

  

Net cash provided by operating activities

  

 584 

  

  

 623 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Capital expenditures

  

 (582) 

  

  

 (783) 

  

Purchases of available-for-sale securities

  

 (12) 

  

  

 (7) 

  

Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities

  

 14 

  

  

 5 

  

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

  

 ― 

  

  

 115 

  

Change in restricted cash

  

 ― 

  

  

 6 

  

Other

  

 (1) 

  

  

 (2) 

  

  

  

  

Net cash used in investing activities

  

 (581) 

  

  

 (666) 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

  

  

  

  

  

  

Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt

  

 250 

  

  

 ― 

  

Payments for the redemption of long-term debt

  

 (4) 

  

  

 (4) 

  

Notes payable to affiliated companies

  

 (245) 

  

  

 14 

  

Other

  

 (2) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

  

Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities

  

 (1) 

  

  

 10 

  

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

  

 2 

  

  

 (33) 

  

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

  

 16 

  

  

 54 

  

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

 18 

  

$

 21 

  

Supplemental Disclosures:

  

  

  

  

  

  

Significant non-cash transactions:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 37 

  

$

 127 

  

  

Transfer of Vermillion Generating Station from Duke Energy Ohio

$

 26 

  

$

 ― 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Operations And Comprehensive Income

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Operating Revenues

$

 1,216 

 

$

 1,090 

Operating Expenses

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power

 

 455 

 

 

 420 

 

Operation, maintenance and other

 

 352 

 

 

 374 

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 137 

 

 

 134 

 

Property and other taxes

 

 60 

 

 

 56 

 

 

Total operating expenses

 

 1,004 

 

 

 984 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Operating Income

 

 212 

 

 

 107 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 14 

 

 

 20 

Interest Expense

 

 48 

 

 

 51 

Income Before Income Taxes

 

 178 

 

 

 76 

Income Tax Expense

 

 68 

 

 

 24 

Net Income

 

 110 

 

 

 52 

Less: Preferred Stock Dividend Requirement

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Net Income Available to Parent

$

 110 

 

$

 51 

 

Net Income

$

 110 

 

$

 52 

Other Comprehensive Income, net of tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net unrealized gain on cash flow hedges(a)

 

 ― 

 

 

 3 

 

Reclassification into earnings from cash flow hedges(b)

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

Other Comprehensive Income, net of tax

 

 ― 

 

 

 5 

Comprehensive Income

$

 110 

 

$

 57 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Net of $2 million tax expense in 2012.

(b)

Net of $1 million tax expense in 2012.

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

18 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY

(Unaudited)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Accumulated

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Other Comprehensive

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Income (Loss)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Net Gains

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Additional

  

  

  

  

(Losses) on

  

  

  

  

  

Common

  

Paid-in

  

Retained

  

Cash Flow

  

  

  

(in millions)

  

Stock

  

Capital

  

Earnings

  

Hedges

  

Total

Balance at December 31, 2010

  

$

 1 

  

$

 1,358 

  

$

 2,200 

  

$

 8 

  

$

 3,567 

  

Net income

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 113 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 113 

  

Other comprehensive loss

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 (1) 

Balance at September 30, 2011

  

$

 1 

  

$

 1,358 

  

$

 2,313 

  

$

 7 

  

$

 3,679 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at December 31, 2011

  

$

 1 

  

$

 1,358 

  

$

 2,368 

  

$

 7 

  

$

 3,734 

  

Net income

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (109) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (109) 

  

Other comprehensive loss

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 (1) 

  

Transfer of Vermillion Generating Station from Duke Energy Ohio

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 26 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 26 

Balance at September 30, 2012

  

$

 1 

  

$

 1,384 

  

$

 2,259 

  

$

 6 

  

$

 3,650 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(Unaudited)

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31,

2013

 

December 31,

2012

ASSETS

 

 

 

 

 

Current Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 11 

 

$

 18 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $8 at March 31, 2013 and $9 at December 31, 2012)

 

 483 

 

 

 458 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 18 

 

 

 5 

Inventory

 

 808 

 

 

 828 

Other

 

 308 

 

 

 313 

 

Total current assets

 

 1,628 

 

 

 1,622 

Investments and Other Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

 

 1,347 

 

 

 1,259 

Other

 

 269 

 

 

 251 

 

Total investments and other assets

 

 1,616 

 

 

 1,510 

Property, Plant and Equipment

 

 

 

 

 

Cost

 

 21,413 

 

 

 21,168 

Cost, variable interest entities

 

 16 

 

 

 16 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

 

 (8,312) 

 

 

 (8,185) 

Generation facilities to be retired, net

 

 62 

 

 

 63 

 

Net property, plant and equipment

 

 13,179 

 

 

 13,062 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory assets

 

 1,791 

 

 

 1,845 

Other

 

 32 

 

 

 29 

 

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

 

 1,823 

 

 

 1,874 

Total Assets

$

 18,246 

 

$

 18,068 

LIABILITIES AND COMMON STOCKHOLDER'S EQUITY

 

 

 

 

 

Current Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

$

 373 

 

$

 542 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 157 

 

 

 76 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

 

 38 

 

 

 364 

Taxes accrued

 

 55 

 

 

 23 

Interest accrued

 

 73 

 

 

 69 

Current maturities of long-term debt

 

 407 

 

 

 407 

Other

 

 407 

 

 

 517 

 

Total current liabilities

 

 1,510 

 

 

 1,998 

Long-term Debt

 

 4,929 

 

 

 4,433 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 2,210 

 

 

 2,162 

Investment tax credits

 

 90 

 

 

 92 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 723 

 

 

 715 

Asset retirement obligations

 

 1,669 

 

 

 1,649 

Regulatory liabilities

 

 1,598 

 

 

 1,538 

Other

 

 282 

 

 

 295 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

 

 6,572 

 

 

 6,451 

Commitments and Contingencies

 

 

 

 

 

Preferred Stock

 

 ― 

 

 

 59 

Common Stockholder's Equity

 

 

 

 

 

Common stock, no par value, 200 million shares authorized; 160 million shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012

 

 2,159 

 

 

 2,159 

Retained earnings

 

 3,076 

 

 

 2,968 

 

Total common stockholder's equity

 

 5,235 

 

 

 5,127 

Total Liabilities and Equity

$

 18,246 

 

$

 18,068 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

19 

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC.

 

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Cash Flows

 

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

 

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net income

$

 110 

 

$

 52 

 

 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Depreciation, amortization and accretion (including amortization of nuclear fuel)

 

 175 

 

 

 161 

 

 

 

 

Equity component of AFUDC

 

 (11) 

 

 

 (15) 

 

 

 

 

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 86 

 

 

 46 

 

 

 

 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 24 

 

 

 13 

 

 

 

 

Contributions to qualified pension plans

 

 ― 

 

 

 (10) 

 

 

 

 

(Increase) decrease in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions

 

 (17) 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 

 

 

Receivables

 

 (8) 

 

 

 51 

 

 

 

 

 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 (13) 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 

 

 

Inventory

 

 20 

 

 

 (5) 

 

 

 

 

 

Other current assets

 

 (25) 

 

 

 (28) 

 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

 

 (87) 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 81 

 

 

 15 

 

 

 

 

 

Taxes accrued

 

 32 

 

 

 23 

 

 

 

 

 

Other current liabilities

 

 (55) 

 

 

 (42) 

 

 

 

 

Other assets

 

 (33) 

 

 

 (18) 

 

 

 

 

Other liabilities

 

 14 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by operating activities

 

 293 

 

 

 246 

 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capital expenditures

 

 (395) 

 

 

 (391) 

 

 

Purchases of available-for-sale securities

 

 (196) 

 

 

 (138) 

 

 

Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities

 

 188 

 

 

 133 

 

 

Other

 

 ― 

 

 

 61 

 

 

 

 

 

Net cash used in investing activities

 

 (403) 

 

 

 (335) 

 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt

 

 496 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

Payments for the:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Redemption of long-term debt

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 

Redemption of preferred stock

 

 (62) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

Notes payable and commercial paper

 

 ― 

 

 

 253 

 

 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

 

 (326) 

 

 

 11 

 

 

Dividends paid to parent

 

 ― 

 

 

 (175) 

 

 

Dividends paid on preferred stock

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

Other

 

 (4) 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by financing activities

 

 103 

 

 

 90 

 

 

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents

 

 (7) 

 

 

 1 

 

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period

 

 18 

 

 

 20 

 

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period

$

 11 

 

$

 21 

 

 

Supplemental Disclosures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Significant non-cash transactions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 149 

 

$

 162 

 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

20 


PART I

Index to Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

The unaudited notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements that follow are a combined presentation. The following

  

list indicates the registrants to which the footnotes apply:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Applicable Notes

  

Registrant

  

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

Duke Energy Corporation

  

  

Duke Energy Carolinas,  LLC

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy Ohio, Inc.

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy Indiana, Inc.

  

  

  

  

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Equity

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated Other

Comprehensive

Loss

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

Common

Stock

 

Retained

Earnings

 

Net Losses on Cash Flow Hedges

 

Total

Equity

Balance at December 31, 2011

 

$

 2,148 

 

$

 3,011 

 

$

 (71) 

 

$

 5,088 

Net income

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 52 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 52 

Other comprehensive income

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 5 

Stock-based compensation expense

 

 

 7 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 7 

Dividend to parent

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (175) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (175) 

Preferred stock dividends at stated rate

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

Tax dividend

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (3) 

Balance at March 31, 2012

 

$

 2,155 

 

$

 2,884 

 

$

 (66) 

 

$

 4,973 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

 

$

 2,159 

 

$

 2,968 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 5,127 

Net income

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 110 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 110 

Premium on the redemption of preferred stock

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (2) 

Balance at March 31, 2013

 

$

 2,159 

 

$

 3,076 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 5,235 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

21


PART I

DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC.

Condensed Statements Of Operations And Comprehensive Income

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Operating Revenues

$

 968 

 

$

 1,010 

Operating Expenses

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power

 

 405 

 

 

 481 

 

Operation, maintenance and other

 

 211 

 

 

 165 

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 52 

 

 

 27 

 

Property and other taxes

 

 79 

 

 

 83 

 

 

Total operating expenses

 

 747 

 

 

 756 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Operating Income

 

 221 

 

 

 255 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 8 

 

 

 9 

Interest Expense

 

 49 

 

 

 63 

Income Before Income Taxes

 

 180 

 

 

 201 

Income Tax Expense

 

 70 

 

 

 73 

Net Income

 

 110 

 

 

 128 

Less: Preferred Stock Dividend Requirement

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Net Income Available to Parent

$

 110 

 

$

 127 

 

Net Income

$

 110 

 

$

 128 

Other Comprehensive Income, net of tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net unrealized gain on cash flow hedges(a)

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Comprehensive Income

$

 110 

 

$

 129 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Net of insignificant tax expense in 2012.

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

22


PART I

DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC.

Condensed Balance Sheets

(Unaudited)

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31,

2013

 

December 31,

2012

ASSETS

 

 

 

 

 

Current Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 7 

 

$

 131 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $7 at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012)

 

 313 

 

 

 318 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 64 

 

 

 20 

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

 

 ― 

 

 

 207 

Inventory

 

 598 

 

 

 613 

Other

 

 354 

 

 

 351 

 

Total current assets

 

 1,336 

 

 

 1,640 

Investments and Other Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Nuclear decommissioning trust funds

 

 670 

 

 

 629 

Other

 

 176 

 

 

 182 

 

Total investments and other assets

 

 846 

 

 

 811 

Property, Plant and Equipment

 

 

 

 

 

Cost

 

 13,615 

 

 

 13,432 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

 

 (4,102) 

 

 

 (4,072) 

 

Net property, plant and equipment

 

 9,513 

 

 

 9,360 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory assets

 

 3,243 

 

 

 3,321 

Other

 

 47 

 

 

 48 

 

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

 

 3,290 

 

 

 3,369 

Total Assets

$

 14,985 

 

$

 15,180 

LIABILITIES AND COMMON STOCKHOLDER'S EQUITY

 

 

 

 

 

Current Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

$

 382 

 

$

 412 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 65 

 

 

 44 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

 

 238 

 

 

 ― 

Taxes accrued

 

 125 

 

 

 48 

Interest accrued

 

 68 

 

 

 55 

Current maturities of long-term debt

 

 10 

 

 

 435 

Other

 

 461 

 

 

 534 

 

Total current liabilities

 

 1,349 

 

 

 1,528 

Long-term Debt

 

 4,884 

 

 

 4,885 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 1,502 

 

 

 1,518 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 612 

 

 

 610 

Asset retirement obligations

 

 772 

 

 

 764 

Regulatory liabilities

 

 724 

 

 

 787 

Other

 

 234 

 

 

 255 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

 

 3,844 

 

 

 3,934 

Commitments and Contingencies

 

 

 

 

 

Preferred Stock

 

 ― 

 

 

 34 

Common Stockholder's Equity

 

 

 

 

 

Common Stock, no par; 60,000,000 shares authorized; 100 issued and outstanding at March 31, 2013  and December 31, 2012

 

 1,762 

 

 

 1,762 

Retained earnings

 

 3,146 

 

 

 3,037 

 

Total common stockholder's equity

 

 4,908 

 

 

 4,799 

Total Liabilities and Common Stockholder's Equity

$

 14,985 

 

$

 15,180 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

23


PART I

DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC.

 

Condensed Statements Of Cash Flows

 

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

 

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net income

$

 110 

 

$

 128 

 

 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Depreciation, amortization and accretion

 

 54 

 

 

 28 

 

 

 

 

Equity component of AFUDC

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (9) 

 

 

 

 

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 70 

 

 

 53 

 

 

 

 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 22 

 

 

 15 

 

 

 

 

Contributions to qualified pension plans

 

 ― 

 

 

 (8) 

 

 

 

 

(Increase) decrease in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions

 

 28 

 

 

 (9) 

 

 

 

 

 

Receivables

 

 5 

 

 

 12 

 

 

 

 

 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 (44) 

 

 

 (18) 

 

 

 

 

 

Inventory

 

 15 

 

 

 (4) 

 

 

 

 

 

Other current assets

 

 (129) 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

 

 (50) 

 

 

 16 

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 21 

 

 

 17 

 

 

 

 

 

Taxes accrued

 

 76 

 

 

 34 

 

 

 

 

 

Other current liabilities

 

 (13) 

 

 

 (15) 

 

 

 

 

Other assets

 

 (42) 

 

 

 (13) 

 

 

 

 

Other liabilities

 

 (5) 

 

 

 (40) 

 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by operating activities

 

 116 

 

 

 189 

 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capital expenditures

 

 (223) 

 

 

 (200) 

 

 

Purchases of available-for-sale securities

 

 (205) 

 

 

 (225) 

 

 

Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities

 

 203 

 

 

 225 

 

 

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

 

 207 

 

 

 (6) 

 

 

Other

 

 ― 

 

 

 6 

 

 

 

 

 

Net cash used in investing activities

 

 (18) 

 

 

 (200) 

 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Payments for the:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Redemption of long-term debt

 

 (426) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 

Redemption of preferred stock

 

 (34) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

Proceeds from issuance of short-term debt with original maturities greater than 90 days

 

 ― 

 

 

 65 

 

 

Notes payable and commercial paper

 

 ― 

 

 

 62 

 

 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

 

 238 

 

 

 (8) 

 

 

Dividends paid to parent

 

 ― 

 

 

 (105) 

 

 

Dividends paid on preferred stock

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

Other

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 

 

 

Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities

 

 (222) 

 

 

 13 

 

 

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents

 

 (124) 

 

 

 2 

 

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period

 

 131 

 

 

 16 

 

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period

$

 7 

 

$

 18 

 

 

Supplemental Disclosures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Significant non-cash transactions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 95 

 

$

 60 

 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

24


PART I

DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC.

Condensed Statements Of Equity

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated Other

Comprehensive

Loss

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

Common

Stock

 

Retained

Earnings

 

Net Losses on Cash Flow Hedges

 

Total

Balance at December 31, 2011

 

$

 1,757 

 

$

 2,945 

 

$

 (27) 

 

$

 4,675 

Net income 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 128 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 128 

Other comprehensive income

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

Stock-based compensation expense

 

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 3 

Dividend to parent

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (105) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (105) 

Preferred stock dividends at stated rate

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

Tax dividend

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

Balance at March 31, 2012

 

$

 1,760 

 

$

 2,966 

 

$

 (26) 

 

$

 4,700 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

 

$

 1,762 

 

$

 3,037 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 4,799 

Net income

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 110 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 110 

Premium on the redemption of preferred stock

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

Balance at March 31, 2013

 

$

 1,762 

 

$

 3,146 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 4,908 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

25


PART I

DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Operations And Comprehensive Income

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Operating Revenues

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regulated electric

$

 333 

 

$

 324 

 

Nonregulated electric and other

 

 228 

 

 

 417 

 

Regulated natural gas

 

 186 

 

 

 171 

 

 

Total operating revenues

 

 747 

 

 

 912 

Operating Expenses

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - regulated

 

 103 

 

 

 114 

 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - nonregulated

 

 240 

 

 

 239 

 

Cost of natural gas

 

 76 

 

 

 75 

 

Operation, maintenance and other

 

 185 

 

 

 196 

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 88 

 

 

 83 

 

Property and other taxes

 

 72 

 

 

 68 

 

 

Total operating expenses

 

 764 

 

 

 775 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Operating (Loss) Income

 

 (17) 

 

 

 138 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 2 

 

 

 4 

Interest Expense

 

 18 

 

 

 24 

(Loss) Income Before Income Taxes

 

 (33) 

 

 

 118 

Income Tax (Benefit) Expense

 

 (12) 

 

 

 44 

Net (Loss) Income

 

 (21) 

 

 

 74 

Other Comprehensive Income, net of tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pension and OPEB adjustments(a)

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

Comprehensive (Loss) Income

$

 (20) 

 

$

 75 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Net of insignificant tax expense in 2013 and 2012.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

26


PART I

DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31,

2013

 

December 31,

2012

ASSETS

 

 

 

 

 

Current Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 27 

 

$

 31 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $2 at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012)

 

 124 

 

 

 108 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 123 

 

 

 82 

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

 

 4 

 

 

 1 

Inventory

 

 216 

 

 

 227 

Other

 

 257 

 

 

 267 

 

Total current assets

 751 

 

 

 716 

Investments and Other Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Goodwill

 

 921 

 

 

 921 

Intangibles, net

 

 124 

 

 

 129 

Other

 

 53 

 

 

 75 

 

Total investments and other assets

 

 1,098 

 

 

 1,125 

Property, Plant and Equipment

 

 

 

 

 

Cost

 

 10,897 

 

 

 10,824 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

 

 (2,758) 

 

 

 (2,698) 

 

Net property, plant and equipment

 

 8,139 

 

 

 8,126 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory assets

 

 582 

 

 

 579 

Other

 

 13 

 

 

 14 

 

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

 

 595 

 

 

 593 

Total Assets

$

 10,583 

 

$

 10,560 

LIABILITIES AND COMMON STOCKHOLDER'S EQUITY

 

 

 

 

 

Current Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

$

 296 

 

$

 318 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 65 

 

 

 62 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

 

 337 

 

 

 245 

Taxes accrued

 

 124 

 

 

 159 

Interest accrued

 

 29 

 

 

 14 

Current maturities of long-term debt

 

 259 

 

 

 261 

Other

 

 117 

 

 

 126 

 

Total current liabilities

 

 1,227 

 

 

 1,185 

Long-term Debt

 

 1,735 

 

 

 1,736 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 1,857 

 

 

 1,853 

Investment tax credits

 

 6 

 

 

 6 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 155 

 

 

 157 

Asset retirement obligations

 

 29 

 

 

 28 

Regulatory liabilities

 

 255 

 

 

 254 

Other

 

 173 

 

 

 175 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

 2,475 

 

 

 2,473 

Commitments and Contingencies

 

 

 

 

 

Common Stockholder's Equity

 

 

 

 

 

Common stock, $8.50 par value, 120,000,000 shares authorized; 89,663,086 shares outstanding at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012

 

 762 

 

 

 762 

Additional paid-in capital

 

 4,882 

 

 

 4,882 

Accumulated deficit

 

 (498) 

 

 

 (477) 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

Total common stockholder's equity

 5,146 

 

 

 5,166 

Total Liabilities and Common Stockholder's Equity

$

 10,583 

 

$

 10,560 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

27


PART I

DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Cash Flows

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

 

2013 

 

 

2012 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net (loss) income

$

 (21) 

 

$

 74 

 

Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash provided by operating activities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 89 

 

 

 84 

 

 

 

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 

Impairment charges

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 (12) 

 

 

 44 

 

 

 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 5 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 

(Increase) decrease in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net realized and unrealized mark-to-market and hedging transactions

 

 38 

 

 

 (48) 

 

 

 

 

Receivables

 

 (17) 

 

 

 25 

 

 

 

 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 (41) 

 

 

 30 

 

 

 

 

Inventory

 

 11 

 

 

 (8) 

 

 

 

 

Other current assets

 

 8 

 

 

 42 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

 

 (5) 

 

 

 (30) 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 3 

 

 

 46 

 

 

 

 

Taxes accrued

 

 (37) 

 

 

 (24) 

 

 

 

 

Other current liabilities

 

 13 

 

 

 6 

 

 

 

Other assets

 

 (10) 

 

 

 (8) 

 

 

 

Other liabilities

 

 (10) 

 

 

 (57) 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by operating activities

 

 14 

 

 

 180 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capital expenditures

 

 (105) 

 

 

 (121) 

 

Net proceeds from the sales of other assets

 

 ― 

 

 

 82 

 

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

 

 (3) 

 

 

 (218) 

 

Change in restricted cash

 

 ― 

 

 

 6 

 

 

 

 

Net cash used in investing activities

 

 (108) 

 

 

 (251) 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Payments for the redemption of long-term debt

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (2) 

 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

 

 92 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities

 

 90 

 

 

 (2) 

 

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents

 

 (4) 

 

 

 (73) 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

 

 31 

 

 

 99 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

 27 

 

$

 26 

 

Supplemental Disclosures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Significant non-cash transactions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 19 

 

$

 34 

 

 

Transfer of Vermillion Generating Station to Duke Energy Indiana

 

 ― 

 

 

 28 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

28


PART I

DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC.

 

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Equity

 

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated Other

Comprehensive

Loss

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

Common

Stock

 

Additional

Paid-in

Capital

 

Retained

Earnings

(Deficit)

 

Pension and OPEB Related Adjustments

 

Total

 

Balance at December 31, 2011

 

$

 762 

 

$

 5,085 

 

$

 (652) 

 

$

 (28) 

 

$

 5,167 

 

Net income

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 74 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 74 

 

Other comprehensive income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

 

Transfer of Vermillion Generating Station to Duke Energy Indiana

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (28) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (28) 

 

Balance at March 31, 2012

 

$

 762 

 

$

 5,057 

 

$

 (578) 

 

$

 (27) 

 

$

 5,214 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

 

$

 762 

 

$

 4,882 

 

$

 (477) 

 

$

 (1) 

 

$

 5,166 

 

Net loss

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (21) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (21) 

 

Other comprehensive income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

 

Balance at March 31, 2013

 

$

 762 

 

$

 4,882 

 

$

 (498) 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 5,146 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

29


PART I

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Operations And Comprehensive Income

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Operating Revenues

$

 724 

 

$

 688 

Operating Expenses

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power

 

 293 

 

 

 283 

 

Operation, maintenance and other

 

 150 

 

 

 160 

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 78 

 

 

 96 

 

Property and other taxes

 

 22 

 

 

 21 

 

Impairment charges

 

 ― 

 

 

 400 

 

 

Total operating expenses

 

 543 

 

 

 960 

Operating Income (Loss)

 

 181 

 

 

 (272) 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 4 

 

 

 23 

Interest Expense

 

 41 

 

 

 34 

Income (Loss) Before Income Taxes

 

 144 

 

 

 (283) 

Income Tax Expense (Benefit)

 

 54 

 

 

 (116) 

Net Income (Loss)

 

 90 

 

 

 (167) 

Other Comprehensive Loss, net of tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reclassification into earnings from cash flow hedges(a)

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

Comprehensive Income (Loss)

$

 90 

 

$

 (168) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Net of $1 million tax benefit in 2013 and insignificant tax benefit in 2012.

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

30


PART I

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(Unaudited)

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31,

2013

 

December 31,

2012

ASSETS

 

 

 

 

 

Current Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 23 

 

$

 36 

Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $1 at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012)

 

 29 

 

 

 33 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 143 

 

 

 104 

Inventory

 

 375 

 

 

 380 

Other

 

 141 

 

 

 138 

 

Total current assets

 711 

 

 

 691 

Investments and Other Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Intangibles, net

 

 37 

 

 

 41 

Other

 

 130 

 

 

 122 

 

Total investments and other assets

 

 167 

 

 

 163 

Property, Plant and Equipment

 

 

 

 

 

Cost

 

 12,119 

 

 

 12,012 

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

 

 (3,746) 

 

 

 (3,692) 

 

Net property, plant and equipment

 

 8,373 

 

 

 8,320 

Regulatory Assets and Deferred Debits

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory assets

 

 785 

 

 

 810 

Other

 

 24 

 

 

 24 

 

Total regulatory assets and deferred debits

 

 809 

 

 

 834 

Total Assets

$

 10,060 

 

$

 10,008 

LIABILITIES AND COMMON STOCKHOLDER'S EQUITY

 

 

 

 

 

Current Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

$

 123 

 

$

 173 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 56 

 

 

 60 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

 

 27 

 

 

 81 

Taxes accrued

 

 80 

 

 

 61 

Interest accrued

 

 48 

 

 

 53 

Current maturities of long-term debt

 

 405 

 

 

 405 

Other

 

 146 

 

 

 165 

 

Total current liabilities

 

 885 

 

 

 998 

Long-term Debt

 

 3,147 

 

 

 3,147 

Long-term Debt Payable to Affiliated Companies

 

 150 

 

 

 150 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes

 

 920 

 

 

 853 

Investment tax credits

 

 141 

 

 

 142 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 185 

 

 

 186 

Asset retirement obligations

 

 37 

 

 

 37 

Regulatory liabilities

 

 746 

 

 

 741 

Other

 

 51 

 

 

 46 

 

Total deferred credits and other liabilities

 2,080 

 

 

 2,005 

Commitments and Contingencies

 

 

 

 

 

Common Stockholder's Equity

 

 

 

 

 

Common Stock, no par; $0.01 stated value, 60,000,000 shares authorized; 53,913,701 shares outstanding at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

Additional paid-in capital

 

 1,384 

 

 

 1,384 

Retained earnings

 

 2,408 

 

 

 2,318 

Accumulated other comprehensive income

 

 5 

 

 

 5 

 

Total common stockholder's equity

 3,798 

 

 

 3,708 

Total Liabilities and Common Stockholder's Equity

$

 10,060 

 

$

 10,008 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

31


PART I

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Cash Flows

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net income (loss)

$

 90 

 

$

 (167) 

 

Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Depreciation and amortization

 

 79 

 

 

 97 

 

 

 

Equity component of AFUDC

 

 (3) 

 

 

 (21) 

 

 

 

Impairment charges

 

 ― 

 

 

 400 

 

 

 

Deferred income taxes and investment tax credit amortization

 

 45 

 

 

 (116) 

 

 

 

Accrued pension and other post-retirement benefit costs

 

 5 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 

(Increase) decrease in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Receivables

 

 2 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 

 

Receivables from affiliated companies

 

 (39) 

 

 

 (20) 

 

 

 

 

Inventory

 

 6 

 

 

 (34) 

 

 

 

 

Other current assets

 

 12 

 

 

 8 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable

 

 (6) 

 

 

 7 

 

 

 

 

Accounts payable to affiliated companies

 

 (4) 

 

 

 8 

 

 

 

 

Taxes accrued

 

 18 

 

 

 (8) 

 

 

 

 

Other current liabilities

 

 (16) 

 

 

 (4) 

 

 

 

Other assets

 

 20 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 

Other liabilities

 

 (11) 

 

 

 (19) 

 

 

 

 

Net cash provided by operating activities

 

 198 

 

 

 153 

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capital expenditures

 

 (156) 

 

 

 (273) 

 

Purchases of available-for-sale securities

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (4) 

 

Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities

 

 2 

 

 

 4 

 

Other

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 

 

Net cash used in investing activities

 

 (156) 

 

 

 (272) 

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt

 

 ― 

 

 

 250 

 

Payments for the redemption of long-term debt

 

 (1) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

Notes payable to affiliated companies

 

 (54) 

 

 

 (122) 

 

Other

 

 ― 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 

 

Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities

 

 (55) 

 

 

 125 

 

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents

 

 (13) 

 

 

 6 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

 

 36 

 

 

 16 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

 23 

 

$

 22 

 

Supplemental Disclosures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Significant non-cash transactions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued capital expenditures

$

 28 

 

$

 72 

 

 

Transfer of Vermillion Generating Station from Duke Energy Ohio

 

 ― 

 

 

 26 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

32


PART I

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

 

Condensed Consolidated Statements Of Equity

 

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated Other

Comprehensive

Income

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

Common

Stock

 

Additional

Paid-in

Capital

 

Retained

Earnings

 

Net Gains on Cash Flow Hedges

 

Total

 

Balance at December 31, 2011

 

$

 1 

 

$

 1,358 

 

$

 2,368 

 

$

 7 

 

$

 3,734 

 

Net loss

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (167) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (167) 

 

Other comprehensive loss

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

Transfer of Vermillion Generating Station from Duke Energy Ohio

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 26 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 26 

 

Balance at March 31, 2012

 

$

 1 

 

$

 1,384 

 

$

 2,201 

 

$

 6 

 

$

 3,592 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

 

$

 1 

 

$

 1,384 

 

$

 2,318 

 

$

 5 

 

$

 3,708 

 

Net income

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 90 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 90 

 

Balance at March 31, 2013

 

$

 1 

 

$

 1,384 

 

$

 2,408 

 

$

 5 

 

$

 3,798 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

33


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

(Unaudited)

Index to Combined Notes To Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

The unaudited notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements that follow are a combined presentation. The following list indicates the registrants to which the footnotes apply.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Applicable Notes

 

Registrant

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

Duke Energy Corporation

 

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC

 

 

 

 

Progress Energy, Inc.

 

 

Duke Energy Progress, Inc.

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Florida, Inc.

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Ohio, Inc.

 

 

 

Duke Energy Indiana, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Organization and Basis of PresentationORGANIZATION AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION

Organization. NATURE OF OPERATIONS AND BASIS OF CONSOLIDATION

Duke Energy Corporation (collectively with its subsidiaries, Duke Energy), is an energy company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Duke Energy operates in the United States (U.S.) and Latin America primarily through its direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries. Duke Energy’s wholly owned subsidiaries includedincludes Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy Carolinas),; Progress Energy, Inc. (Progress Energy); Duke Energy Progress, Inc. (Duke Energy Progress); Duke Energy Florida, Inc. (Duke Energy Florida); Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. (Duke Energy Ohio), which includes Duke Energy Kentucky, Inc. (Duke Energy Kentucky); and Duke Energy Indiana, Inc. (Duke Energy Indiana) prior to the merger with Progress Energy, Inc (Progress Energy).

On July 2, 2012, Duke Energy merged with Progress Energy, with Duke Energy continuing as the surviving corporation, and Progress Energy becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy.Energy and Progress Energy’s regulated utility subsidiaries, Duke Energy Progress (formerly Carolina Power & Light Company d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Progress) and Duke Energy Carolinas) andFlorida (formerly Florida Power Corporation d/b/a Progress Energy Florida Inc. (Progress Energy Florida), Progress Energy’s regulated utility subsidiaries, are nowInc.), becoming indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Duke Energy. Duke Energy’s consolidated financial statements include Progress Energy, Duke Energy Progress Energy Carolinas and ProgressDuke Energy Florida activity frombeginning July 2, 2012 through September 30, 2012. In accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) guidance, Progress Energy, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida did not reflect the impacts of acquisition accounting from the merger with Duke Energy, whereby the adjustments of assets and liabilities to fair value and the resultant goodwill would be shown on the financial statements of Progress Energy, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida. These adjustments were recorded by Duke Energy. See Note 2 for additional information regarding the merger. When discussing Duke Energy’s condensed consolidated financial information, it necessarily includes the results of its six separate subsidiary registrants, Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy, Duke Energy Progress, Energy Carolinas, ProgressDuke Energy Florida, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana (collectively referred to as the Subsidiary Registrants), which, along with Duke Energy, are collectively referred to as the Duke Energy Registrants.

Progress Energy, Progress Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Florida (collectively referred to as the Progress Energy Registrants) continue to maintain reporting requirements as SEC registrants. The information presented in the Progress Energy Registrants separately filed Form 10-Q represents the results of operations of the Progress Energy Registrants for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 and the financial position as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, presented on a comparable basis. In accordance with SEC guidance, the Progress Energy Registrants did not reflect the impacts of acquisition accounting, whereby the adjustments of assets and liabilities to fair value and the resultant goodwill would be shown on the financial statements of the Progress Energy Registrants. These adjustments were recorded by Duke Energy.

The information in these combined notes relates to each of the Duke Energy Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy IndianaRegistrants as noted in the Index to the Combined Notes. However, none of the registrants makes any representation as to information related solely to Duke Energy or the Subsidiary Registrantssubsidiaries of Duke Energy other than itself. As discussed further in Note 3, Duke Energy operates in three reportable business segments: U.S. Franchised Electric and Gas (USFE&G), Commercial Power and International Energy. The remainder of Duke Energy’s operations is presented as Other.

These Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements include, after eliminating intercompany transactions and balances, the accounts of the Duke Energy Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy IndianaRegistrants and all majority-owned subsidiaries where thesethe respective Duke Energy Registrants have control and those variable interest entities (VIEs) where thesethe respective Duke Energy Registrants are the primary beneficiary. These Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements also reflect the Duke Energy Registrants’ proportionate share of certain generation and transmission facilities. In January 2012, Duke Energy Ohio completed the sale of its 75% ownership of the Vermillion Generating Station (Vermillion); upon the close, Duke Energy Indiana purchased a 62.5% interest in the station. See Note 2 for further discussion.

Duke Energy Carolinas, a wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy, is an electrica regulated public utility company that generates, transmits, distributes and sells electricity in portions of North Carolina and South Carolina. Duke Energy Carolinas is subject to the regulatory provisions of the North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC), the Public Service Commission of South Carolina (PSCSC), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Substantially all of Duke Energy Carolinas’ operations are regulated and qualify for regulatory accounting treatment. As discussed further in Note 3, Duke Energy Carolinas’ operations include one reportable business segment, Franchised Electric.

Progress Energy, a wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy, is a holding company headquartered in Raleigh, North Carolina, subject to regulation by the FERC. Progress Energy conducts operations through its wholly owned subsidiaries, Duke Energy Progress Energy Carolinas and ProgressDuke Energy Florida. As discussed further in Note 3, Progress Energy’s operations include one reportable segment, Franchised Electric. The remainder

Duke Energy Progress, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Progress Energy’s operations is presented as Other. Other primarily includes amounts applicable to the activities of the holding company and ProgressDuke Energy, Service Company, LLC (PESC) and other miscellaneous nonregulated businesses that do not separately meet the quantitative disclosure requirements as a reportable business segment.

Progress Energy Carolinas is a regulated public utility primarily engaged in the generation, transmission, distribution and sale of electricity in portions of North Carolina and South Carolina. ProgressDuke Energy CarolinasProgress is subject to the regulatory provisions of the NCUC, the PSCSC, the NRC and the FERC. Substantially all of ProgressDuke Energy Carolinas’Progress’ operations are regulated and qualify for regulatory accounting treatment. As discussed further in Note 3, Duke Energy Progress’ operations include one reportable segment, Franchised Electric.

34

Progress


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Duke Energy Florida, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy, is a regulated public utility primarily engaged in the generation, transmission, distribution and sale of electricity in west central Florida. ProgressDuke Energy Florida is subject to the regulatory jurisdiction of the Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC), the NRC and the FERC. Substantially all of ProgressDuke Energy Florida’s operations are regulated and qualify for regulatory accounting treatment. As discussed further in Note 3, Duke Energy Florida’s operations include one reportable segment, Franchised Electric.

Duke Energy Ohio, is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy. Duke Energy, Ohio is a combination electric and gas public utility that provides service in the southwestern portion of Ohio and in northern Kentucky through its wholly owned subsidiary, Duke Energy Kentucky, Inc. (Duke Energy Kentucky) as well as electric generation in parts of Ohio, Illinois and Pennsylvania. Duke Energy Ohio’s principal lines of business include generation, transmission and distribution of electricity, the sale of and/or transportation of natural gas, and energy marketing. Duke Energy Ohio

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

20


PART I

conducts competitive auctions for retail electricity supply in Ohio whereby the energy price is recovered from retail customers. Duke Energy Kentucky’s principal lines of business include generation, transmission and distribution of electricity, as well as the sale of and/or transportation of natural gas. References herein to Duke Energy Ohio include Duke Energy Ohio and its subsidiaries, unless otherwise noted. Duke Energy Ohio is subject to the regulatory provisions of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO), the Kentucky Public Service Commission (KPSC) and the FERC. Duke Energy Ohio applies regulatory accounting treatment to substantially all of the operations ofin its Franchised Electric and Gas operating segment. Through November 2011, Duke Energy Ohio applied regulatory accounting treatment to certain rate riders associated with retail generation of its Commercial Power operating segment. See Note 3 for further information about Duke Energy Ohio’s business segments.

Duke Energy Indiana, is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy. Duke Energy, Indiana is an electrica regulated public utility that provides electricity service in north central, central, and southern Indiana. Its primary line of business is generation, transmission and distribution of electricity. Duke Energy Indiana is subject to the regulatory provisions of the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) and the FERC. The substantial majoritySubstantially all of Duke Energy Indiana’s operations are regulated and qualify for regulatory accounting treatment. As discussed further in Note 3, Duke Energy Indiana’s operations include one reportable business segment, Franchised Electric.

BasisREVERSE STOCK SPLIT

On July 2, 2012, just prior to the close of Presentationthe merger with Progress Energy, Duke Energy executed a one-for-three reverse stock split with respect to the issued and outstanding shares of Duke Energy common stock. All per-share amounts included in this Form 10-Q are presented as if the one-for-three reverse stock split had been effective from the beginning of the earliest period presented.

BASIS OF PRESENTATION.

These Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) in the U.S. for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Regulation S-X. Accordingly, these Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements do not include all of the information and notes required by GAAP in the U.S. for annual financial statements. Because the interim Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes do not include all of the information and notes required by GAAP in the U.S. for annual financial statements, the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and other information included in this quarterly report should be read in conjunction with the respective Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes in the Duke Energy Registrants combined Form 10-K and the Progress EnergyRegistrants’ combined Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.2012.

These Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, in the opinion of management, reflect all normal recurring adjustments that are, in the opinion of the respective companies’ management, necessary to fairly present the financial position and results of operations of each Duke Energy Registrant. Amounts reported in Duke Energy’s interim Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and each of the Subsidiary Registrants’ interim Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income are not necessarily indicative of amounts expected for the respective annual periods due to the effects of seasonal temperature variations on energy consumption, regulatory rulings, the timing of maintenance on electric generating units, changes in mark-to-market valuations, changing commodity prices and other factors.

In preparing financial statements that conform to GAAP, management must make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the reported amounts of revenues and expenses and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Certain amountsPrior year financial statements and footnote disclosures for 2011Progress Energy, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida have been reclassified to conform to the 2012Duke Energy’s presentation.

Reverse Stock Split. UNBILLED REVENUEOn July 2, 2012, just prior to the close of the merger with Progress Energy, Duke Energy executed a one-for-three reverse stock split with respect to the issued and outstanding shares of Duke Energy common stock.  All per-share amounts included in this 10-Q are presented as if the one-for-three reverse stock split had been effective January 1, 2011.

Unbilled Revenue.Revenues on sales of electricity and gas are recognized when either the service is provided or the product is delivered. Unbilled retail revenues are estimated by applying either weighted average or average revenue per kilowatt-hour (kWh) or per thousand cubic feet (Mcf) for all customer classes to the number of estimated kilowatt-hourskWh or McfsMcf delivered but not billed. Unbilled wholesale energy revenues are calculated by applying the contractual rate per megawatt-hour (MWh) to the number of estimated MWh delivered but not yet billed. Unbilled wholesale demand revenues are calculated by applying the contractual rate per megawatt (MW) to the MW volume delivered but not yet billed. The amount of unbilled revenues can vary significantly from period to period as a result of numerous factors, including seasonality, weather, customer usage patterns and customer mix.

The Duke Energy Registrants had unbilled revenues within Receivables and within Restricted Receivablesreceivables of Variable Interest Entities and Receivablesvariable interest entities on their respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as follows:shown in the table below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

Duke Energy

$

 899 

 

$

 920 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

 314 

 

 

 315 

Progress Energy

 

 193 

 

 

 187 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 115 

 

 

 112 

Duke Energy Florida

 

 78 

 

 

 74 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 49 

 

 

 47 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 3 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

35

 


(in millions)

  

September 30, 2012

  

December 31, 2011

Duke Energy

  

$

 822 

  

$

 674 

Duke Energy Carolinas

  

$

 282 

  

$

 293 

Duke Energy Ohio

  

$

 36 

  

$

 50 

Duke Energy Indiana

  

$

 3 

  

$

 2 

PART I

 

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Additionally, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana sell, on a revolving basis, nearly all of their retail and wholesale accounts receivable to Cinergy Receivables Company, LLC (CRC). These transfers meet sales/derecognition criteria and, therefore, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana account for the transfers of receivables to Cinergy ReceivablesCRC as sales, and accordinglysales. Accordingly, the receivables sold are not reflected on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets of Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana. See Note 11 for further information. Receivables for unbilled revenues related to retail and wholesale accounts receivable at Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana included in the sales of accounts receivable to CRC were as follows:shown in the table below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

Duke Energy Ohio

$

74 

 

$

90 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

122 

 

 

132 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NET INCOME AMOUNTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO CONTROLLING INTERESTS

The following tables present the net income amounts attributable to controlling interests for the Duke Energy Registrants with noncontrolling interests during the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012.

(in millions)

  

September 30, 2012

  

December 31, 2011

Duke Energy Ohio

  

$

63 

  

$

89 

Duke Energy Indiana

  

$

110 

  

$

115 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

See Note 11 for additional information.

        

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

Duke Energy

 

Progress Energy

Net Income Amounts Attributable to Controlling Interests

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

Income from continuing operations, net of tax / Net income attributable to controlling interests

$

 634 

 

$

 153 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

 

 

 

 

 

Income from continuing operations, net of tax

$

 293 

 

$

 139 

Discontinued operations, net of tax

 

 2 

 

 

 11 

 

Net income attributable to controlling interests

$

 295 

 

$

 150 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. Acquisitions and Sales of Other AssetsACQUISITIONS, DISPOSITIONS AND SALES OF OTHER ASSETS

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

21


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

Acquisitions.ACQUISITIONS

The Duke Energy Registrants consolidate assets and liabilities from acquisitions as of the purchase date, and include earnings from acquisitions in consolidated earnings after the purchase date.

Merger with Progress Energy

Description of Transaction

On July 2, 2012, Duke Energy completed the merger contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of Merger (Merger Agreement), among Diamond Acquisition Corporation, a North Carolina corporation and Duke Energy’s wholly owned subsidiary (Merger Sub) andwith Progress Energy, a North Carolina corporation engaged in the regulated utility business of generation, transmission and distribution and sale of electricity in portions of North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida. As a result of the merger, Merger Sub was merged into Progress Energy and Progress Energy became a wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy.

The merger between Duke Energy and Progress Energy provides increased scale and diversity with potentially enhanced access to capital over the long-term and a greater ability to undertake the significant construction programs necessary to respond to increasing environmental regulation, plant retirements and customer demand growth. Duke Energy’s business risk profile is expected to improve over time due to the increased proportion of the business that is regulated. Additionally, cost savings, efficiencies and other benefits are expected from the combined operations.

Progress Energy’s shareholders received 0.87083 shares of Duke Energy common stock in exchange for each share of Progress Energy common stock outstanding as of July 2, 2012. Generally, all outstanding Progress Energy equity-based compensation awards were converted into Duke Energy equity-based compensation awards using the same ratio. The merger was structured as a tax-free exchange of shares.

Merger Related Regulatory Matters

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. On June 8, 2012, the FERC conditionally approved the merger including Duke Energy and Progress Energy’s revised market power mitigation plan, the Joint Dispatch Agreement (JDA) and the joint Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT). The revised market power mitigation plan provides for the acceleration of one transmission project and the construction of seven other transmission projects (Long-term FERC Mitigation) and interim firm power sale agreements during the construction of the transmission projects (Interim FERC Mitigation). The Long-term FERC Mitigation will increase power imported into the Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas service areas and enhance competitive power supply options in the service areas. The construction of these projects will occur over the next two to three years. In conjunction with the Interim FERC Mitigation, Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas entered into power sale agreements with various counterparties that were effective with the consummation of the merger. These agreements, or similar power sale agreements, will be in place until the Long-term FERC Mitigation is operational. Under the agreements Duke Energy will deliver around-the-clock power during the winter and summer in quantities that vary by season and by peak period.

The FERC order requires an independent party to monitor whether the power sale agreements remain in effect during construction of the transmission projects and provide quarterly reports to the FERC regarding the status of construction of the transmission projects.

·On June 25, 2012, Duke Energy and Progress Energy accepted the conditions imposed by the FERC.

·On July 9, 2012, certain intervenors requested a rehearing seeking to overturn the June 8, 2012 order by the FERC. On August 8, 2012, FERC granted rehearing for further consideration.

North Carolina Utilities Commission and Public Service Commission of South Carolina. In September 2011, Duke Energy and Progress Energy reached settlements with the Public Staff of the North Carolina Utilities Commission (NC Public Staff) and the South Carolina Office of Regulatory Staff (ORS) and certain other interested parties in connection with the regulatory proceedings related to the merger, the JDA and the OATT that were pending before the NCUC and PSCSC. These settlements were updated in May 2012 to reflect the results of ongoing merger related applications pending before the FERC. As part of these settlements and the application for approval of the merger by the NCUC and PSCSC, Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas agreed to the conditions and obligations listed below.

·Guarantee of $650 million in system fuel and fuel-related savings over 60 to 78 months for North Carolina and South Carolina retail customers. The savings are expected to be achieved through coal blending, coal commodity and transportation savings, gas transportation savings, and the joint dispatch of Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas generation fleets.

·Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas will not seek recovery from retail customers for the cost of the Long-term FERC Mitigation for five years following merger consummation. After five years, Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas may seek to recover the costs of the Long-term FERC Mitigation, but must show that the projects are needed to provide adequate and reliable retail service regardless of the merger.

·A $65 million rate reduction over the term of the Interim FERC Mitigation to reflect the cost of capacity not available to Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas wholesale and retail customers during the Interim FERC Mitigation. The rate reduction will be achieved through retail decrement riders apportioned between Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas retail customers.

·Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas will not seek recovery from retail customers for any revenue shortfalls or fuel-related costs associated with the Interim FERC Mitigation.

·Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas will not seek recovery from retail customers for any of their allocable share of merger related severance costs.

·Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas will provide community support and charitable contributions for four years, workforce development, low income energy assistance, and funding for green energy at a total cost of approximately $99 million, which cannot be recovered from retail customers.

·Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas will abide by revised North Carolina Regulatory Conditions and Code of Conduct governing their operations.

22


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

On June 29, 2012, the NCUC approved the merger application and the JDA application with conditions that were reflective of the settlement agreements described above. On July 2, 2012, the PSCSC approved the JDA application subject to Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas providing their South Carolina retail customers pro rata benefits equivalent to those approved by the NCUC in its merger approval order.

On July 6, 2012, the NCUC issued an order initiating investigation and scheduling hearings on the Duke Energy board of directors’ decision on July 2, 2012, to replace William D. Johnson with James E. Rogers as President and CEO of Duke Energy subsequent to the merger close, as well as other related matters. See Note 4 for further information.

Kentucky Public Service Commission. On June 24, 2011, Duke Energy and Progress Energy filed a settlement agreement with the Kentucky Attorney General. On August 2, 2011, the KPSC issued an order conditionally approving the merger and required Duke Energy and Progress Energy to accept all conditions contained in the order. Duke Energy and Progress Energy requested and were granted rehearing on the limited issue of the wording of one condition relating to the composition of Duke Energy’s post-merger board of directors. On October 28, 2011, the KPSC issued its order approving a settlement with the Kentucky Attorney General on the revised condition relating to the composition of the post-merger Duke Energy board. Duke Energy and Progress Energy filed their acceptance of the condition on November 2, 2011. Duke Energy Kentucky agreed to (i) not file new gas or electric base rate applications for two years from the date of the KPSC’s final order in the merger proceedings, (ii) make five annual shareholder contributions of $165,000  to support low-income weatherization efforts and economic development within Duke Energy Kentucky’s service territory and (iii) not seek recovery from retail customers for any of their allocable share of merger related costs.

Accounting Charges Related to the Merger Consummation

The following pre-tax consummation charges were recognized upon closing of the merger and are included in the Duke Energy Registrant’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012.

(in millions)

  

Duke Energy Carolinas

  

Progress Energy Carolinas

  

Progress Energy Florida

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

Duke Energy Indiana

  

Duke Energy

FERC Mitigation

  

$

 46 

  

$

 71 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 117 

Severance costs

  

  

 48 

  

  

 42 

  

  

 24 

  

  

 15 

  

  

 13 

  

  

 146 

Community support, charitable contributions and other

  

  

 73 

  

  

 54 

  

  

 9 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 149 

Total

  

$

 167 

  

$

 167 

  

$

 33 

  

  

 20 

  

$

 18 

  

$

 412 

The FERC Mitigation charges reflect the portion of transmission project costs that are probable of disallowance, the impairment of the carrying value of the generation assets serving the Interim FERC Mitigation, and the mark-to-market loss recognized on the power sale agreements upon closing of the merger. Subsequent changes in the fair value of the interim power sale agreements are reflected in Regulated electric operating revenues over the life of the contracts. The charges related to the transmission projects and the impairment of the carrying value of generation assets were recorded within Impairment charges in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012. The mark-to-market loss on the power sale agreements was recorded in Regulated electric operating revenues in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012. Realized gains or losses on the interim contract sales are also recorded within Regulated electric operating revenues. The ability to successfully defend future recovery of a portion of the transmission projects in rates and any future changes to estimated transmission project costs could impact the amount that is not expected to be recovered.

In conjunction with the merger, in November 2011, Duke Energy and Progress Energy each offered a voluntary severance plan (VSP) to certain eligible employees. VSP and other severance costs incurred during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, were recorded primarily within Operation, maintenance and other in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. See Note 15 for further information related to employee severance expenses.

Community support, charitable contributions and other reflect (i) the unconditional obligation to provide funding at a level comparable to historic practices over the next four years, and (ii) financial and legal advisory costs that were incurred upon the closing of the merger, retention and relocation costs paid to certain employees. These charges were recorded within Operation, maintenance and other in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012.

Purchase Price

Pursuant to the merger, all Progress Energy common shares were exchanged at the fixed exchange ratio of 0.87083 common shares of Duke Energy for each Progress Energy common share. The total consideration transferred in the mergerof $18,071 million, including $62 million fair value of stock-based compensation awards, was based on the closing price of Duke Energy common shares on July 2, 2012, and was calculated as follows:

(dollars in millions, except per share amounts; shares in thousands)

Progress Energy common shares outstanding at July 2, 2012

 296,116 

Exchange ratio

 0.87083 

Duke Energy common shares issued for Progress Energy common shares outstanding

 257,867 

Closing price of Duke Energy common shares on July 2, 2012

$

 69.84 

Purchase price for common stock

$

 18,009 

Fair value of outstanding earned stock compensation awards

 62 

Total purchase price

$

 18,071 

23


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

Progress Energy’s stock-based compensation awards, including performance shares and restricted stock, were replaced with Duke Energy awards upon consummation of the merger. In accordance with accounting guidance for business combinations, a portion of the fair value of these awards is included in the purchase price as it represents consideration transferred in the merger.

Purchase Price Allocation2012.

The fair value of Progress Energy’s assets acquired and liabilities assumed was determined based on significant estimates and assumptions, including level 3 inputs, thatwhich are judgmental in nature, includingnature. The estimates and assumptions include the projected timing and amount of future cash flows;flows, discount rates reflecting risk inherent in the future cash flows and future market prices. The fair value of Progress Energy’s assets acquired and liabilities assumed utilized for the purchase price allocation are preliminary andpreliminary. These amounts are subject to revision until the valuations are completed, and to the extent that additional information is obtained about the facts and circumstances that existed as of the acquisition date, including assumptions regarding Progressbut not limited to the resolution of matters pertaining to the retirement of Duke Energy Florida’s Crystal River Nuclear Station - Unit 3.3 (Crystal River Unit 3) as well as certain other tax and contingency related items.

The significant assets and liabilities for which preliminary valuation amounts are reflected as of the filing of this Form 10-Q include the fair value of the acquired long-term debt, asset retirement obligations, capital leases and pension and other post-retirement benefit (OPEB) plans. Additionally the February 5, 2013 announcement of the decision to retire Crystal River Unit 3, reflects additional information related to the facts and circumstances that existed as of the acquisition date. See Note 4 for additional information related to Crystal River Unit 3. As such, the

36


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Progress Energy assets acquired and liabilities assumed are presented as if the retirement of Crystal River Unit 3 occurred on the acquisition date. The preliminary fair value of the outstanding stock compensation awards is included in the purchase price as consideration transferred.

The majority of Progress Energy’s operations are subject to the rate-setting authority of the FERC, the NCUC, the PSCSC, and the FPSC and are accounted for pursuant to U.S. GAAP, including the accounting guidance for regulated operations. The rate-setting and cost recovery provisions currently in place for Progress Energy’s regulated operations provide revenues derived from costs, including a return on investment of assets and liabilities included in rate base. Except for long-term debt, asset retirement obligations, capital leases, and pension and OPEB plans and the wholesale portion of Duke Energy Florida’s Crystal River Unit 3, the fair values of Progress Energy’s tangible and intangible assets and liabilities subject to these rate-setting provisions approximate their carrying values, and the assets and liabilities acquired and pro forma financial information do not reflect any net adjustments related to these amounts. The difference between fair value and the pre-merger carrying amounts for Progress Energy’s long-term debt, asset retirement obligations, capital leases and pension and OPEB plans for the regulated operations were recorded as a regulatory asset.Regulatory assets.

The excess of the purchase price over the estimated fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed was recognized as goodwill at the acquisition date. The goodwill reflects the value paid primarily for the long-term potential for enhanced access to capital as a result of the company’s increased scale and diversity, opportunities for synergies, and an improved risk profile. The goodwill resulting from Duke Energy’s merger with Progress Energy was preliminarily allocated entirely to the USFE&G segment, but is subject to change as additional information is obtained. None of the goodwill recognized is deductible for income tax purposes, and as such, no deferred taxes have been recorded related to goodwill.

The preliminary purchase price allocation of the merger was as follows:

is presented in the following table.

(in millions)

 

 

 

Current assets

 

$

 3,2583,204 

Property, plant and equipment

 

 

 24,94923,122 

Goodwill

 

 

 12,34212,477 

Other long-term assets, excluding goodwill

 

 

 8,1499,992 

Total assets

 

 

 48,69848,795 

Current liabilities, including current maturities of long-term debt

 

 

 3,5673,590 

Long-term liabilities, preferred stock and noncontrolling interests

 

 

 10,31410,388 

Long-term debt

 

 

 16,746 

Total liabilities and preferred stock

 

 

 30,62730,724 

Total estimated purchase price

 

$

 18,071 

ImpactThe preliminary purchase price allocation in the table above reflects refinements made to the fair values of Merger

The impactthe assets acquired and liabilities assumed, including adjustments associated with the retirement of Progress Energy onCrystal River Unit 3, that were included in Duke Energy’s revenuesAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012. The changes primarily resulted in an increase to Goodwill of $10 million, an increase to the fair value of Current liabilities, including current maturities of long-term debt of $9 million, a decrease to Property, plant and net income attributableequipment of $157 million and a decrease to Duke Energy inLong-term liabilities, preferred stock and noncontrolling interests of $158 million. These refinements had no impact on the Condensed Consolidated Statementsamortization of Operationsthe purchase accounting adjustments recorded during 2012 or for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, was an increase of $2,749 million and $226 million, respectively.

Duke Energy incurred pre-tax merger consummation costs, integration and other related costs (collective referred to as costs to achieve), including those discussed above, of $457 million and $472 million, for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, and $13 million and $29 million, for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively, substantially all of which are recorded in Operating expenses in Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.

Duke Energy expects to incur significant system integration and other merger-related transition costs primarily through 2016 that are necessary in order to achieve certain cost savings, efficiencies and other benefits anticipated to result from the merger with Progress Energy.March 31, 2013.

Pro Forma Financial Information

The following unaudited pro forma financial information reflects the consolidated results of operations of Duke Energy for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and reflects the amortization of purchase accountingprice adjustments assuming the merger had taken place on January 1, 2011. The unaudited pro forma financial information has been presented for illustrative purposes only and is not necessarily indicative of the consolidated results of operations that would have been achieved or the future consolidated results of operations of Duke Energy. This information is preliminary in nature and subject to change based on final purchase price adjustments.

Non-recurring merger consummation, integration and other costs incurred by both Duke Energy and Progress Energy during the periodthree months ended March 31, 2012 have been excluded from the pro forma earnings presented below. After-tax non-recurring merger consummation, integration and other costs incurred by both Duke Energy and Progress Energy were $293$10 million and $311 million, respectively, for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, and $15 million and $34 million, respectively, for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.March 31, 2012. The pro forma financial information also excludes potential future cost savings or non-recurring charges related to the merger.

(in millions, except per share amounts)

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

Revenues

$

 5,724 

Net Income Attributable to Duke Energy Corporation

 463 

Basic and Diluted Earnings Per Share

 0.66 

24Chilean Operations

In December 2012, International Energy acquired Iberoamericana de Energía Ibener, S.A. (Ibener) of Santiago, Chile for cash consideration of $415 million. This acquisition included the 140 MW Duqueco hydroelectric generation complex consisting of two run-of-the-river plants located in southern Chile. The preliminary purchase accounting entries consisted primarily of $383 million of property, plant and equipment, $30 million of intangible assets, $57 million of deferred income tax liabilities, $53 million of goodwill, and $6 million of working capital. The fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed utilized for the purchase price allocation are preliminary and subject to revision until the valuations are completed and to the extent that additional information is obtained about the facts and circumstances that existed as of the acquisition date. In connection with the acquisition, a $190 million six-month bridge loan and a $200 million revolving loan under a credit agreement were executed with a commercial bank. Both loans are collateralized with cash deposits equal to 101 percent of the loan amounts,

37

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

  

  

  

Three Months Ended September 30,

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions, except per share amounts)

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Revenues

  

$

 6,727 

  

$

 6,700 

  

$

 18,284 

  

$

 18,333 

Net Income Attributable to Duke Energy Corporation

  

  

 889 

  

  

 783 

  

  

 1,876 

  

  

 2,124 

Basic and Diluted Earnings Per Share

  

$

 1.26 

  

$

 1.12 

  

$

 2.66 

  

$

 3.03 

Referand therefore no net proceeds from the financings exist through March 31, 2013. The $190 million bridge loan is classified in Current maturities of long-term debt and the related cash collateral deposit is presented within Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. The $200 million, fully cash-collateralized revolving loan is due on December 20, 2013 and International Energy has the right to Note 5extend the term for information regarding Progress Energy merger shareholder litigation.additional 1 year terms, not to exceed a final maturity of thirteen years from the date of the initial funding. The revolving loan is classified as Long-term Debt and the related cash collateral deposits are presented within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. In April 2013, the $190 million six-month bridge loan was replaced with a $230 million nonrecourse secured credit facility with a term of thirteen years, and $192 million of cash collateral related to the six-month bridge loan was returned to Duke Energy.

Vermillion Generating Station.Station

On January 12, 2012, after receiving approvals from the FERC and the IURC on August 12, 2011 and December 28, 2011, respectively, Duke Energy Vermillion II, LLC (Duke Energy Vermillion), an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy Ohio, completed the sale of its 75%75 percent undivided ownership interest in the Vermillion Generating Station (Vermillion) to Duke Energy Indiana and Wabash Valley Power Association (WVPA). Upon the closing of the sale, Duke Energy Indiana and WVPA held 62.5%62.5 percent and 37.5%37.5 percent interests in Vermillion, respectively. Duke Energy Ohio received net proceeds of $82 million, consisting of $68 million and $14 million from Duke Energy Indiana and WVPA, respectively. Following the transaction, Duke Energy Indiana retired Gallagher Units 1 and 3 effective February 1, 2012.

As Duke Energy Indiana is an affiliate of Duke Energy Vermillion the transaction has been accounted for as a transfer between entities under common control with no gain or loss recorded and did not have a significant impact to Duke Energy Ohio or Duke Energy Indiana’s results of operations. The proceeds received from Duke Energy Indiana are included in Net proceeds from the sales of other assets on Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. The cash paid to Duke Energy Ohio is included in Capital expenditures on Duke Energy Indiana’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana recognized non-cash after tax equity transfers of $28 million and $26 million, respectively, in their Condensed Consolidated Statements of Common Stockholder’s Equity on the transaction representing the difference between cash exchanged and the net book value of Vermillion. These amounts are not reflected in Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows or Condensed Consolidated Statements of Equity as the transaction is eliminated in consolidation.

The proceeds from WVPA are included in Net proceeds from the sales of other assets, and sale of and collections on notes receivable on Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. In the second quarter of 2011, Duke Energy Ohio recorded a pre-tax impairment charge of $9 million to adjust the carrying value of the proportionate share of Vermillion to be sold to WVPA to the proceeds to be received from WVPA less costs to sell. The sale of the proportionate share of Vermillion to WVPA did not result in a significant additional gain or loss upon close of the transaction.

Wind Projects Joint Venture.

In April 2012, Duke Energy executed a joint venture agreement with Sumitomo Corporation of America (SCOA). Under the terms of the agreement, Duke Energy and SCOA each own a 50% interest in the joint venture (DS Cornerstone, LLC), which owns two wind generation projects. The facilities began commercial operations in June 2012 and August 2012. Beginning September 2012, the joint venture is no longer consolidated into Duke Energy’s consolidated financial statements and is now accounted for by Duke Energy as an equity method investment. The deconsolidation of the joint venture did not result in a significant gain or loss. Cash flows

DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS

Included in Income From Discontinued Operations, net of tax on the joint venture are included in Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows upOperations are amounts related to adjustments for prior sales of diversified businesses. These adjustments are generally due to indemnifications provided for certain legal, tax and environmental matters. The ultimate resolution of these matters could result in additional adjustments in future periods.

For the three months ended March 31, 2012, Progress Energy’s Income From Discontinued Operations, net of tax was primarily related to the datereversal of deconsolidation. Duke Energy and SCOA also negotiated a $330 million, Construction and 12-year amortizing Term Loan Facility on behalf ofcertain environmental indemnification liabilities for which the borrower, a wholly owned subsidiary ofindemnification period expired during the joint venture. The loan agreement is non-recourse to Duke Energy. Duke Energy received proceeds of $319 million upon execution of the loan agreement. This amount represents reimbursement of a significant portion of Duke Energy’s construction costs incurred as of the date of the agreement. See Note 11 for further information.three months ended March 31, 2012.

 

3. Business SegmentsBUSINESS SEGMENTS

Effective with the first quarter of 2012, management began evaluatingManagement evaluates segment performance based on Segment Income. Segment Income, which is defined as income from continuing operations net of income attributable to noncontrolling interests. In conjunction with management’s use ofSegment Income, as discussed below, includes intercompany revenues and expenses that are eliminated in the new reporting measure, certainCondensed Consolidated Financial Statements. Certain governance costs that were previously unallocated have now beenare allocated to each of the segments. In addition, direct interest expense and income taxes are included in segment income. Prior year segment profitability information has been recast to conform to the current year presentation. NoneSegment Income.

Operating segments for each of these changes impacts the reportable operating segments or the Duke Energy Registrants’ previously reported consolidated revenues, net income or earnings-per-share.Registrants are determined based on information used by the chief operating decision maker in deciding how to allocate resources and evaluate the performance at each of the Duke Energy Registrants.

Products and services are sold between the affiliate companies and between the reportable segments of Duke Energy at cost. Segment assets as presented in the tables that follow exclude all intercompany assets.

Duke EnergyDUKE ENERGY

Duke Energy has the following reportable operating segments: USFE&G, Commercial Power and International Energy.

USFE&G generates, transmits, distributes and sells electricity in North Carolina, South Carolina, west central Florida, central, north central and southern Indiana, and northern Kentucky. USFE&G also transmits and distributes electricity in southwestern Ohio. Additionally, USFE&G transports and sells natural gas in southwestern Ohio and northern Kentucky. It conducts operations primarily through Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress, Energy Carolinas, ProgressDuke Energy Florida, certain regulated portions of Duke Energy Ohio, (including Duke Energy Kentucky), and Duke Energy Indiana. Segment information for USFE&G includes the results of the regulated operations of Progress Energy from July 2, 2012 forward.

Commercial Power owns, operates and manages power plants and engages in the wholesale marketing and procurement of electric power, fuel and emission allowances related to these plants, as well as other contractual positions. Commercial Power also has a retail sales subsidiary, Duke Energy Retail Sales, LLC (Duke Energy Retail), which is certified by the PUCO as a Competitive Retail Electric Service

38


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

provider in Ohio. Through Duke Energy Generation Services, Inc. and its affiliates (DEGS), Commercial Power engages in the development, construction and operation of renewable energy projects. In addition, DEGS owns and develops commercial transmission projects.

International Energy principally operates and manages power generation facilities and engages in sales and marketing of electric power and natural gas outside the U.S. It conducts operations primarily through Duke Energy International, LLC and its affiliates and its activities principally target

25


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

power generation in Latin America. Additionally, International Energy owns a 25%25 percent interest in National Methanol Company, located in Saudi Arabia, which is a large regional producer of methanol and methyl tertiary butyl ether.ether (MTBE).

The remainder of Duke Energy’s operations is presented as Other. While it is not considered an operating segment, Other primarily includes unallocated corporate costs, which include costs not allocable to Duke Energy’s reportable business segments, primarily interest expense on corporate debt instruments, costs to achieve mergers and divestitures, and costs associated with certain corporate severance programs. It also includes Bison Insurance Company Limited (Bison), Duke Energy’s wholly owned, captive insurance subsidiary, Duke Energy’s 50%50 percent interest in DukeNet Communications, LLC (DukeNet) and related telecommunications businesses, and Duke Energy’s 60 percent interest in Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, LLC,LLC.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

(in millions)

USFE&G

 

Commercial

Power

 

International

Energy

 

Total

Reportable

Segments

 

Other

 

Eliminations

 

Consolidated

Unaffiliated revenues

$

 5,052 

 

$

 439 

 

$

 392 

 

$

 5,883 

 

$

 15 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 5,898 

Intersegment revenues

 

 8 

 

 

 13 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 21 

 

 

 20 

 

 

 (41) 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total revenues

$

 5,060 

 

$

 452 

 

$

 392 

 

$

 5,904 

 

$

 35 

 

$

 (41) 

 

$

 5,898 

Segment income / Consolidated net income (a)

$

 656 

 

$

 (42) 

 

$

 97 

 

$

 711 

 

$

 (77) 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 634 

Segment assets

 

 98,419 

 

 

 6,937 

 

 

 5,521 

 

 

 110,877 

 

 

 2,696 

 

 

 93 

 

 

 113,666 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Other includes after-tax costs to achieve the merger with Progress Energy of $34 million, net of tax of $21 million. See Note 2 for additional information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

(in millions)

USFE&G

 

Commercial

Power

 

International

Energy

 

Total

Reportable

Segments

 

Other

 

Eliminations

 

Consolidated

Unaffiliated revenues(a)

$

 2,660 

 

$

 564 

 

$

 402 

 

$

 3,626 

 

$

 4 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 3,630 

Intersegment revenues

 

 8 

 

 

 16 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 24 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 (35) 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total revenues

$

 2,668 

 

$

 580 

 

$

 402 

 

$

 3,650 

 

$

 15 

 

$

 (35) 

 

$

 3,630 

Segment income(a)(b)

$

 136 

 

$

 31 

 

$

 142 

 

$

 309 

 

$

 (16) 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 293 

Add back noncontrolling interest component

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 4 

Income from discontinued operations, net of tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 2 

Consolidated net income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

 299 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

On January 25, 2012 and January 27, 2012, the Duke Energy Carolinas' South Carolina and North Carolina rate case settlement agreements were approved by the PSCSC and NCUC, respectively. Among other things, the rate case settlements included an annual base rate increase of $309 million in North Carolina and a $93 million annual base rate increase in South Carolina, both beginning in February 2012. The impact of these rates impacts USFE&G.

(b)

USFE&G recorded an after-tax impairment charge of $268 million, net of tax of $152 million, related to Duke Energy Indiana's Edwardsport Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) project. USFE&G also recorded the reversal of expenses of $60 million, net of tax of $39 million, related to a prior year Voluntary Opportunity Plan in accordance with Duke Energy Carolinas' 2011 rate case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PROGRESS ENERGY

Progress Energy’s sole reportable segment is Franchised Electric, which is 40% ownedprimarily engaged in the generation, transmission, distribution and sale of electricity in portions of North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida. These electric operations also distribute and sell electricity to other utilities, primarily on the east coast of the United States. The remainder of Progress Energy’s operations is presented as Other. While it is not considered an operating segment, Other primarily includes the Progress Energy holding company and Progress Energy Service Company, LLC and other miscellaneous nonregulated businesses, as well as costs to achieve the merger with Duke Energy and certain governance costs allocated by Exxon Mobil Corporation and 60% owned byits parent, Duke Energy.

See Note 17 for additional information.

Business Segment Data  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Segment Income/   

  

   

Unaffiliated

  

Intersegment

  

Total

  

Consolidated   

(in millions)  

Revenues

  

Revenues

  

Revenues

  

Net Income(a)

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

USFE&G  

$

 5,830 

  

$

 12 

  

$

 5,842 

  

$

 790  

Commercial Power  

  

 508 

  

  

 17 

  

  

 525 

  

  

 12  

International Energy  

  

 382 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 382 

  

  

 103  

  

Total reportable segments  

  

 6,720 

  

  

 29 

  

  

 6,749 

  

  

 905  

Other(c)

  

 2 

  

  

 18 

  

  

 20 

  

  

 (315)  

Eliminations  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (47) 

  

  

 (47) 

  

  

 ―  

Add back of noncontrolling interest component  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 4  

Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 4  

  

Total consolidated  

$

 6,722 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 6,722 

  

$

 598  

Three Months Ended September 30, 2011  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

USFE&G(b)

$

 2,917 

  

$

 9 

  

$

 2,926 

  

$

 337  

Commercial Power  

  

 684 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 687 

  

  

 24  

International Energy  

  

 360 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 360 

  

  

 115  

  

Total reportable segments  

  

 3,961 

  

  

 12 

  

  

 3,973 

  

  

 476  

Other  

  

 3 

  

  

 11 

  

  

 14 

  

  

 (5)  

Eliminations  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (23) 

  

  

 (23) 

  

  

 ―  

Add back of noncontrolling interest component  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (2)  

Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1  

  

Total consolidated  

$

 3,964 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 3,964 

  

$

 470  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Segment Income/   

  

   

Unaffiliated

  

Intersegment

  

Total

  

Consolidated   

(in millions)  

Revenues

  

Revenues

  

Revenues

  

Net Income(a)

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

USFE&G(b)

$

 11,178 

  

$

 29 

  

$

 11,207 

  

$

 1,263  

Commercial Power  

  

 1,560 

  

  

 47 

  

  

 1,607 

  

  

 71  

International Energy  

  

 1,181 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1,181 

  

  

 350  

  

Total reportable segments  

  

 13,919 

  

  

 76 

  

  

 13,995 

  

  

 1,684  

Other(c)

  

 10 

  

  

 41 

  

  

 51 

  

  

 (356)  

Eliminations  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (117) 

  

  

 (117) 

  

  

 ―  

Add back of noncontrolling interest component  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 12  

Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 5  

  

Total consolidated  

$

 13,929 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 13,929 

  

$

 1,345  

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

USFE&G(b)

$

 8,131 

  

$

 27 

  

$

 8,158 

  

$

 975  

Commercial Power  

  

 1,918 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 1,926 

  

  

 103  

International Energy  

  

 1,114 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1,114 

  

  

 370  

  

Total reportable segments  

  

 11,163 

  

  

 35 

  

  

 11,198 

  

  

 1,448  

Other  

  

 (2) 

  

  

 36 

  

  

 34 

  

  

 (31)  

Eliminations  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (71) 

  

  

 (71) 

  

  

 ―  

Add back of noncontrolling interest component  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 6  

Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1  

  

Total consolidated  

$

 11,161 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 11,161 

  

$

 1,424  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

(a)

Segment results exclude noncontrolling interests and results of entities classified as discontinued operations.  

(b)

As discussed further in Note 4, Duke Energy recorded pre-tax impairment and other charges of $600 million and $222 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, related to the Edwardsport Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) project.  

(c)

Includes after-tax costs to achieve of $293 million and $306 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, related to the Progress merger on July 2, 2012 (net of tax of $164 and $166 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively).  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

(in millions)

Franchised

Electric

 

Total

Reportable

Segment

 

Other

 

Eliminations

 

Consolidated

Unaffiliated revenues

$

 2,169 

 

$

 2,169 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 2,178 

Affiliated revenues

 

 9 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 8 

 

Total revenues

$

 2,178 

 

$

 2,178 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 (1) 

 

$

 2,186 

Segment income(a)

$

 232 

 

$

 232 

 

$

 (79) 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 153 

Add back noncontrolling interest component

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 1 

Consolidated net income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

 154 

Segment assets

 

 36,786 

 

 

 36,786 

 

 

 520 

 

 

 (21) 

 

 

 37,285 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Other includes after-tax costs to achieve the merger with Duke Energy of $12 million, net of tax of $8 million. See Note 2 for additional information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

(in millions)

Franchised

Electric

 

Total

Reportable

Segment

 

Other

 

Eliminations

 

Consolidated

Unaffiliated revenues

$

 2,099 

 

$

 2,099 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 2,102 

Affiliated revenues

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total revenues

$

 2,100 

 

$

 2,100 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 (1) 

 

$

 2,102 

Segment income(a)

$

 178 

 

$

 178 

 

$

 (39) 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 139 

Add back noncontrolling interest component

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 2 

Income from discontinued operations, net of tax

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 11 

Consolidated net income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

 152 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Other includes after-tax costs to achieve the merger with Duke Energy of $4 million, net of tax of $3 million. See Note 2 for additional information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2639

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

Segment Assets  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

    

  

  

  

  

  

  

Segment assets in the following table exclude all intercompany assets.

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

September 30, 2012

  

December 31, 2011

USFE&G  

$

 96,919 

  

$

 47,977 

Commercial Power  

  

 6,897 

  

  

 6,939 

International Energy  

  

 4,790 

  

  

 4,539 

  

Total reportable segments  

  

 108,606 

  

  

 59,455 

Other  

  

 3,206 

  

  

 2,961 

Reclassifications(a)

  

 196 

  

  

 110 

  

Total consolidated assets  

$

 112,008 

  

$

 62,526 

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Primarily represents reclassification of federal tax balances in consolidation.

Duke Energy OhioDUKE ENERGY OHIO

Duke Energy Ohio has two reportable operating segments, Franchised Electric and Gas and Commercial Power.

Franchised Electric and Gas transmits and distributes electricity in southwestern Ohio and generates, transmits, distributes and sells electricity in northern Kentucky. Franchised Electric and Gas also transports and sells natural gas in southwestern Ohio and northern Kentucky. It conducts operations primarily through Duke Energy Ohio and its wholly owned subsidiary, Duke Energy Kentucky.

Commercial Power owns, operates and manages power plants and engages in the wholesale marketing and procurement of electric power, fuel and emission allowances related to these plants, as well as other contractual positions. Duke Energy Ohio’s Commercial Power reportable operating segment does not include the operations of DEGS or Duke Energy Retail, which isare included in the Commercial Power reportable operating segment at Duke Energy.

The remainder of Duke Energy Ohio’s operations is presented as Other. While it is not considered an operating segment, Other primarily includes certain governance costs allocated by its parent, Duke Energy. See Note 17 for additional information. All of Duke Energy (see Note 17).

Ohio’s revenues are generated domestically and its long-lived assets are all in the U.S.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

(in millions)

Franchised Electric and Gas

Commercial Power

Total Reportable Segments

Other

Eliminations

Consolidated

Unaffiliated revenues

$

 492 

$

 255 

$

 747 

$

 ― 

$

 ― 

$

 747 

Intersegment revenues

 

 ― 

 

 11 

 

 11 

 

 ― 

 

 (11) 

 

 ― 

 

Total revenues

$

 492 

$

 266 

$

 758 

$

 ― 

$

 (11) 

$

 747 

Segment income / Consolidated net income

$

 53 

$

 (67) 

$

 (14) 

$

 (7) 

$

 ― 

$

 (21) 

Segment assets

 

 6,514 

 

 4,120 

 

 10,634 

 

 109 

 

 (160) 

 

 10,583 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

(in millions)

Franchised Electric and Gas

Commercial Power

Total Reportable Segments

Other

Eliminations

Consolidated

Unaffiliated revenues

$

 473 

$

 439 

$

 912 

$

 ― 

$

 ― 

$

 912 

Intersegment revenues

 

 ― 

 

 15 

 

 15 

 

 ― 

 

 (15) 

 

 ― 

 

Total revenues

$

 473 

$

 454 

$

 927 

$

 ― 

$

 (15) 

$

 912 

Segment income / Consolidated net income

$

 34 

$

 44 

$

 78 

$

 (4) 

$

 ― 

$

 74 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Business Segment Data

Segment Income (Loss)/

Unaffiliated

Consolidated

(in millions)

Revenues(a)

Net Income

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012

Franchised Electric and Gas

$

 431 

$

 49 

Commercial Power

 341 

 (17) 

Total reportable segments

 772 

 32 

Other

 ― 

 (18) 

Eliminations

 (15)

 ― 

Total consolidated

$

 757 

$

 14 

Three Months Ended September 30, 2011

Franchised Electric and Gas

$

 333 

$

 38 

Commercial Power

 505 

 16 

Total reportable segments

 838 

 54 

Other

 ―

 (3) 

Total consolidated

$

 838 

$

 51 

Segment Income/

Unaffiliated

Consolidated

(in millions)

Revenues(a)

Net Income

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012

Franchised Electric and Gas

$

 1,291 

$

 113 

Commercial Power

 1,137 

 44 

Total reportable segments

 2,428 

 157 

Other

 ―

 (24) 

Eliminations

 (42)

 ― 

Total consolidated

$

 2,386 

$

 133 

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011

Franchised Electric and Gas

$

 1,112 

$

 115 

Commercial Power

 1,299 

 50 

Total reportable segments

 2,411 

 165 

Other

 ―

 (8) 

Total consolidated

$

 2,411 

$

 157 

(a)

There was an insignificant amount of intersegment revenues for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.

27


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

PROGRESS, DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA AND DUKE ENERGY INDIANA INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

Segment Assets  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

    

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Segment assets in the following table exclude all intercompany assets.

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

September 30, 2012

  

December 31, 2011

Franchised Electric and Gas  

  

$

 6,399 

  

$

 6,293 

Commercial Power  

  

  

 4,157 

  

  

 4,740 

  

Total reportable segments  

  

  

 10,556 

  

  

 11,033 

Other  

  

  

 110 

  

  

 259 

Reclassifications(a)

  

  

 (172) 

  

  

 (353) 

  

Total consolidated assets  

  

$

 10,494 

  

$

 10,939 

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Primarily represents reclassification of federal tax balances in consolidation.

Duke Energy Carolinas, and Duke Energy Indiana

Progress, Duke Energy CarolinasFlorida and Duke Energy Indiana each have one reportable operating segment, Franchised Electric, which generates, transmits, distributes and sells electricity in central and western North Carolina and western South Carolina, and north central, central and southern Indiana, respectively.

electricity. The remainder of Duke Energy Carolinas’ and Duke Energy Indiana’seach company’s operations are included inis classified as Other. While it is not considered an operating segment,reportable segments for any of these companies, Other primarily includesconsists of each respective company’s share of costs to achieve certain mergersthe merger between Duke Energy and divestitures,Progress Energy, certain corporate severance programs, and certain costs for use of corporate

40


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

assets as allocated to Duke Energy Carolinas or Duke Energy Indiana.  Duke Energy Carolinas had a net loss of $119 million and $137 millioneach company. See Note 17 for additional information. The following table summarizes the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 recorded in Other primarily as a result of costs to achieve related to the Progress Energy merger. Duke Energy Indiana had a net loss was $14 million and $19 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 recorded in Other. Duke Energy Carolinas’ and Duke Energy Indiana’s net loss for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 recorded in Other was not material.at each of these entities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Duke Energy Carolinas

$

 (19) 

 

$

 (8) 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 (7) 

 

 

 (3) 

Duke Energy Florida

 

 (5) 

 

 

 (1) 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 (4) 

 

 

 (4) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011The Franchised Electric operating segments includes substantially all of Duke Energy Carolinas’, Duke Energy Progress’, Duke Energy Florida’s and Duke Energy Indiana’s assets are each owned by the Franchised Electric operating segment. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, substantially all revenues and expenses are from the Franchised Electric operating segment of each registrant.assets.

 

4. Regulatory MattersREGULATORY MATTERS

Rate Related Information.RATE RELATED INFORMATION

The NCUC, PSCSC, FPSC, IURC, PUCO and KPSC approve rates for retail electric and gas services within their states. Non-regulatedNonregulated sellers of gas and electric generation are also allowed to operate in Ohio once certified by the PUCO. The FERC approves rates for electric sales to certain wholesale customers served under cost-based rates, as well as sales of transmission service.

Duke Energy Carolinas

Cliffside Unit 6. 2013 North Carolina Rate Case

On February 4, 2013, Duke Energy Carolinas filed an application with the NCUC for an increase in base rates of approximately $446 million, or an average 9.7 percent increase in retail revenues. The request for increase is based upon an 11.25 percent return on equity and a capital structure of 53 percent equity and 47 percent long-term debt. The rate increase is designed primarily to recover the cost of plant modernization, environmental compliance and other capital additions.

Duke Energy Carolinas expects revised rates, if approved, to go into effect late third quarter of 2013.

2013 South Carolina Rate Case

On March 21, 2007,18, 2013, Duke Energy Carolinas filed an application with the PSCSC for an increase in base rates of approximately $220 million, or an average 15.1 percent increase in retail revenues. The request for increase is based upon an 11.25 percent return on equity and a capital structure of 53 percent equity and 47 percent long-term debt. More than half of the request is driven by capital investments, but also seeks to recover items such as vegetation management improvements, nuclear safety upgrades, cyber-security enhancements and the impacts of lower sales volumes.

Duke Energy Carolinas expects revised rates, if approved, to go into effect late third quarter of 2013.

2011 North Carolina Rate Case

On January 27, 2012, the NCUC approved a settlement agreement between Duke Energy Carolinas and the North Carolina Utilities Commission Public Staff (Public Staff) for a rate increase. On March 28, 2012, the North Carolina Attorney General (NCAG) filed a notice of appeal with the NCUC challenging the rate of return approved in the agreement. On April 12, 2013, the North Carolina Supreme Court (NCSC) issued an order allowing Duke Energy Carolinasrequiring the NCUC to buildmake an 800 MW coal-fired unit. Following final equipment selectionindependent determination regarding the proper return on equity. The NCSC indicated the determination should be based upon appropriate findings of fact that balance all the available evidence, including the impact of changing economic conditions on customers. On April 29, 2013, the NCAG filed a motion with the NCUC requesting a stay of the rate increase approved by the NCUC and implemented in 2012. The NCAG also requested the completion of detailed engineering, Cliffside Unit 6 is expectedNCUC to have a net output of 825 MW.provide the parties guidance with respect to further evidentiary hearings at which new evidence would be introduced. On January 31, 2008,May 1, 2013, Duke Energy Carolinas filed its updated cost estimate of $1.8 billion (excluding AFUDC of $600 million) for Cliffside Unit 6. In March 2010, opposition to the NCAG’s motion to stay the rate increase.

Duke Energy Carolinas filed an update tocannot predict the cost estimateoutcome of $1.8 billion (excluding AFUDC) with the NCUC where it reduced the estimated AFUDC financing costs to $400 million as a result of the December 2009 rate case settlement with the NCUC that allowed the inclusion of construction work in progress in rate

28


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.these proceedings.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

base prospectively. Duke Energy Carolinas believes that the overall cost of Cliffside Unit 6 will be further reduced by $125 million in federal advanced clean coal tax credits, as discussed in Note 5. Cliffside Unit 6 is expected to begin commercial operation by the end of 2012.

Dan River Combined Cycle Facility. In June 2008, the NCUC issued its order approving the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) applications to construct a 620 MW combined cycle natural gas fired generating facility at Duke Energy Carolinas’ existing Dan River Steam Station. The Division of Air Quality (DAQ) issued a final air permit authorizing construction of the Dan River combined cycle natural gas-fired generating unit in August 2009. The Dan River project is expected to begin operation by the end of 2012. Based on the most updated cost estimates, total costs (including AFUDC) for the Dan River project are estimated to be $715 million.

William States Lee III Nuclear Station. Station

In December 2007, Duke Energy Carolinas filed an application with the NRC, which has been docketed for review, for a combined Construction and Operating License (COL) for two Westinghouse AP1000 (advanced passive) reactors for the proposed William States Lee III Nuclear Station (Lee Nuclear Station) at a site in Cherokee County, South Carolina. Each reactor is capable of producing 1,117 MW. Submitting the COL application does not commit Duke Energy Carolinas to build nuclear units. Through several separate orders, the NCUC and PSCSC have concurred with the prudency of Duke Energy incurring certain project development and pre-construction costs. As of March 31, 2013, Duke Energy Carolinas has incurred approximately $330 million, including allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC), which is included in Net property, plant and equipment on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The Lee COL application is impacted by the ongoing activity by the NRC to address its Waste Confidence rule, a generic finding by the NRC that spent fuel can be managed safely until ultimate disposal. The rule has been remanded to the NRC by the District of Columbia Court of

41


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Appeals. In response to the court’s remand and in connection with numerous petitions asserting waste confidence contentions, including in the Lee proceeding, the NRC determined that no final licenses for new reactors would be issued until the remand is appropriately addressed. In September 2012, the NRC provided a timeline of 24 months from the time of its order for the staff to finish the generic Environmental Impact Study and publish a final Waste Confidence rule. Assuming the NRC uses the entire 24 month period for promulgation of a new rule, licenses would not be issued until September 2014 at the earliest.

V.C. Summer Nuclear Station Letter of Intent.Intent

In July 2011, Duke Energy Carolinas signed a letter of intent with Santee Cooper related to the potential acquisition by Duke Energy Carolinas of a 5%5 percent to 10%10 percent ownership interest in the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station being developed by Santee Cooper and SCE&G near Jenkinsville, South Carolina. The letter of intent providesprovided a path for Duke Energy Carolinas to conduct the necessary due diligence to determine ifwhether future participation in this project is beneficial for its customers. On November 7, 2012, the term of the letter of intent expired, though Duke Energy Carolinas remains engaged in discussions at this time.

2011Duke Energy Progress

2012 North Carolina Rate Case. Case

On January 27, 2012,February 28, 2013, the Public Staff filed a Settlement Agreement with the NCUC approved adetailing additional terms of settlement agreementwith Duke Energy Progress in connection with the rate case filed on October 12, 2012. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement between Duke Energy Carolinas and the North Carolina Utilities Public Staff (Public Staff). The terms of the agreement include an average 7.2% increase in retail revenues, or approximately $309 million annually beginning in February 2012. The agreement includes a 10.5% return on equity and a capital structure of 53% equity and 47% long-term debt.

On March 28, 2012, the North Carolina Attorney General filed a notice of appeal with the NCUC challenging the rate of return approved in the agreement. On April 17, 2012, the NCUC denied Duke Energy Carolinas’ request to dismiss the notice of appeal. Briefs were filed on August 22, 2012 by the North Carolina Attorney General and the AARP with the North Carolina Supreme Court, which is hearing the appeal. Duke Energy Carolinas filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on August 31, 2012 and the North Carolina Attorney General filed a response to that motion on September 13, 2012. Briefs by the appellees, Duke Energy CarolinasProgress and the Public Staff, were filed on September 21, 2012. The North Carolina Supreme Court deniedthe parties have agreed to a two year step-in to a total agreed upon net rate increase, with the first year providing for a $151 million, or 4.7 percent average increase in rates, and the second year providing for rates to be increased by an additional $31 million, or 1.0 percent average increase in rates. This second year increase is a result of Duke Energy Carolinas’ motionProgress agreeing to dismissdelay collection of financing costs on procedural grounds and set the matter for oral arguments on November 13, 2012.

2011 South Carolina Rate Case. On January 25, 2012, the PSCSC approved a settlement agreement between Duke Energy Carolinas and the ORS, Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, and Sam’s East, Inc. The Commission of Public Worksconstruction work in progress for the city of Spartanburg, South Carolina and the Spartanburg Sanitary Sewer District were not parties to the agreement; however, they did not object to the agreement.L.V. Sutton (Sutton) combined cycle facility for one year. The terms of the agreement include an average 5.98% increase in retail and commercial revenues, or approximately $93 million annually beginning February 6, 2012. The agreement includesSettlement Agreement is based upon a 10.5% return on equity a capital structure of 53% equity and 47% long-term debt.

Progress Energy Carolinas

2012 North Carolina Rate Case. On October 12, 2012, Progress Energy Carolinas filed an application with the NCUC for an increase in base rates of approximately $387 million, or an average 12% increase in revenues. The request for increase is based upon an 11.25% return on equity10.2 percent and a 53 percent equity component of the capital structure of 55% equity and 45% long-term debt.structure. The rate increaseSettlement Agreement is designed primarilysubject to recoverapproval by the cost of plant modernization and other capital investments in generation, transmission and distribution systems, as well as increased expenditures for nuclear plants and personnel, vegetation management and other operating costs. The rate case includes a corresponding decrease inNCUC.

Duke Energy Progress Energy Carolinas’ energy efficiency and demand side management rider, resulting in a net requested increase of $359 million, or 11% increase in revenues.

Progress Energy Carolinas expects revised rates, if approved, to go into effect in the second or third quarter ofJune 2013.

HF Lee and L.V. Sutton Combined Cycle Facilities. Facility

Duke Energy Progress Energy Carolinas is in the process of constructing twoa new generating facilities, which consist of an approximately 920 MW combined cycle natural gas-fired generating facility at the HF Lee Energy Complex (Lee) in Wayne County, N.C., and an approximately 625 MW natural gas-fired generating facility at its existing L.V. Sutton Steam Station (Sutton) in New Hanover County, N.C. Lee has an expected in-service date of December 2012 and Sutton has an expected in-service date of December 2013. Based on updated cost estimates, totalNorth Carolina. Total estimated costs at final project completion (including AFUDC) for the Lee and Sutton projectsproject, which is approximately 77 percent complete, are estimated$600 million. The Sutton project is expected to be approximately $750 million and $600 million, respectively.in service in the fourth quarter of 2013.

Shearon Harris Nuclear Station Expansion.

In 2006, ProgressDuke Energy CarolinasProgress selected a site at its existing Shearon Harris Nuclear Station (Harris) to evaluate for possible future nuclear expansion. On February 19, 2008, ProgressDuke Energy CarolinasProgress filed its COL application with the NRC for two Westinghouse Electric AP1000 reactors at Harris, which the NRC docketed on April 17, 2008. No petitionsOn May 2, 2013, Duke Energy Progress filed a letter with the NRC requesting the NRC to intervene have been admitted insuspend its review activities associated with the COL at the Harris COL application.

site. As of March 31, 2013, approximately $70 million, including AFUDC, is recorded in Net property, plant and equipment on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. Duke Energy Progress is seeking recovery of this amount.

ProgressDuke Energy Florida

2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement. Agreement

On February 22, 2012, the FPSC approved a comprehensive settlement agreement among ProgressDuke Energy Florida, the Florida Office of Public Counsel and other consumer advocates. The 2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement will continue through the last billing cycle of December 2016. The agreement addresses threefour principal matters: (i) Progress Energy Florida’s proposed Levy Nuclear Project cost recovery, (ii) the Crystal River Nuclear Station – Unit 3 (Crystal River Unit 3) delamination prudence review then pending before the FPSC, (ii) certain customer rate matters, (iii) Duke Energy Florida’s proposed Levy Nuclear Station (Levy) cost recovery, and (iii) certain base rate issues.(iv) cost of removal reserve. Refer to each of these respective sections below for further discussion.

Crystal River Nuclear Station - Unit 3 (Crystal River Unit 3).

In September 2009, Crystal River Unit 3 began an outage for normal refueling and maintenance as well as an uprate project to increase its generating capability and to replace two steam generators. During preparations to replace the steam generators, workers discovered a delamination (or separation) within the concrete at the periphery of the containment building, which resulted in an extension of the outage. After analysis, it was determined that the concrete delamination at Crystal River Unit 3 was caused by redistribution of stresses in the containment wall that occurred when an opening was created to accommodate the replacement of the unit’s steam generators. In March 2011, the work to return the plant to service was suspended after monitoring equipment identified a new delamination that occurred in a different section

29


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

of the outer wall after the repair work was completed and during the late stages of retensioning the containment building. Crystal River Unit 3 has remained out of service while ProgressDuke Energy Florida conducted an engineering analysis and review of the new delamination and evaluatesevaluated possible repair options.

Subsequent to March 2011, monitoring equipment has detected additional changes and further damage in the partially tensioned containment building and additional cracking or delaminations could occur.

Progressbuilding. Duke Energy Florida worked with two potential vendors fordeveloped a repair work and received repair proposals from both vendors. After analyzing those proposals, Progress Energy Florida selectedplan which had a single vendor that would be engaged to complete the repair of Crystal River Unit 3 should the choice to repair be made. See discussion below regarding Crystal River Unit 3 cost recovery and other provisions, as a result of a 2012 settlement agreement with the FPSC.

Based on an analysis of possible repair options performed by outside engineering consultants, Progress Energy Florida selected an option, which would entail systematically removing and replacing concrete in substantial portions of the containment structure walls. The preliminary cost estimate of $900 million to $1.3 billion is currently under review and could changebillion.

On February 5, 2013, following the completion of further detailed engineering studies, vendor negotiationsa comprehensive analysis and final risk assessments. These engineering studies and risk assessments include analyses by independent entities currently in progress. The risk assessment process includes analysis of events that, although currently deemed unlikely, could have a significant impact on the cost estimate or feasibility of repair. This preliminary cost estimate and project scope are under review, as described further below, however, the cost estimate is trending upward.

In March 2012, Duke Energy commissioned an independent review team led by Zapata Incorporated (Zapata)which estimated repair costs to reviewbe between $1.49 billion and assess$3.43 billion depending on the Progressrepair scope selected, Duke Energy Floridaannounced its

42


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

intention to retire Crystal River Unit 3 repair plan, including the repair scope, risks, costs and schedule. In its final report, Zapata found that the current repair scope appears to be technically feasible, but there are significant risks that need to be addressed regarding the approach, construction methodology, scheduling and licensing. Zapata performed four separate analyses of the estimated project cost and schedule to repair Crystal River Unit 3, including; (i) an independent review of the current repair scope (without existing assumptions or data), of which Zapata estimated costs of $1.49 billion with a project duration of 35 months; (ii) a review of Progress Energy Florida’s previous bid information, which included cost estimate data from Progress Energy Florida, of which Zapata estimated costs of $1.55 billion with a project duration of 31 months; (iii) an expanded scope of work scenario, that included the Progress Energy Florida scope plus the replacement of the containment building dome and the removal and replacement of concrete in the lower building elevations, of which Zapata estimated costs of approximately $2.44 billion with a project duration of 60 months, and; (iv) a “worst case” scenario, assuming Progress Energy Florida performed the more limited scope of work, and at the conclusion of that work, additional damage occurred in the dome and in the lower elevations, which forced replacement of each, of which Zapata estimated costs of $3.43 billion with a project duration of 96 months. The principal difference between Zapata’s estimate and Progress Energy Florida’s previous estimate appears to be due to the respective levels of contingencies included by each party, including higher project risk and longer project duration. Progress Energy Florida has filed a copy of the Zapata report with the FPSC and with the NRC. The FPSC held a status conference on October 30, 2012 to discuss Duke Energy’s analysis of the Zapata report.

Progress Energy Florida continues to analyze the various aspects of the repair option as well as the option of early retirement. This analysis includes the evaluation of the potential implications to scope, cost estimate and schedule from the project risks identified in the Zapata report. A number of factors could affect the decision to repair, the return-to-service date and repair costs incurred, including, but not limited to, state regulatory and NRC reviews, insurance recoveries from Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL), the ability to obtain builder’s risk insurance with appropriate coverage, final engineering designs, vendor contract negotiations, the ultimate work scope completion, performance testing, weather and the impact of new information discovered during additional testing and analysis.3. Duke Energy will proceed with the repair option only if there isconcluded that it did not have a high degree of confidence that the repair cancould be successfully completed and licensed within the final estimated costs and schedule, and that it iswas in the best interests of Duke Energy’sEnergy Florida’s customers, joint owners and investors.Duke Energy’s investors to retire the unit. On February 20, 2013, Duke Energy Florida filed with the NRC a certification of permanent cessation of power operations. Duke Energy Florida developed initial estimates of the cost to decommission the plant during its analysis of whether to repair or retire Crystal River Unit 3. With the final decision to retire, Duke Energy Florida is working to develop a comprehensive decommissioning plan, which will evaluate various decommissioning options and costs associated with each option. The plan will determine resource needs as well as the scope, schedule and other elements of decommissioning. Duke Energy Florida intends to use a safe storage (SAFSTOR) option for decommissioning. Generally, SAFSTOR involves placing the facility into a safe storage configuration, requiring limited staffing to monitor plant conditions, until the eventual dismantling and decontamination activities occur, usually in 40 to 60 years. This decommissioning approach is currently utilized at a number of retired domestic nuclear power plants and is one of three generally accepted approaches to decommissioning approved by the NRC. Once an updated site specific decommissioning study is completed it will be filed with the FPSC. As part of the evaluation of repairing Crystal River Unit 3, initial estimates of the cost to decommission the plant under the SAFSTOR option were developed which resulted in an estimate in 2011 dollars of $989 million. Additional specifics about the decommissioning plan are being developed.

ProgressDuke Energy Florida maintains insurance coverage against incremental costs of replacement power resulting from prolonged accidental outages atfor Crystal River Unit 3 through NEIL.Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL). NEIL provides insurance coverage for repair costs for covered events, as well as the cost of replacement power of up to $490 million per event when the unit is out of service as a result of these events. Actual replacement power costs have exceeded the insurance coverage. Progress Energy Florida also maintains insurance coverage through NEIL’s accidental property damage program, which provides insurance coverageclaims on an actual cash value basis up to $2.25$1.06 billion with a $10 million deductible per claim. The NEIL coverage does not include property damage to or resulting from the containment structure except full limit coverage does apply to decontamination and debris removal if required following an accident to ensure public health and safety or if property damage results from a terrorism event.

ProgressThroughout the duration of the Crystal River Unit 3 outage, Duke Energy Florida is continuing to workworked with NEIL for recovery of applicable repair costs and associated replacement power costs. Pursuant to a settlement agreement executed on March 28, 2013, between NEIL has made payments on the first delamination; however, NEIL has withheld payment of approximately $70 million of replacement power cost claims and repair cost claims related to the first delamination event. NEIL has unresolved concerns and has not made any payments on the second delamination and has not provided a written coverage decision for either delamination. In addition, no replacement power reimbursements have been received from NEIL since May 2011. These considerations led ProgressDuke Energy Florida, to conclude that it was not probable thaton April 25, 2013, NEIL will voluntarily pay the full coverage amounts that Progresspaid Duke Energy Florida believes them to owe under the applicable insurance policies. Consistentan additional $530 million. Along with the terms and procedures under the insurance coverage with$305 million which NEIL Progresspreviously paid, Duke Energy Florida has agreedreceived a total of $835 million in insurance proceeds. In accordance with the 2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement, NEIL proceeds received allocable to mediation priorretail customers will be applied to commencing any formal dispute resolution. Progressreplacement power costs incurred after December 31, 2012 through December 31, 2016.

Because Duke Energy Florida is indid not begin the processrepair of providing information as requested by NEIL and currently have scheduled the mediation to commence in November 2012. Given the circumstances, accounting standards require full recovery to be probable to recognize an insurance receivable. As of the merger date and September 30, 2012, Progress Energy Florida has no insurance receivables from NEIL related to either the first or second delamination. Progress Energy Florida continues to believe that all applicable costs associated with bringing Crystal River Unit 3 back into service are covered under all insurance policies.

The following table summarizesprior to December 31, 2012 and has decided to retire the Crystal River Unit 3unit, per the 2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement, Duke Energy Florida will refund $40 million in 2015 and $60 million in 2016. Duke Energy Florida recorded a Regulatory liability for these refunds in the third quarter of 2012 related to these replacement power and repair costs and recovery, as discussed above, through September 30, 2012:

(in millions)  

Replacement Power Costs

  

  

Repair Costs

Spent to date  

$

 573 

  

  

$

 324 

NEIL proceeds received to date  

  

 (162) 

  

  

  

 (143) 

Balance for recovery(a)

$

 411 

  

  

$

 181 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

See discussion below of Progress Energy Florida's ability to recover prudently incurred fuel and purchased power costs and Crystal River Unit 3 repair costs.

        

30


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

obligations.

As a result of the 2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement, ProgressDuke Energy Florida will be permitted to recover prudently incurred fuel and purchased power costs through its fuel clause without regard for the absence of Crystal River Unit 3 for the period from the beginning of the Crystal River Unit 3 outage through the earlier of the return of Crystal River Unit 3 to commercial service or December 31, 2016. If Progress Energy Florida does not begin repairs of Crystal River Unit 3 prior to the end of 2012, Progress Energy Florida will refund replacement power costs on a pro rata basis based on the in-service date of up to $40 million in 2015 and $60 million in 2016.

As a result of the ongoing analysis of repair options, including scope, schedule, cost estimate and project risks, Progress Energy Florida has determined that it is unlikely to be in a position to begin the repair of Crystal River Unit 3 prior to December 31, 2012. Consistent with the 2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement, regarding the timing of commencement of repairs, Progress Energy Florida recorded a Regulatory liability of $100 million related to replacement power obligations. This amount is reflected as part of the purchase price allocation of the merger with Progress Energy in Duke Energy’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

In the event that repair activities continue beyond December 31, 2016, the parties are not prohibited from contesting Progress Energy Florida’s right to recover replacement power costs incurred after 2016. The parties to the agreement maintain the right to challenge the prudence and reasonableness of Progress Energy Florida’s fuel acquisition and power purchases, and other fuel prudence issues unrelated to the Crystal River Unit 3 outage. All prudence issues from the steam generator project inception through the date of settlement approval by the FPSC are resolved.

To the extent that Progress Energy Florida pursues the repair of Crystal River Unit 3, Progress Energy Florida will establish an estimated cost and repair schedule with ongoing consultation with the parties to the agreement. The established cost, to be approved by Duke Energy’s Board of Directors, will be the basis for project measurement. If costs exceed the board-approved estimate, overruns will be split evenly between Duke Energy shareholders and Progress Energy Florida customers up to $400 million. The parties to the agreement agree to discuss the method of recovery of any overruns in excess of $400 million, with final decision by the FPSC if resolution cannot be reached. If the repairs begin prior to the end of 2012, the parties to the agreement waive their rights to challenge Progress Energy Florida’s decision to repair and the repair plan chosen by Progress Energy Florida. In addition, there will be limited rights to challenge recovery of the repair execution costs incurred prior to the final resolution on NEIL coverage. The parties to the agreement will discuss the treatment of any potential gap between NEIL repair coverage and the estimated cost, with final decision by the FPSC if resolution cannot be reached. If the repairs do not begin prior to the end of 2012, the parties to the agreement reserve the right to challenge the prudence of Progress Energy Florida’s repair decision, plan and implementation.

Progress Energy Florida also retains sole discretion and flexibility to retire the unit without challenge from the parties to the agreement. If Progress Energy Florida decides to retire Crystal River Unit 3, Progress Energy Florida is allowed to recover all remaining Crystal River Unit 3 investments and to earn a return on the Crystal River Unit 3 investments set at its current authorized overall cost of capital, adjusted to reflect a return on equity set at 70 percent of the current FPSC-authorizedFPSC authorized return on equity, no earlier than the first billing cycle of January 2017. The wholesale portion of

Duke Energy Florida has reclassified all Crystal River Unit 3 investments, which are not covered by the 2012 FSPC Settlement Agreement, totals approximately $130 millionincluding property, plant and equipment, nuclear fuel, inventory, and other assets to a regulatory asset. In addition, as a result of September 30, 2012. The recoverability of the wholesale portion ofDuke Energy Florida’s decision to retire Crystal River Unit 3, will continuethe 2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement authorizes Duke Energy Florida to be evaluated as decisions are made regarding repair or retirement. Recoverydefer the retail portion of the wholesale portion ofall Crystal River Unit 3 underrelated costs including, but not limited to, operations and maintenance and property tax costs in a regulatory asset. A regulatory liability must also be established to capture the retirement option is at risk based on prior treatmentdifference between, i) actual incurred operations and maintenance and property tax costs in a given year and, ii) the amount included in customer rates as established in Duke Energy Florida’s most recent fully litigated base rate proceeding, effective 2010. Beginning in February 2013, the retail portion of early retired plants in wholesale rates. Any NEIL proceeds received after the settlement will be applied first to replacement poweroperations and maintenance costs incurred after December 31, 2012,associated with the remainder used to write down the remaining Crystal River Unit 3 investments. Retirementis being deferred to a regulatory asset. As of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, $1,711 million and $1,637 million, respectively, have been recorded to Regulatory assets on Duke Energy Florida’s Condensed Balance Sheets.

In accordance with the terms of the plant could impact funding obligations associated with Progress Energy Florida’s nuclear decommissioning trust fund.

Progress2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement, Duke Energy Florida retained the sole discretion to retire Crystal River Unit 3 without challenge from the parties to the agreement. The FPSC will review the prudence of the retirement decision in what was previously titled Phase 2 of the Crystal River Unit 3 delamination regulatory docket. Duke Energy Florida has also asked the FPSC to review the mediated resolution of insurance claims with NEIL as part of what was previously titled Phase 3 of this regulatory docket. Additionally, Duke Energy Florida anticipates that the FPSC will review the costs included in the Crystal River Unit 3 regulatory asset as part of this pending proceeding. On March 1, 2013, an order was issued that Phase 2 and Phase 3 of the regulatory docket would be considered together in a single hearing. On April 26, 2013, the FPSC issued a procedural order on the matter and set final hearing dates to resolve all remaining issues on October 21, 2013 through October 23, 2013. Oral arguments were heard on April 30, 2013 on evidentiary issues.

Duke Energy Florida believes the decision to retire Crystal River Unit 3, the actions taken and costs incurred in response to the Crystal River Unit 3 delamination have been prudent and, accordingly, considers replacement power and capital costs not recoverable through insurance to be recoverable through its fuel cost-recovery clause or base rates. Additional replacement power costs and repairexit cost to wind down the operations at the plant and maintenance costs incurred untildecommission Crystal River Unit 3 is returned to service could be material. Additionally, ProgressRetirement of the plant could impact funding obligations associated with Duke Energy Florida cannot be assured that Crystal River 3 can be repaired and brought back to service until full engineering and other analyses are completed.Florida’s nuclear decommissioning trust fund.

ProgressDuke Energy Florida is a party to a master participation agreement and other related agreements with the joint owners of Crystal River Unit 3 which convey certain rights and obligations on ProgressDuke Energy Florida and the joint owners. ProgressIn December 2012, Duke Energy Florida reached an agreement with one group of joint owners related to all Crystal River Unit 3 matters, and is meetingengaged in settlement discussions with the other major group of joint owners on a regular basisowners.

43


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to discuss the parties’ mutual obligations under these agreements and to better understand their views and positions on these issues. ProgressCondensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Duke Energy Florida cannot predict the outcome of this matter.the matters described above.

BaseCustomer Rate Matters. MattersAs a result of

In conjunction with the 2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement, ProgressDuke Energy Florida will maintain base rates at the current levels through the last billing cycle of December 2016, except as described as follows. The agreement provides for a $150 million increase in revenue requirements effective with the first billing cycle of January 2013, while maintaining the current return on equity range of 9.5 percent to 11.5 percent. Additionally, costs associated with Crystal River Unit 3 investments will be removed from retail rate base effective with the first billing cycle of January 2013. ProgressDuke Energy Florida will accrue, for future rate-setting purposes, a carrying charge on the Crystal River Unit 3 investment until the Crystal River Unit 3 regulatory asset is returned to service and placed back into retail rate base. Upon return of Crystal River Unit 3 to commercial service, Progress Energy Florida will be authorized to increase itsrecovered in base rates forbeginning with the annual revenue requirementsfirst billing cycle of all Crystal River Unit 3 investments. In the month following Crystal River Unit 3’s return to commercial service, Progress Energy Florida’s return on equity range will increase to between 9.7 percent and 11.7 percent.January 2017. If ProgressDuke Energy Florida’s retail base rate earnings fall below the return on equity range, as reported on a FPSC-adjusted or pro-forma basis on a ProgressDuke Energy Florida monthly earnings surveillance report, ProgressDuke Energy Florida may petition the FPSC to amend its base rates during the term of the agreement. Refer to the discussion above regarding recovery of Crystal River Unit 3 investments if the plant is retired.investments.

ProgressDuke Energy Florida will refund $288 million to retail customers through its fuel clause. ProgressDuke Energy Florida will refund $129 million in each of 2013 and 2014, and an additional $10 million annually to residential and small commercial customers in 2014, 2015 and 2016. ADuke Energy Florida has a regulatory liability recorded for this refund is reflected in Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2012.these refunds.

Levy Nuclear Station. Station

On July 30,28, 2008, ProgressDuke Energy Florida filed its COL application with the NRC for two Westinghouse AP1000 reactors at its proposed Levy Nuclear Station (Levy),nuclear station, which the NRC docketed on October 6, 2008. Various parties filed a joint petition to intervene in the Levy COL application. On March 26, 2013, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board issued a decision finding that the NRC had carried its burden of demonstrating that its Final Environmental Impact Statement complies with the National Environmental Policy Act and applicable NRC regulatory requirements. A mandatory hearing conducted by the five NRC Commissioners is expected to occur in late 2013 or early 2014.

The Levy COL application is also impacted by the ongoing activity by the NRC to address its Waste Confidence rule, a generic finding by the NRC that spent fuel can be managed safely until ultimate disposal. The rule has been remanded to the NRC by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. In response to the court’s remand and in connection with numerous petitions asserting waste confidence contentions, including in the Levy proceeding, the NRC determined that no final licenses for new reactors would be issued until the remand is appropriately addressed. In September 2012, the NRC provided a timeline of 24 months from the time of its order for the staff to finish the generic Environmental Impact Study and publish a final Waste Confidence rule. Assuming the NRC uses the entire 24 month period for promulgation of a new rule, licenses would not be issued until September 2014 at the earliest.

In 2008, the FPSC granted ProgressDuke Energy Florida’s petition for an affirmative Determination of Need and related orders requesting

31


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

cost recovery under Florida’s nuclear cost-recovery rule for Levy, together with the associated facilities, including transmission lines and substation facilities.

On April 30, 2012, as part of its annual nuclear cost recovery filing, ProgressDuke Energy Florida updated the Levy project schedule and cost. Due to lower-than-projected customer demand, the lingering economic slowdown, uncertainty regarding potential carbon regulation and current low natural gas prices, Progress Energy Florida has shiftedcurrently estimates the in-service date for the first Levy unit to be 2024, with the second unit following 18 months later. The revised schedule is consistent with the recovery approach included in the 2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement. Although the scope and overnight cost for Levy, including land acquisition, related transmission work and other required investments, remain essentially unchanged, the shift in schedule will increase escalation and carrying costs and raise the total estimated project cost tois between $19 billion and $24 billion.

Along with the FPSC’s annual prudence reviews, Progress As of March 31, 2013, Duke Energy Florida will continue to evaluate the projecthas a net unrecovered investment of approximately $343 million, including AFUDC, recorded on an ongoing basis based on certain criteria, including, but not limited to, cost; potential carbon regulation; fossil fuel prices; the benefits of fuel diversification; public, regulatory and political support; adequate financial cost-recovery mechanisms; appropriate levels of joint owner participation; customer rate impacts; project feasibility; DSM and EE programs; and availability and terms of capital financing. Taking into account these criteria, Levy is considered to be Progress Energy Florida’s preferred baseload generation option.its Condensed Balance Sheets.

Under the terms of the 2012 FSPC Settlement Agreement, ProgressDuke Energy Florida will begin residentialbegan retail cost-recovery of its proposed Levy Nuclear Station effective in the first billing cycle of January 2013 at the fixed rates contained in the settlement and continuing for a five-year period. Progress Energy Florida willperiod, with true-up of any actual costs not recover any additional Levy costs from customers throughrecovered during the term of5-year period occurring in the agreement, or file for any additional recovery before March 1, 2017, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties to the agreement.final year. This amount is intended to recover the estimated retail project costs to date plus costs necessary to obtain the COL and any engineering, procurement and construction cancellation costs, if ProgressDuke Energy Florida ultimately chooses to cancel that contract. Duke Energy Florida will not file for recovery of any new Levy costs that were not addressed in the 2012 FSPC Settlement Agreement before March 1, 2017 and will not begin recovering those costs from customers before the first billing cycle of January, 2018, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties to the agreement. In addition, the consumer parties will not oppose ProgressDuke Energy Florida continuing to pursue a COL for Levy. Progress Energy Florida will true up any actual costs not recovered during the five year period. The 2012 FSPC Settlement Agreement also provides that ProgressDuke Energy Florida will treat the allocated wholesale cost of Levy (approximately $60 million) as a retail regulatory asset and include this asset as a component of rate base and amortization expense for regulatory reporting. ProgressDuke Energy Florida will have the discretion, under certain circumstances, to accelerate and/or suspend such amortization in full or in part provided that it amortizes all of the regulatory asset by December 31, 2016.

Cost of Removal Reserve. Reserve

The 2012 and 2010 FPSC settlement agreements provide ProgressSettlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement) provides Duke Energy Florida the discretion to reduce cost of removal amortization expense by up to the balance in the cost of removal reserve until the earlier of (a) its applicable cost of removal reserve reaches zero, or (b) the expiration of the 2012 FPSC settlement agreement at the end of 2016. ProgressSettlement Agreement. Duke Energy Florida may not reduce amortization expense if the reduction would cause it to exceed the appropriate high point of the return on equity range, as established in the settlement agreements.Settlement Agreement. Pursuant to the settlement agreements, ProgressSettlement Agreement, Duke Energy Florida recognized a reduction in amortization expense of $60$56 million and $58 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012. ProgressMarch 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Duke Energy Florida had eligible cost of removal reserves of $169$58 million remaining at September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, which is impacted by accruals in accordance with its latest depreciation study, removal costs expended, jurisdictional allocation changes and reductions in amortization expense as permitted by the settlement agreements.Settlement Agreement.

Anclote Units 1 and 2. Duke Energy Ohio

Capacity Rider Filing

On MarchAugust 29, 2012, ProgressDuke Energy Florida announced plansOhio filed an application with the PUCO for the establishment of a charge, pursuant to convert the 1,010-MW Anclote Units 1 and 2 (Anclote) from oil and natural gas fired to 100 percent natural gas fired and requested that the FPSC permit recovery of the estimated $79 million conversion cost through the Environmental Cost Recovery Clause (ECRC). Progress Energy Florida believes this conversion is the most cost-effective alternativeOhio’s state compensation mechanism, for Anclote to achieve and maintain compliancecapacity provided consistent with applicable environmental regulations. On September 13, 2012, the FPSC approved Progress Energy Florida’s request to seek cost recovery through the ECRC.  Progress Energy Florida anticipates that both converted units will be placed in service by the end of 2013.its obligations as a Fixed Resource Requirement (FRR) entity for

44


PART I

 

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

approximately $728 million. The application included a request for deferral authority and for a new tariff to implement the charge. The deferral being sought is the difference between its costs and market-based prices for capacity. The requested tariff would implement a charge to be collected via a rider through which such deferred balances will subsequently be recovered. 24 parties moved to intervene. Hearings were held in April 2013 and additional hearings are scheduled for May 2013. Under the current procedural schedule, Duke Energy Ohio expects an order in the second half of 2013.

2012 Electric Rate Case

On May 1, 2013, the PUCO approved a settlement agreement (Electric Settlement) between Duke Energy Ohio and all intervening parties in connection with an electric distribution case, filed in July 2012. The Electric Settlement provides for a net increase in electric distribution revenues of $49 million, or an average increase of 2.9 percent, based upon a return on equity of 9.84 percent. Revised rates will be effective in May 2013.

2012 Natural Gas Rate Case

On May 1, 2013, the PUCO approved a settlement agreement (Gas Settlement) between Duke Energy Ohio and all intervening parties in connection with a gas distribution case, filed in July 2012. The Gas Settlement provides for no increase in base rates for gas distribution service, subject to the unresolved litigation over remediation costs associated with manufactured gas plants (MGP). The Gas Settlement is based upon a return on equity of 9.84 percent.

Duke Energy Ohio requested that MGP remediation costs be recovered through a rider with the amount of recovery subject to the results of litigation. Duke Energy Ohio has requested an annual revenue requirement of $22 million for its MGP remediation costs. Hearings for the MGP litigation began April 29, 2013.

Duke Energy Ohio expects revised rates, if approved, to go into effect in the second half of 2013.

Regional Transmission Organization Realignment

Duke Energy Ohio, which includes its wholly owned subsidiary Duke Energy Kentucky, transferred control of its transmission assets to effect a Regional Transmission Organization (RTO) realignment from Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) to PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM), effective December 31, 2011.

On December 16, 2010, the FERC issued an order related to MISO’s cost allocation methodology surrounding Multi-Value Projects (MVP), a type of MISO Transmission Expansion Planning (MTEP) project cost. MISO expects that MVP will fund the costs of large transmission projects designed to bring renewable generation from the upper Midwest to load centers in the eastern portion of the MISO footprint. MISO approved MVP proposals with estimated project costs of approximately $5.2 billion prior to the date of Duke Energy Ohio’s exit from MISO on December 31, 2011. These projects are expected to be undertaken by the constructing transmission owners from 2012 through 2020 with costs recovered through MISO over the useful life of the projects. Duke Energy Ohio has historically represented approximately five percent of the MISO system. On October 21, 2011, the FERC issued an order on rehearing in this matter largely affirming its original MVP order and conditionally accepting MISO’s compliance filing as well as determining that the MVP allocation methodology is consistent with cost causation principles and FERC precedent. The order further stated that MISO’s tariff withdrawal language establishes that once cost responsibility for transmission upgrades is determined, withdrawing transmission owners retain any costs incurred prior to the withdrawal date. In order to preserve its rights, Duke Energy Ohio filed an appeal of the FERC order in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The case was consolidated with appeals of the FERC order by other parties in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

On December 29, 2011, MISO filed with FERC a Schedule 39 to MISO’s tariff. Schedule 39 provides for the allocation of MVP costs to a withdrawing owner based on the owner’s actual transmission load after the owner’s withdrawal from MISO, or, if the owner fails to report such load, based on the owner’s historical usage in MISO assuming annual load growth. On January 19, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio filed with FERC a protest of the allocation of MVP costs to them under Schedule 39. On February 27, 2012, the FERC accepted Schedule 39 as a just and reasonable basis for MISO to charge for MVP costs, a transmission owner that withdraws from MISO after January 1, 2012. The FERC set for hearing whether MISO’s proposal to use the methodology in Schedule 39 to calculate the obligation of transmission owners who withdrew from MISO prior to January 1, 2012 (such as Duke Energy Ohio) to pay for MVP costs is consistent with the MVP-related withdrawal obligations in the tariff at the time that they withdrew from MISO, and, if not, what amount of, and methodology for calculating, any MVP cost responsibility should be.

On March 28, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio filed a request for rehearing of FERC’s February 27, 2012 order on MISO’s Schedule 39. On December 19, 2012, the FERC Trial Staff submitted testimony in the Schedule 39 hearing proceeding in which its witness stated his opinion that Duke Energy Ohio should not be liable for any MVP costs. The role of the FERC Trial Staff is to act as an independent party in the proceeding; it has no judicial authority. The Schedule 39 hearing was held in April 2013. A FERC Administrative Law Judge presided over the hearing and is required to issue an initial decision by July 16, 2013.

Upon its exit from MISO on December 31, 2011, Duke Energy Ohio recorded a liability for its MISO exit obligation and share of MTEP costs, excluding MVP, which was recorded within Other in Current liabilities and Other in Deferred credits and other liabilities on Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. In addition to these liabilities, Duke Energy Ohio may also be responsible for costs associated with MISO MVP projects. Duke Energy Ohio is contesting its obligation to pay for such costs. However, depending on the final outcome of this matter, Duke Energy Ohio could incur material costs associated with MVP projects, which are not reasonably estimable at this time. Regulatory accounting treatment will be pursued for any costs incurred in connection with the resolution of this matter.

The following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balance of Duke Energy Ohio’s recorded obligations related to its withdrawal from MISO.

45


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

Balance at

December 31, 2012

 

Provision /

Adjustments

 

Cash

Reductions

 

Balance at

March 31, 2013(a)

Duke Energy Ohio

 

$

 97 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 (1) 

 

$

 97 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

As of March 31, 2013, $71 million is recorded as a Regulatory asset on Duke Energy Ohio's Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Indiana

Edwardsport IGCC Plant. Plant

On September 7, 2006,November 20, 2007, the IURC issued an order granting Duke Energy Indiana a Certificate of Public Convenience and Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Company d/b/a Vectren Energy Delivery of Indiana (Vectren) filed a joint petition with the IURC seeking a CPCNNecessity (CPCN) for the construction of a 618 MW IGCC power plant at Duke Energy Indiana’s Edwardsport Generating Station in Knox County, Indiana. The facility was initially estimated to cost approximately $1.985 billion (including $120 million of AFUDC). In August 2007, Vectren formally withdrew its participation in the IGCC plant andIndiana with a hearing was conducted on the CPCN petition based on Duke Energy Indiana owning 100% of the project. On November 20, 2007, the IURC issued an order granting Duke Energy Indiana a CPCN for the proposed IGCC project, approved the cost estimate of $1.985 billion and approved theassuming timely recovery of financing costs related to the project. On January 25, 2008, Duke Energy Indiana received the final air permit from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management. The Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana, Inc. (CAC), Sierra Club, Inc. (Sierra Club), Save the Valley, Inc. (Save the Valley), and Valley Watch, Inc. (Valley Watch), all intervenors in the CPCN proceeding (collectively, the Joint Intervenors), have appealed the air permit.

On May 1, 2008, Duke Energy Indiana filed its first semi-annual IGCC rider and ongoing review proceeding with the IURC as required under the CPCN order issued by the IURC. In its filing, Duke Energy Indiana requested approval of a new cost estimate for the IGCC project of $2.35 billion (including $125 million of AFUDC) and for approval of plans to study carbon capture as required by the IURC’s CPCN order. On January 7, 2009, the IURC approved Duke Energy Indiana’s request, including the new cost estimate of $2.35 billion, and cost recovery associated with a study on carbon capture. On November 3, 2008 and May 1, 2009, Duke Energy Indiana filed its second and third semi-annual IGCC riders, respectively, both of which were approved by the IURC in full.

On November 24, 2009, Duke Energy Indiana filed a petition for its fourth semi-annual IGCC rider and ongoing review proceeding with the IURC. As Duke Energy Indiana experienced design modifications, quantity increases and scope growth above what was anticipated from the preliminary engineering design, which increased capital costs tofor the IGCC project were anticipated to increase. Duke Energy Indiana forecasted thatproject. In January 2009, a new cost estimate was approved by the additional capital cost items would use the remaining contingency and escalation amounts in the currentIURC for $2.35 billion cost estimate and add $150(including $125 million excluding the impact associated with the need to add more contingency. Duke Energy Indiana did not request approval of an increased cost estimate in the fourth semi-annual update proceeding; rather, Duke Energy Indiana requested, and the IURC approved, a subdocket proceeding in which Duke Energy Indiana would present additional evidence regarding an updated estimated cost for the IGCC project and in which a more comprehensive review of the IGCC project could occur. The evidentiary hearing for the fourth semi-annual update proceeding was heldAFUDC). In April 6, 2010, and an interim order was received on July 28, 2010. The order approves the implementation of an updated IGCC rider to recover costs incurred through September 30, 2009, effective immediately. The approvals are on an interim basis pending the outcome of the sub-docket proceeding involving the revised cost estimate as discussed further below.

32


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

On April 16, 2010, Duke Energy Indiana filed a revised cost estimate for the IGCC project reflecting an estimated cost increase of $530 million. Duke Energy Indiana requestedrequesting approval of the revised cost estimate of $2.88 billion (including $160 million of AFUDC), and for continuation of the existing cost recovery treatment. A major driver of the cost increase included quantity increases and design changes, which impacted the scope, productivity and schedule of the IGCC project. On September 17, 2010, an agreement was reached with the Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor (OUCC), Duke Energy Indiana Industrial Group and Nucor Steel Indiana to increase the authorized cost estimate of $2.35 billion to $2.76 billion, and to cap the project’s costs that could be passed on to customers at $2.975 billion. Any construction cost amounts above $2.76 billion would be subject to a prudence review similar to most other rate base investments in Duke Energy Indiana’s next general rate increase request before the IURC. Duke Energy Indiana agreed to accept a 150 basis point reduction in the equity return for any project construction costs greater than $2.35 billion. Additionally, Duke Energy Indiana agreed not to file for a general rate case increase before March 2012. Duke Energy Indiana also agreed to reduce depreciation rates earlier than would otherwise be required and to forego a deferred tax incentive related to the IGCC project. As a result of the settlement, Duke Energy Indiana recorded a pre-tax charge to earnings of approximately $44 million in the third quarter of 2010 to reflect the impact of the reduction in the return on equity. The charge is recorded in Impairment charges on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. The IURC convened a technical conference on November 3, 2010, related to the continuing need for the Edwardsport IGCC facility. On December 9, 2010, the parties to the settlement withdrew the settlement agreement to provide an opportunity to assess whether and to what extent the settlement agreement remained a reasonable allocation of risks and rewards and whether modifications to the settlement agreement were appropriate. Management determined that the approximate $44 million charge discussed above was not impacted by the withdrawal of the settlement agreement.

During 2010, Duke Energy Indiana filed petitions for its fifth and sixth semi-annual IGCC riders. Evidentiary hearings were held on April 24, 2012 and April 25, 2012.

The CAC, Sierra Club, Inc., Save the Valley, Inc., and Valley Watch, Inc. filed motions for two subdocket proceedings alleging improper communications, undue influence, fraud, concealment and gross mismanagement, and a request for field hearing in this proceeding. Duke Energy Indiana opposed the requests. On February 25, 2011, the IURC issued an order which denied the request for a subdocket to investigate the allegations of improper communications and undue influence at this time, finding there were other agencies better suited for such investigation. The IURC also found that allegations of fraud, concealment and gross mismanagement related to the IGCC project should be heard in a Phase II proceeding of the cost estimate subdocket and set evidentiary hearings on both Phase I (cost estimate increase) and Phase II beginning in August 2011. After procedural delays, hearings began on Phase I on October 26, 2011 and on Phase II on November 21, 2011.

On March 10,. In June 2011, Duke Energy Indiana filed testimony with the IURC proposing a framework designed to mitigate customer rate impacts associated with the Edwardsport IGCC project. Duke Energy Indiana’s filing proposed a cap on the project’s construction costs, (excluding financing costs), which can be recovered through rates at $2.72 billion. It also proposed rate-related adjustments that will lower the overall customer rate increase related to the project from an average of 19% to approximately 16%.

On June 27, 2011, Duke Energy Indiana filed testimony with the IURC in connection withupdated its seventh semi-annual rider request which included an update on the current cost forecast of the Edwardsport IGCC project. The updated forecast excluding AFUDC increased from $2.72 billion to $2.82 billion not including any contingency for unexpected start-up events. On June 30, 2011, the OUCC and intervenors filed testimony in Phase I recommending that Duke Energy Indiana be disallowed cost recovery of any of the additional cost estimate increase above the previously approved cost estimate of $2.35 billion. Duke Energy Indiana filed rebuttal testimony on August 3, 2011.

(excluding AFUDC). In the subdocket proceeding, on July 14, 2011, the OUCC and certain intervenors filed testimony in Phase II alleging that Duke Energy Indiana concealed information and grossly mismanaged the project, and therefore Duke Energy Indiana should only be permitted to recover from customers $1.985 billion, the original IGCC project cost estimate approved by the IURC. Other intervenors recommended that Duke Energy Indiana not be able to rely on any cost recovery granted under the CPCN or the first cost increase order. Duke Energy Indiana believes it has diligently and prudently managed the project. On September 9, 2011, Duke Energy defended against the allegations in its responsive testimony. The OUCC and intervenors filed their final rebuttal testimony in Phase II on or before October 7, 2011, making similar claims of fraud, concealment and gross mismanagement and recommending the same outcome of limiting Duke Energy Indiana’s recovery to the $1.985 billion initial cost estimate. Additionally, the CAC recommended that recovery be limited to the costs incurred on the IGCC project as of November 30, 2009, with further IURC proceedings to be held to determine the financial consequences of this recommendation. As of November 30, 2009, Duke Energy Indiana estimates it had committed costs of $1.6 billion.

On October 19, 2011, Duke Energy Indiana revised its project cost estimate from approximately $2.82 billion, excluding financing costs, to approximately $2.98 billion excluding financing costs. The revised estimate reflects additional cost pressures resulting from quantity increases and the resulting impact on the scope, productivity and schedule of the IGCC project. Duke Energy Indiana previously proposed to the IURC a cost cap of approximately $2.72 billion, plus the actual AFUDC that accrues on that amount. As a result, Duke Energy Indiana recorded a pre-tax impairment charge of approximately $222 million in the third quarter of 2011 related to costs expected to be incurred above the cost cap. This charge is in addition to the previous pre-tax impairment charge related to the Edwardsport project discussed above and is recorded in Impairment charges on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. The cost cap, if approved by the IURC, limits the amount of project construction costs that may be incorporated into customer rates in Indiana. As a result of the proposed cost cap, recovery of these cost increases is not considered probable. Additional updates to the cost estimate could occur through the completion of the plant in 2013.

On November 30, 2011, Duke Energy Indiana filed a petition with the IURC in connection with its eighth semi-annual rider request for the Edwardsport IGCC project. Evidentiary hearings for the seventh and eighth semi-annual rider requests were held for August 6, 2012 and August 7, 2012.

Phase I and Phase II hearings concluded on January 24, 2012. The CAC has filed repeated requests for the IURC to consider issues of ethics, undue influence, due process violations and appearance of impropriety. The IURC denied the most recent motion in March 2012.(excluding AFUDC). In April 2012, the CAC filed a motion requesting the IURC to certify questions of law for appeal regarding allegations of fraud on the commission and due process violations. This motion was denied.

On April 30,October 2012, Duke Energy Indiana entered intofurther revised its projected cost estimate to $3.15 billion (excluding AFUDC).

On December 27, 2012, the IURC approved a settlement agreement withfinalized in April 2012, between Duke Energy Indiana, the OUCC,Office of Utility Consumer Counselor (OUCC), the Duke Energy Indiana Industrial Group and Nucor Steel-Indiana, on the cost increase for the construction of the Edwardsport IGCC plant,project including both Phase I and Phase II ofsubdockets before the sub docket. PursuantIURC related to the project. This order resolved all then pending regulatory issues related to the project. The settlement agreement, there would be a cap onas approved, caps costs to be reflected in customer rates ofat $2.595 billion, including estimated financing costsAFUDC through June 30, 2012. Pursuant to the agreement, Duke Energy Indiana would be ableis allowed to recover additional financing costsAFUDC after June 30, 2012 until customer rates are revised, with such recovery decreasing to 85 percent on AFUDC accrued after November 30, 2012, and 85% of financing costs that accrue thereafter.2012. Duke Energy Indiana also agreesagreed not to request a retail electric base rate increase prior to March 2013, with rates in effect no earlier than April 1, 2014.

The IURC modified the settlement agreement is subjectas previously agreed to approval by the IURC. Asparties to (i) require Duke Energy Indiana to credit customers for cost control incentive payments which the IURC found to be unwarranted as a result of the agreement,delays that arose from project cost overruns and (ii) provide that if Duke Energy Indiana

33should recover more than the project costs absorbed by Duke Energy’s shareholders through litigation, any surplus must be returned to the Duke Energy Indiana’s ratepayers. On December 11, 2012, Duke Energy Indiana filed an arbitration action against General Electric Company (General Electric) and Bechtel Corporation (Bechtel) in connection with their work at the Edwardsport IGCC facility. Duke Energy Indiana is seeking damages of not less than $560 million. Duke Energy Indiana cannot predict the outcome of this matter.


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

Over the course of construction of the project, Duke Energy Indiana recorded pre-tax impairment and other charges of approximately $897 million, related to the Edwardsport project including the settlement agreement discussed above. For the three months ended March 31, 2012, Duke Energy Indiana recorded pre-tax charges of $420 million inrelated to the first quarter of 2012. Approximately $400 million isEdwardsport project. These charges were recorded in Operating revenues, Impairment charges and the remaining approximately $20 million is recorded in Operation,Operations, maintenance and other on Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated StatementStatements of Operations and in Duke Energy Indiana’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

The $20 million recorded in Operation, maintenanceJoint Intervenors have appealed the IURC order approving the April 2012 settlement agreement and other related regulatory orders to the Indiana Court of Appeals. No briefing schedule has been set.

The project is attributedscheduled to legal feesbe in commercial operation by mid-2013. Additional updates to the cost estimate and schedule could occur through the completion of the plant.

The costs for the Edwardsport IGCC plant are recovered from retail electric customers via a tracking mechanism, the IGCC Rider. Duke Energy Indiana files information related to the IGCC Rider every six months. In the currently pending tenth semi-annual IGCC rider proceeding, Duke Energy Indiana is requesting recovery associated with the capped construction costs of the project and forecasted operating expenses for the period the plant is expected to be in-service. On April 11, 2013, the OUCC and the Joint Intervenors filed testimony. The OUCC requested additional information concerning the operating expenses, but otherwise did not dispute Duke Energy Indiana’s calculated rider amounts. The Joint Intervenors recommended rate disallowances of financing charges due to the extension of the in-service date calculated at approximately $77 million, which they deemed to be imprudent. Additionally, the Joint Intervenors requested various ratemaking changes, including interest to be paid on the credit to be provided to customers pursuant to the IURC order on the April 2012 Settlement Agreement. Finally, the Joint Intervenors have requested the IURC to open a docket related to the future reliability of the plant. Duke Energy Indiana will be responsible for on behalf of certain intervenors, as well as funding for low income energy assistance, as required by the settlement agreement. These charges arerespond in addition to previous pre-tax impairment charges related to the Edwardsport project as discussed above.

The CAC, Sierra Club Indiana chapter, Save the Valley and Valley Watch, filedrebuttal testimony in opposition to the April 30, 2012 settlement agreement contending the agreement should not be approved,May and that the amount of costs recovered from customers should be less than what the settlement agreement provides, potentially even zero. In addition to reiterating their prior concerns with the Edwardsport IGCC project, the intervenors noted above also contend new settlement terms should be added to mitigate carbon emissions, conditions should be added prior to the plant being declared in-service and the IURC should consider their allegations of undue influence. Duke Energy Indiana, the Industrial Group and the OUCC, filed rebuttal testimony supporting the settlement as reasonable and in the public interest. Anan evidentiary hearing on the settlement agreement concluded on July 19, 2012. Post-hearing briefing has been completed.

On June 8, 2012, Duke Energy Indiana filed a petition with the IURC in connection with its ninth semi-annual rider request for the Edwardsport IGCC project. Evidentiary hearings for the ninth semi-annual rider requests areis scheduled for January 14, 2013 and January 15,June 2013.

On October 30, 2012, Duke Energy Indiana revised its project cost estimate from approximately $2.98 billion, excluding financing costs, to approximately $3.154 billion, excluding financing costs, and revised the projected in-service date from the first quarter of 2013 to the second quarter of 2013. The revised estimate is due primarily to lower than projected revenues from test output and delays due to more extensive testing conditions. As a result, Duke Energy Indiana recorded a pre-tax impairment charge of approximately $180 million in the third quarter of 2012 related to costs expected to be incurred above the cost cap proposed in the settlement agreement filed in April 2012. This amount is in addition to previous pre-tax impairment charges related to the Edwardsport project and is recorded in Impairment charges on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.

Duke Energy is unable to predict the ultimate outcome of the various regulatory proceedings described above. In the event the IURC disallows a portion of the remaining plant costs, including financing costs, or if cost estimates for the plant increase, additional charges to expense, which could be material, could occur.

Phase 2 Environmental Compliance Proceeding. Proceeding

On June 28, 2012, Duke Energy Indiana filed with the IURC a plan for the addition of certain environmental pollution control projects on several of its coal-fired generating units in order to comply with existing and proposed environmental rules and regulations. The plan calls for a combination of selective catalytic reduction systems, dry sorbent injection systems for SO3 mitigation, activated carbon injection systems and/or mercury re-emission chemical injection systems. The capital costs are estimated at $450$395 million (excluding AFUDC). Duke Energy

46


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Indiana also indicated that it preliminarily anticipates the retirement of Wabash River Units 2 through 5 in 2015 and is still evaluating future equipment additions or retirement of Wabash River Unit 6. An evidentiary hearing is scheduled in December 2012, with an order expected in the second quarter of 2013.

Duke Energy Ohio

Capacity Rider Filing. On August 29, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio filed an application with the PUCO for the establishment of a charge, pursuant to Ohio’s state compensation mechanism, for capacity provided consistent with its obligations as a Fixed Resource Requirement (FRR) entity. The application included a request for deferral authority and for a new tariff to implement the charge. The deferral being sought is the difference between its costs and market-based prices for capacity. The requested tariff would implement a charge to be collected via a rider through which such deferred balances will subsequently be recovered. 24 parties moved to intervene. Additionally, the PUCO has issued a procedural schedule that includes deadlines for the submission of comments and testimony leading up to a hearing currently scheduled on April 2, 2013. Duke Energy Ohio has moved to vacate this procedural schedule and to seek a schedule that will enable an opinion and order on its filings by March 1, 2013. On October 4, 2012, various customer groups filed a motion to dismiss the application. On October 19, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio made a filing opposing the motion to dismiss. Under the current procedural schedule, Duke Energy Ohio expects an order in 2013.

2012 Electric Rate Case. On July 9, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio filed an application with the PUCO for an increase in electric distribution rates of approximately $87 million. On average, total electric rates would increase approximately 5.1% under the filing. The rate increase is designed to recover the cost of investments in projects to improve reliability for customers and upgrades to the distribution system. Pursuant to a stipulation in another case, Duke Energy Ohio will continue recovering its costs associated with grid modernization in a separate rider.

Duke Energy Ohio expects revised rates, if approved, to go into effect in the first half of 2013.

2012 Natural Gas Rate Case. On July 9, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio filed an application with the PUCO for an increase in natural gas distribution rates of approximately $45 million. On average, total natural gas rates would increase approximately 6.6% under the filing. The rate increase is designed to recover the cost of upgrades to the distribution system, as well as environmental cleanup of manufactured gas plant sites. In addition to the recovery of costs associated with the manufactured gas plants, the rate request includes a proposal for an accelerated service line replacement program and a new rider to recover the associated incremental cost. The filing also requests that the PUCO renew the rider recovery of Duke Energy Ohio’s accelerated main replacement program and grid modernization program.

Duke Energy Ohio expects revised rates, if approved, to go into effect in the first half of 2013.

Generation Asset Transfer.On April 2, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio and various affiliated entities filed an Application for Authorization for Disposition of Jurisdictional Facilities with FERC. The application seeks to transfer, from Duke Energy Ohio’s rate-regulated Ohio utility company,10, 2013, the legacy coal-fired and combustion gas turbine assets to a non-regulated affiliate, consistent with ESP stipulation approved on November 22, 2011. The application outlines a potential additional step in the reorganization that would result in a transfer of all of Duke Energy Ohio’s Commercial Power business to an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy. The process of determining the optimal corporate structure is an ongoing evaluation of factors, such as tax considerations, that may change between now and the transfer date. In conjunction with the transfer, Duke Energy Ohio’s capital structure will be restructured to reflect appropriate debt and equity ratios for its regulated Franchised Electric and Gas operations. The transfer could instead be accomplished within a wholly owned non-regulated subsidiary of Duke Energy Ohio depending on final tax structuring analysis. On June 22,

34


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

2012, Duke Energy Ohio amended its Application to include several small additional generation units to be transferred. The FERC approved the application on September 5, 2012.

Standard Service Offer (SSO). The PUCO approved Duke Energy Ohio’s current Electric Security Plan (ESP) on November 22, 2011. The ESP effectively separates the generation of electricity from Duke Energy Ohio’s retail load obligation and requires Duke Energy Ohio to transfer its generation assets to a non-regulated affiliate on or before December 31, 2014. The ESP includes competitive auctions for electricity supply whereby the energy price is recovered from retail customers. As a result, Duke Energy Ohio now earns retail margin on the transmission and distribution of electricity only and not on the cost of the underlying energy. New rates for Duke Energy Ohio went into effect for SSO customers on January 1, 2012. The ESP also includes a provision for a non-bypassable stability charge of $110 million per year to be collected from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2014.

On January 18, 2012, the PUCO denied a request for rehearing of its decision on Duke Energy Ohio’s ESP filed by Columbus Southern Power and Ohio Power Company.

Regional Transmission Organization Realignment. Duke Energy Ohio, which includes its wholly owned subsidiary Duke Energy Kentucky, transferred control of its transmission assets to effect a Regional Transmission Organization (RTO) realignment from MISO to PJM, effective December 31, 2011.

On December 16, 2010, the FERCIURC issued an order related to MISO’s cost allocation methodology surrounding Multi-Value Projects (MVP), a type of MISO Transmission Expansion Planning (MTEP) project cost. MISO expects that MVP will fundapproving the costs of large transmission projects designed to bring renewable generation from the upper Midwest to load centers in the eastern portion of the MISO footprint. MISO approved MVP proposals with estimated project costs of approximately $5.2 billion prior to the date of Duke Energy Ohio’s exit from MISO on December 31, 2011. These projects are expected to be undertaken by the constructing transmission owners from 2012 through 2020 with costs recovered through MISO over the useful life of the projects. The FERC order did not clearly and expressly approve MISO’s apparent interpretation that a withdrawing transmission owner is obligated to pay its share of costs of all MVP projects approved by MISO up to the date of the withdrawing transmission owners’ exit from MISO. Duke Energy Ohio, has historically represented approximately five-percent of the MISO system. The impact of this order is not fully known, but could result in a substantial increase in MISO transmission expansion costs allocated to Duke Energy Ohio subsequent to a withdrawal from MISO. Duke Energy Ohio, among other parties, sought rehearing of the FERC MVP order. On October 21, 2011, the FERC issued an order on rehearing in this matter largely affirming its original MVP order and conditionally accepting MISO’s compliance filing as well as determining that the MVP allocation methodology is consistent with cost causation principles and FERC precedent. The FERC also reiterated that it will not prejudge any settlement agreement between an RTO and a withdrawing transmission owner for fees that a withdrawing transmission owner owes to the RTO. The order further states that any such fees that a withdrawing transmission owner owes to an RTO are a matter for those parties to negotiate, subject to review by the FERC. The FERC also ruled that Duke Energy Ohio’s challenge of MISO’s ability to allocate MVP costs to a withdrawing transmission owner is beyond the scope of the proceeding. The order further stated that MISO’s tariff withdrawal language establishes that once cost responsibility for transmission upgrades is determined, withdrawing transmission owners retain any costs incurred prior to the withdrawal date. In order to preserve its rights, Duke Energy Ohio filed an appeal of the FERC order in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The case was consolidated with appeals of the FERC order by other parties in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

On October 14, 2011, Duke Energy Ohio filed an application with the FERC to establish new wholesale customer rates for transmission service under PJM’s Open Access Transmission Tariff. In this filing, Duke Energy Ohio sought recovery of its legacy MTEP costs, including MVP costs, and submitted an analysis showing that the benefits of the RTO realignment outweigh the costs to the customers. The new rates went into effect, subject to refund, on January 1, 2012. Protests were filed by certain transmission customers. On April 24, 2012, FERC issued an order in which it, among other things, denied recovery of legacy MTEP costs without prejudice to the right of Duke Energy Ohio to make another filing including a more comprehensive cost-benefit analysis to support such recovery. Settlement discussions are underway with the relevant intervening parties that address matters raised in the initial October 14, 2011 filing.

On December 29, 2011, MISO filed with FERC a Schedule 39 to MISO’s tariff. Schedule 39 provides for the allocation of MVP costs to a withdrawing owner based on the owner’s actual transmission load after the owner’s withdrawal from MISO, or, if the owner fails to report such load, based on the owner’s historical usage in MISO assuming annual load growth. On January 19, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio filed with FERC a protest of the allocation of MVP costs to them under Schedule 39. On February 27, 2012, the FERC accepted Schedule 39 as a just and reasonable basis for MISO to charge for MVP costs, a transmission owner that withdraws from MISO after January 1, 2012. The FERC set for hearing whether MISO’s proposal to use the methodology in Schedule 39 to calculate the obligation of transmission owners who withdrew from MISO prior to January 1, 2012 (such as Duke Energy Ohio) to pay for MVP costs is consistent with the MVP-related withdrawal obligations in the tariff at the time that they withdrew from MISO, and, if not, what amount of, and methodology for calculating, any MVP cost responsibility should be. On March 28, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio filed a request for rehearing of FERC’s order on MISO’s Schedule 39. This hearing has been scheduled for April 2013.

On December 31, 2011, Duke Energy Ohio recorded a liability for its MISO exit obligation and share of MTEP costs, excluding MVP, of approximately $110 million. This liability was recorded within Other in Current liabilities and Other in Deferred credits and other liabilities on Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets upon exit from MISO on December 31, 2011. Approximately $74 million of this amount was recorded as a regulatory asset while $36 million was recorded to Operation, maintenance and other in Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. In addition to the above amounts, Duke Energy Ohio may also be responsible for costs associated with MISO MVP projects. Duke Energy Ohio is contesting its obligation to pay for such costs. However, depending on the final outcome of this matter, Duke Energy Ohio could incur material costs associated with MVP projects, which are not reasonably estimable at this time. Regulatory accounting treatment will be pursued for any costs incurred in connection with the resolution of this matter.

The following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balance of Duke Energy Ohio’s recorded obligations related to its withdrawal from MISO:

  

  

  

Balance at

  

Provision /

  

Cash

  

Balance at

(in millions)

  

December 31, 2011

  

Adjustments

  

Reductions

  

September 30, 2012

Duke Energy Ohio

  

$

 110 

  

$

 3 

  

$

 (18) 

  

$

 95 

              

35


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.plan.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

Other Regulatory MattersOTHER REGULATORY MATTERS

Progress Energy Merger NCUC and North Carolina Department of Justice (NCDOJ) Investigations.FERC Mitigation

On July 6,June 8, 2012, the NCUC issued an order initiating investigationFERC conditionally approved the Progress Energy merger including Duke Energy and scheduling hearings addressingProgress Energy’s revised market power mitigation plan, the timingJoint Dispatch Agreement (JDA) and the joint Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT). The revised market power mitigation plan provides for the acceleration of one transmission project and the construction of seven other transmission projects (Long-term FERC Mitigation) and interim firm power sale agreements during the construction of the transmission projects (Interim FERC Mitigation). The Long-term FERC Mitigation is expected to increase power imported into the Duke Energy board of directors’ decision on July 2, 2012, to replace William D. Johnson with James E. Rogers as PresidentCarolinas and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Duke Energy as well as other related matters.Progress’ service areas and enhance competitive power supply options in the service areas. The construction of these projects will occur over the next two to three years. In conjunction with the Interim FERC Mitigation, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress entered into power sale agreements with various counterparties that were effective with the consummation of the merger. These agreements, or similar power sale agreements, will be in place until the Long-term FERC Mitigation is operational. Under the agreements Duke Energy will deliver around-the-clock power during the winter and summer in quantities that vary by season and by peak period.

PursuantThe FERC order requires an independent party to monitor whether the power sale agreements remain in effect during construction of the transmission projects and provide quarterly reports to the merger agreement, William D. Johnson, Chairman, President and CEOFERC regarding the status of Progress Energy became President and CEOconstruction of the transmission projects.

On June 25, 2012, Duke Energy and James E. Rogers, Chairman, President and CEO of DukeProgress Energy became Executive Chairman of Duke Energy upon close ofaccepted the merger. Mr. Johnson subsequently resigned asconditions imposed by the President and CEO of Duke Energy, effective July 3, 2012 and Mr. Rogers was appointed to be CEO.FERC.

Pursuant to the NCUC’s July 6, 2012 order, Mr. Rogers appeared before the NCUC onOn July 10, 2012, and provided testimony regardingcertain intervenors requested a rehearing seeking to overturn the approval and closing of the merger and his replacement of Mr. Johnson as the President and CEO of Duke Energy. On July 19,June 8, 2012 Mr. Johnson, as well as E. Marie McKee and James B. Hyler, Jr., both former members of the Progress Energy board of directors and current members of the post-merger Duke Energy board of directors, appeared before the NCUC. Ann M. Gray and Michael G. Browning, both members of the pre-merger and post-merger Duke Energy board of directors, appeared before the NCUC on July 20, 2012. All provided testimony on the timing of the decision to replace Mr. Johnson with Mr. Rogers, as well as other related matters.

The NCUC’s order also requests that Duke Energy provide certain documents related to the issue for its review.Duke Energy also received an Investigative Demand issued by the NCDOJ on July 6, 2012, requesting the production of certain documents related to the issues which are also the subject of the NCUC Investigation. Duke Energy’s responses to these requests were submitted on August 7, 2012.FERC. On August 1,8, 2012, the NCUC engaged the law firm of Jenner & Block to conduct an investigation of these matters.  That investigation is underway and to date has involved the production of more documents to the NCUC and a series of informal interviews by Jenner & Block of a number of persons with knowledge of these matters, including executive officers of Duke Energy.  This process is ongoing and will also involve interviews of the members of the legacy Duke Energy Board of Directors. FERC granted rehearing for further consideration.

Duke Energy has also been contacted by the SEC to explain the circumstances surrounding the NCUC Investigation and shareholder lawsuits in connection withFollowing the closing of the merger, with Progress Energy.  A meeting was held withDuke Energy’s outside counsel reviewed Duke Energy’s mitigation plan and discovered a technical error in the SEC staff in late October.calculations. Duke Energy intendsreported the error to continuethe appropriate regulatory bodies and is working to assist the SEC staff, as they request.

determine whether additional mitigation measures are necessary. At this time, Duke Energy is unable tocannot predict the ultimate outcome of these proceedings.this matter.

Joint Dispatch Agreement (JDA). On June 29, 2012,Planned and July 2, 2012, the NCUC and the PSCSC, respectively, approved the JDA between Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas. The JDA provides for joint dispatch of the generating facilities of both Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas for the purpose of reducing the cost of serving the native loads of both companies. As set forth in the JDA, Duke Energy Carolinas will act as the joint dispatcher, on behalf of both Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas. As joint dispatcher, Duke Energy Carolinas will direct the dispatch of both Duke Energy Carolinas’ and Progress Energy Carolinas’ power supply resources, determine payments between the parties for the purchase and sale of energy between Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas as a result of the JDA, and calculate and allocate the fuel cost savings to the parties as a result of the JDA.

Potential Coal Plant Retirements.Retirements

The Subsidiary Registrants periodically file Integrated Resource Plans (IRP) with their state regulatory commissions. The IRPs provide a view of forecasted energy needs over a long term (15-20(10-20 years), and options being considered to meet those needs. The IRP’s filed by the Subsidiary Registrants in 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 included planning assumptions to potentially retire by 2015, certain coal-fired generating facilities in North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Indiana and Ohio that do not have the requisite emission control equipment, primarily to meet Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations that are not yet effective. Additionally, management is considering the impact pending environmental regulations might have on certain coal-fired generating facilities in Florida.

47

The Duke Energy Registrants classify generating facilities that are still operating but are expected


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to be retired significantly before the end of their previously estimated useful lives as Generation facilities to be retired, net, on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Amounts are reclassified from the cost and accumulated depreciation of Property, plant and equipment when it becomes probable the plant will be retired. Duke Energy continues to depreciate these generating facilities based on current depreciable lives. When such facilities are removed from service, the remaining net carrying value, if any, is then reclassified to regulatory assets, in accordance with the expected ratemaking treatment.Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

The table below contains the net carrying value of generating facilities planned for early retirement or being evaluated for potential retirement included in Property, plant and equipment, net on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

36


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited In addition to the amounts presented below, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Indiana have $125 million and $60 million, respectively, of net carrying value related to previously retired generation facilities included in Regulatory assets on their Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)Balance Sheets.

September 30, 2012

Duke Energy

Duke Energy Carolinas(b)(e)

Progress Energy Carolinas(c)(e)

Progress Energy Florida(d)

Duke Energy Ohio(f)

Duke Energy Indiana(g)

Capacity (in MW)

 4,642 

 910 

 1,166 

 873 

 1,025 

 668 

Remaining net book value (in millions)(a)

$

 583 

$

 117 

$

 164 

$

 155 

$

 13 

$

 134 

(a)

Included in Property, plant and equipment, net as of September 30, 2012, on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, unless otherwise noted.

(b)

Includes Riverbend Units 4 through 7, Lee Units 1 and 2 and Buck Units 5 and 6. Duke Energy Carolinas has committed to retire 1,667 MW in conjunction with a Cliffside air permit settlement, of which 587 MW have already been retired as of September 30, 2012. Excludes 170 MW Lee Unit 3 that is expected to be converted to gas in 2014.  The Lee Unit 3 conversion will be considered a retirement towards meeting the 1,667 MW retirement commitment.

(c)

Includes Cape Fear, Robinson and six combustion turbine units, which were retired on October 1, 2012, and Sutton, which is expected to be retired by the end of 2013.

(d)

Includes Crystal River Units 1 and 2.

(e)

Net book value of Duke Energy Carolinas' Buck Units 5 and 6 of $68 million, and Progress Energy Carolinas' Cape Fear, Robinson, Sutton and six combustion turbine units of $164 million is included in Generation facilities to be retired, net, on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at September 30, 2012.

(f)

Includes Beckjord Station and Miami Fort Unit 6. Beckjord has no remaining book value.

(g)

Includes Wabash River Units 2 through 6.

           Duke Energy continues to evaluate the potential need to retire these coal-fired generating facilities earlier than the current estimated useful lives, and plans to seek regulatory recovery for amounts that would not be otherwise recovered when any of these assets are retired. However, such recovery, including recovery of carrying costs on remaining book values, could be subject to future regulatory approvals and therefore cannot be assured.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy

 

 

Duke Energy Carolinas(b)(e)

 

Progress Energy

 

 

Duke Energy Progress(c)(e)

 

Duke Energy Florida(d)

 

Duke Energy Ohio(f)

 

Duke Energy Indiana(g)

Capacity (in MW)

 

 3,954 

 

 

 910 

 

 1,448 

 

 

 575 

 

 873 

 

 928 

 

 668 

Remaining net book value (in millions)(a)

$

 415 

 

$

 98 

$

 175 

 

$

 62 

$

 113 

$

 12 

$

 130 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Property, plant and equipment, net as of March 31, 2013, on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, unless otherwise noted.

(b)

Includes Riverbend Units 4 through 7, Lee Units 1 and 2 and Buck Units 5 and 6. Duke Energy Carolinas has committed to retire 1,667 MW in conjunction with a Cliffside air permit settlement, of which 587 MW have already been retired as of March 31, 2013. Duke Energy Carolinas retired 710 MW for Riverbend Units 4 through 7 and Buck Units 5 and 6 on April 1, 2013. Excludes 170 MW Lee Unit 3 that is expected to be converted to gas in 2014. The Lee Unit 3 conversion will be considered a retirement toward meeting the 1,667 MW retirement commitment.

(c)

Includes Sutton Station, which is expected to be retired by the end of 2013.

(d)

Includes Crystal River Units 1 and 2.

(e)

Net book value of Duke Energy Carolinas' Buck Units 5 and 6 of $68 million, and Duke Energy Progress' Sutton Station of $62 million is included in Generation facilities to be retired, net, on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at March 31, 2013.

(f)

Includes Beckjord Station Units 2 through 6 and Miami Fort Unit 6. Beckjord has no remaining book value. Beckjord Unit 1 was retired May 1, 2012.

(g)

Includes Wabash River Units 2 through 6.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy continues to evaluate the potential need to retire these coal-fired generating facilities earlier than the current estimated useful lives, and plans to seek regulatory recovery for amounts that would not be otherwise recovered when any of these assets are retired. However, such recovery, including recovery of carrying costs on remaining book values, could be subject to future regulatory approvals and therefore cannot be assured.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5. Commitments and ContingenciesCOMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Environmental.ENVIRONMENTAL

Duke Energy is subject to international, federal, state and local regulations regarding air and water quality, hazardous and solid waste disposal and other environmental matters. Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy IndianaThe Subsidiary Registrants are subject to federal, state and local regulations regarding air and water quality, hazardous and solid waste disposal and other environmental matters. These regulations can be changed from time to time, imposing new obligations on the Duke Energy Registrants.

The following environmental matters impact all of the Duke Energy Registrants.

Remediation Activities. Activities

The Duke Energy Registrants are responsible for environmental remediation at various contaminated sites. These include some properties that are part of ongoing operations and sites formerly owned or used by Duke Energy entities. In some cases, the Duke Energy Registrants no longer ownsown the property. These sites are in various stages of investigation, remediation and monitoring. Managed in conjunction with relevant federal, state and local agencies, activities vary with site conditions and locations, remediation requirements, complexity and sharing of responsibility. If remediation activities involve statutory joint and several liability provisions, strict liability, or cost recovery or contribution actions, the Duke Energy Registrants could potentially be held responsible for contamination caused by other parties. In some instances, the Duke Energy Registrants may share liability associated with contamination with other potentially responsible parties, and may also benefit from insurance policies or contractual indemnities that cover some or all cleanup costs. Reserves associated with remediation activities at certain sites have been recorded and it is anticipated that additional costs associated with remediation activities at certain sites will be incurred in the future. All of these sites generally are managed in the normal courseas part of business or affiliate operations. The Duke Energy Registrants continually assess the nature and extent of known or potential environmentally related contingencies and record liabilities when losses become probable and are reasonably estimable. The Duke Energy Registrants have accrued costs associated with remediation activities at some of itstheir current and former sites for the stages of investigation, remediation and monitoring that can be reasonably estimated, as well as other relevant environmental contingent liabilities. Management,At this time, the Duke Energy Registrants cannot estimate the total costs that may be incurred in connection with the remediation of all stages of all sites because the extent of environmental impact, allocation among potentially responsible parties, remediation alternatives, and/or regulatory decisions have not yet been determined. It is anticipated that additional costs, which could be material, associated with remediation activities at certain sites will be incurred in the normal course of business, continually assesses the nature and extent of known or potential environmentally related contingencies and records liabilities when losses become probable and are reasonably estimable.future. Costs associated with remediation activities within the Duke Energy Registrants’ operations are typically expensed as Operation, maintenance and other unless regulatory recovery of the costs is deemed probable.

The following tables containtable contains information regarding reserves for probable and estimable costs related to the Duke Energy’sEnergy Registrants’ various environmental sites. These amounts are recorded in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Duke Energy Registrants’ Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(in millions)  

Balance at December 31, 2011

  

Provisions / Adjustments(b)

Cash Reductions

  

Balance at September 30, 2012

Duke Energy(a)

$

 61 

  

$

 43  

$

 (19) 

  

$

 85 

Duke Energy Carolinas  

  

 12 

  

  

 1  

  

 ― 

  

  

 13 

Duke Energy Ohio(a)

  

 28 

  

  

 10  

  

 (15) 

  

  

 23 

Duke Energy Indiana  

  

 9 

  

  

 2  

  

 (2) 

  

  

 9 

  

   

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)  

Balance at December 31, 2010

  

Provisions / Adjustments  

Cash Reductions

  

Balance at September 30, 2011

Duke Energy(a)

$

 88 

  

$

 5  

$

 (21) 

  

$

 72 

Duke Energy Carolinas  

  

 13 

  

  

 ―  

  

 ― 

  

  

 13 

Duke Energy Ohio(a)

  

 50 

  

  

 3  

  

 (17) 

  

  

 36 

Duke Energy Indiana  

  

 11 

  

  

 1  

  

 (2) 

  

  

 10 

  

   

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Environmental reserves relate primarily to former Manufactured Gas Plants (MGP) and Other Sites.

(b)

Amounts at Duke Energy include $32 million in environmental reserves assumed during the Progress Energy merger.

3748

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

Duke Energy

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy Florida

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

Balance at December 31, 2011

 

$

 61 

 

$

 12 

 

$

 23 

 

$

 11 

 

$

 12 

 

$

 28 

 

$

 9 

Provisions / adjustments

 

 

 4 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 6 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

Cash reductions

 

 

 (7) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (4) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 (3) 

 

 

 (5) 

 

 

 ― 

Balance at March 31, 2012

 

$

 58 

 

$

 13 

 

$

 24 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 15 

 

$

 25 

 

$

 9 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

 

$

 75 

 

$

 12 

 

$

 33 

 

$

 14 

 

$

 19 

 

$

 15 

 

$

 8 

Provisions / adjustments

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

Cash reductions

 

 

 (6) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (1) 

Balance at March 31, 2013

 

$

 71 

 

$

 12 

 

$

 32 

 

$

 13 

 

$

 19 

 

$

 13 

 

$

 7 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Duke Energy Registrants could incur additional losses in excess of their recorded reserves for the stages of investigation, remediation and monitoring for their environmental sites that can be reasonably estimated at this time. The maximum amount of the range for all stages of the Duke Energy Registrants’ environmental sites cannot be determined at this time. Actual experience may differ from current estimates, and it is probable that estimates will continue to change in the future.

Duke Energy Ohio has received an order from the PUCO to defer the costs incurred for probable and estimable costs related to environmental sites. Recovery of those costs is being sought in Duke Energy Ohio’s natural gas distribution rate case as noteddiscussed in Note 4.

The additional losses in excess of their recorded reserves that the Duke Energy Registrants’ could incur for the stages of investigation, remediation and monitoring for their environmental sites that can be reasonably estimated at this time are presented in the above table. The PUCO will rule on the recovery of these costs at a future proceeding.table below.

Management believes it is probable that additional liabilities will be incurred as work progresses at Duke Energy Ohio and Progress Energy Florida MGP sites; however, costs associated with future remediation cannot currently be reasonably estimated.

(in millions)

Duke Energy

$

 84 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 29 

Progress Energy

 7 

Duke Energy Progress

 3 

Duke Energy Florida

 4 

Duke Energy Ohio

 43 

Duke Energy Indiana

 5 

Clean Water Act 316(b).

The EPA published its proposed cooling water intake structures rule on April 20, 2011. The proposed rule advances one main approach and three alternatives. The main approach establishes aquatic protection requirements for existing facilities and new on-site facility additions that withdraw 2 million gallons or more of water per day from rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, estuaries, oceans, or other U.S. waters for cooling purposes. Based on the main approach proposed, most, if not all of the coal, natural gas and nuclear-fueled steam electric generating facilities in which the Duke Energy Registrants are either a whole or partial owner are likely affected sources unless retired prior to implementation of the 316(b) requirements.

The EPA recently modified a previous settlement agreement that now calls for the EPAplans to finalize the 316(b) rule by June 2013. Compliance with portions ofIf the rule is finalized as proposed, initial submittals, station details or study plans would be due in the spring of 2014. If required, modifications to the intakes could beginbe required as early as mid to late 2016. Because of the wide range of potential outcomes, including the other three alternative proposals, the Duke Energy Registrants are unable to predict the outcome of the rulemaking or estimate itstheir costs to comply at this time.

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR).

On August 8, 2011, the final Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) was published in the Federal Register. The CSAPR established state-level annual SOsulfur dioxide (SO2) budgets and NOannual seasonal nitrogen oxide (NOx) budgets that were to take effect on January 1, 2012, and state-level ozone-season NOx budgets that were to take effect on May 1, 2012, allocating emission allowances to affected sources in each state equal to the state budget less an allowance set-aside for new sources. The budget levels were set to decline in 2014 for many states, including each state that the Duke Energy Registrants operate in, except for South Carolina and Florida where the applicable budgets were to remain constant. The rule allowed both intrastate and limited interstate allowance trading.2012.

Numerous petitions for review ofparties challenged the CSAPR were filed withrule. On August 21, 2012, by a 2-1 decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit or The Court). On August 21, 2012, by a 2-1 decision, the D.C CircuitCircuit) vacated the CSAPR. The Courtcourt also directed the EPA to continue administering the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) that the Duke Energy Registrants have been complying with since 2009, pending completion of a remand rulemaking to replace CSAPR with a valid rule. The CAIR requires additional Phase II reductions in SO2 and NOx emissions beginning in 2015. The court’s decision to vacateEPA petitioned for rehearing by the CSAPR leavesCourt of Appeals, which was denied. On March 29, 2013, the futureEPA petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for review of the rule uncertain.D.C. Circuit’s decision. The EPA has filed a petition with the D.C. Circuit for en banc rehearing of the CSAPR decision. If the court’s August 21, 2012 decision is upheld, the CAIR will remain in force for an unknown period of time until the EPA develops a replacement rule. Ifrule or the decisionCSAPR is overturned on rehearing, it is not known when EPA would move to implement the CSAPR.reinstated.

The Duke Energy Registrants cannot predict the outcome of the rehearing processany further appeal or how ita potential CSAPR replacement rule could affect future emission reduction requirements that might apply to the Duke Energy Registrants as a result of a potential CSAPR replacement rulemaking.requirements. The continued implementation of the CAIR pending the outcome of the rehearing process and a potential CSAPR replacement rulemaking including the potential implementation of CAIR Phase II in 2015, will not result in the Duke Energy Registrants adding new emission controls.

49


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR).

On June 21, 2010, the EPA issued a proposal to regulate, under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, coal combustion residuals (CCR), a term the EPA uses to describe the CCPscoal combustion by-products associated with the generation of electricity. The EPA proposal contains two regulatory options whereby CCRs not employed in approved beneficial use applications either would either be regulated as hazardous waste or would continue to be regulated as non-hazardous waste. The Duke Energy Registrants cannot predict the outcome of this rulemaking. However, based onThe EPA has stated that it may be 2014 before it finalizes the proposal, the cost of complying with the final regulation will be material. In response to a motion filed in federal court by environmental groups asking the court to compelregulation.

Steam Electric Effluent Limitation Guidelines

On April 19, 2013, the EPA Acting Administrator signed the proposed revisions to issuethe Steam Electric Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELG). The proposal is expected to be published in the Federal Register in early May 2013 with comments due in July 2013. The EPA is under a court order to complete a final rule by May 22, 2014. The EPA has proposed eight different options for the EPA filedrule, which vary in stringency and cost. The proposal would regulate seven waste streams, including wastewater from air pollution control equipment and ash transport water from sluicing ash to ponds. The ELG proposed rule would be applicable to all steam electric generating units, including most, if not all of the coal, natural gas and nuclear-fueled generating facilities which the Duke Energy Registrants are either a declaration on October 11, 2012, suggesting that itwhole or partial owner. Compliance is proposed as soon as possible after July 1, 2017, but may extend until July 1, 2022. Duke Energy is still evaluating the proposal. Given the number of options and the long compliance term, the Duke Energy Registrants are unable to determine the ultimate impact of the final rule, but the impact could take more than a year to complete the regulation.be significant.

Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS).

The final Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule, (previouslypreviously referred to as the Utility MACT Rule)Rule, was published in the Federal Register on February 16, 2012. The final rule establishes emission limits for hazardous air pollutants from new and existing coal-fired and oil-fired steam electric generating units. The rule requires sources to comply with the emission limits by April 16, 2015. Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), permitting authorities have the discretion to grant up to a 1-yearone-year compliance extension, on a case-by-case basis, to sources that are unable to complete the installation of emission controls before the compliance deadline. The Duke Energy Registrants continue to evaluate the requirements of the ruledevelop and developimplement strategies for complying with the rule’s requirements. Strategies to achieve compliance with the final MATS rules are likely tocould include installing new or upgrading existing air emission control equipment, developing monitoring processes, fuel switching and accelerating retirement of some coal-fired electric-generating units. For additional information, refer to Note 4 Regulatory Matters, regarding potential plant retirements.

Numerous petitions for review of the final MATS rule have been filed with the United States Court of Appeals forD.C. Circuit. Briefing in the District of Columbia. The court established a schedule for the litigation thatcase has final briefs being filed on April 8, 2013.been completed. Oral arguments have not been scheduled. The Duke Energy Registrants cannot predict the outcome of the litigation or how it might affect the MATS requirements as they apply to the Duke Energy Registrants.

As finalized, Refer to the table in “Estimated Cost and Impacts of EPA Rulemakings” below for a summary of the cost to the Duke Energy Registrants to comply with the regulationproposed MATS regulations, which will be material.

EPA Greenhouse Gas New Source Performance Standards (NSPS).

On April 13, 2012, the EPA published in the Federal Register its proposed rule to establish carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions standards for pulverized coal, IGCC, and natural gas combined cycle electric generating units that are permitted and constructed in the future. The proposal would not apply to any of the Duke Energy Registrants’ coal, (which includes IGCC)including IGCC, and natural gas electric generation plants that are currently under construction or in operation. AnyHowever, any future pulverized coal and IGCC units will have to employ

38


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology to meet the CO2 emission standard the EPA has proposed. The proposed standard will not require new natural gas combined cycle facilities to install CCS technology. The EPA was due to issue the final rule by April 13, 2013, however, the final rule has not been issued and the EPA has stated publicly that more time is needed to complete the rulemaking. No timetable has been set.

Management does not expect any material impact on the Duke Energy Registrants’ future results of operations or cash flows based on the EPA’s proposal. The final rule, however, could be significantly different from the proposal. It is not known when the EPA might finalize the rule.

Estimated Cost and Impacts of EPA Rulemakings.

While the ultimate compliance requirements for the Duke Energy Registrants for MATS, Clean Water Act 316(b), ELG and CCRsCCR will not be known until all the rules have been finalized, for planning purposes, the Duke Energy Registrants currently estimate that the cost of new control equipment that may need to be installed on existing power plants to comply with this group of rulesEPA regulations could total $6$5 billion to $7$6 billion, excluding AFUDC, over the next 10 years. This range includes estimated costs for new control equipment necessary to comply with the MATS, which is the only rule that has been finalized, as shown in the table below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy

$

 650 

 

to

$

 800 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

 65 

 

to

 

 85 

Progress Energy

 

 7 

 

to

 

 30 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 5 

 

to

 

 10 

Duke Energy Florida

 

 2 

 

to

 

 20 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 40 

 

to

 

 85 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 540 

 

to

 

 600 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Duke Energy Registrants also expect to incur increased fuel, purchased power, operation and maintenance, and other expenses in conjunction with these EPA regulations, and also expect to incur costs for replacement generation for potential coal-fired power plant

50


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

retirements. Until the final regulatory requirements of the group of EPA regulations are known and can be fully evaluated, the potential compliance costs associated with these EPA regulatory actions are subject to considerable uncertainty. Therefore, the actual compliance costs incurred may be materially different from these estimates based on the timing and requirements of the final EPA regulations.

The Duke Energy Registrants intend to seek regulatory recovery of amounts incurred associated with regulated operations in complying with these regulations. Refer to Note 4 for further information regarding potential plant retirements and regulatory filings related to the Duke Energy Registrants.

Litigation.LITIGATION

Duke Energy

Progress Energy Merger Shareholder Litigation. Litigation

On July 20, 2012, Duke Energy was served with a shareholder Derivative Complaint filed in the Delaware Chancery Court (Rupp v. Rogers, et al.). The lawsuit names as defendants JimJames E. Rogers and the ten other members of the Duke Energy board of directors who were also members of the pre-merger Duke Energy board of directors (Legacy Duke Energy Directors). Duke Energy is named as a nominal defendant. Raul v. Rogers, also filed in Delaware Chancery Court was consolidated with the Rupp case on September 24, 2012. Two shareholders, each of whom previously made separate Section 220 demands to inspect various Duke Energy books and records, filed derivative cases against James E. Rogers and the Legacy Duke Energy Directors. The Gerber v Rogers, et al. lawsuit was filed on December 5, 2012, and the Reilly v. Rogers, et al. lawsuit was filed on January 8, 2013. Each of the lawsuits alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duties of loyalty and care by the defendants in connection with the post-merger change in CEO, as discussed in Note 4.CEO.

On August 3, 2012, Duke Energy was served with a shareholder Derivative Complaint, which has been transferred to the North Carolina Business Court (Krieger v. Johnson, et al.). The lawsuit names as defendants, William D. Johnson, James E. Rogers and the Legacy Duke Energy Directors. Duke Energy is named as a nominal defendant. The lawsuit alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duty in granting excessive compensation to Mr. Johnson. A hearing on the defendants’ motion to dismiss was held on January 22, 2013. A decision on the motion made by Mr. Rogers and the Legacy Duke Energy Directors remains pending.

Duke Energy has been served with two cases shareholder Derivative Complaints, filed in federal district court in Delaware. The plaintiffs in Tansey v. Rogers, et al., served on August 17, 2012, and Pinchuck v. Rogers, et al., served on October 31, 2012, allege claims offor breach of fiduciary duty and waste of corporate assets.  The plaintiffs in Pinchuck v.  Rogers, et al., served on October 31, 2012, also allegesassets, as well as claims for breachunder Section 14(a) and 20(a) of fiduciary duty. Thethe Exchange Act against the Legacy Duke Energy Directors areDirectors. Duke Energy is named as a nominal defendant. On December 18, 2012, the defendants in bothfiled a motion to stay the case. A hearing on the various motions to (i) stay the litigation pending a resolution of these cases.the North Carolina securities case noted below; (ii) to appoint a lead plaintiff and a lead law firm; and (iii) to consolidate the two cases was held on May 2, 2013.

Duke Energy was also served in July 2012 with three purported securities class action lawsuits. These three cases (Craig v. Duke Energy Corporation, et al.; Nieman v. Duke Energy Corporation, et al.al.; and Sunner v. Duke Energy Corporation, et al.)al.), have been consolidated in the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. The cases are purportedly broughtplaintiff filed a Corrected Consolidated Complaint on behalf of classes of various persons who purchased stock of Duke EnergyJanuary 28, 2013, alleging federal Securities Act and Progress EnergyExchange Act claims based on allegedly materially false and namemisleading representations and omissions made in the Registration Statement filed on July 7, 2011, and subsequently incorporated into other documents, all in connection with the post-merger change in CEO. The Corrected Consolidated Complaint names as defendants the Legacy Duke Energy Directors and certain officers of the company. The claims are purportedly brought on behalf of a class of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired Duke Energy securities between June 11, 2012 and July 9, 2012. The Defendant’s motion to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint was filed April 2, 2013.

It is not possible to predict whether Duke Energy will incur any liability or to estimate the damages, if any, that Duke Energy might incur in connection with these lawsuits. Additional lawsuits may be filed.

Spent Nuclear Fuel Matters. Pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Progress Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Florida entered into contracts with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under which the DOE agreed to begin taking spent nuclear fuel by no later than January 31, 1998. All similarly situated utilities were required to sign the same Standard Contract for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel.

The DOE failed to begin taking spent nuclear fuel by January 31, 1998. In January 2004, Progress Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Florida filed a complaint in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims against the DOE, claiming that the DOE breached the standard contract and asserting damages incurred through 2005. In 2011, the judge in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a ruling to award Progress Energy Carolinas substantially all their asserted damages. As a result, Progress Energy Carolinas recorded the award in 2011 as an offset for past spent fuel storage costs incurred.

On December 12, 2011, Progress Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Florida filed another complaint in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims against the DOE, claiming damages incurred from January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2010. The damages stem from the same breach of contract asserted in the previous litigation. On March 23, 2012, Progress Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Florida filed its initial disclosure of $113 million of damages with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and the DOE. The next status conference to discuss trial dates is scheduled for May 10, 2013. Progress Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Florida may file subsequent damage claims as they incur additional costs. The next status conference to discuss trial dates is scheduled for January 10, 2013. Duke Energy cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

Synthetic Fuels Matters. In October 2009, a jury delivered a verdict in a lawsuit against Progress Energy and a number of its subsidiaries and affiliates arising out of an Asset Purchase Agreement dated as of October 19, 1999, and amended as of August 23, 2000 (the Asset Purchase Agreement) by and among U.S. Global, LLC (Global); Earthco synthetic fuels facilities (Earthco); certain affiliates of Earthco; EFC Synfuel LLC (which was owned indirectly by Progress Energy) and certain of its affiliates, including Solid Energy LLC; Solid Fuel LLC; Ceredo Synfuel LLC; Gulf Coast Synfuel LLC (renamed Sandy River Synfuel LLC) (collectively, the Progress Affiliates), as amended by an amendment to the Asset Purchase Agreement. In a case filed in the Circuit Court for Broward County, Fla., in March 2003 (the Florida Global Case), Global requested an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, as well as declaratory relief. Global asserted (i) that pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement, it was entitled to an interest in two synthetic fuels facilities previously owned by the Progress Affiliates and an option to purchase additional interests in the two synthetic fuels facilities and (ii) that it was entitled to damages because the Progress Affiliates prohibited it from procuring purchasers for the synthetic fuels facilities. As a result of the 2007 expiration of the Internal Revenue Code Section 29 tax credit program, all of Progress Energy’s synthetic fuels businesses were abandoned and the synthetic fuels businesses were reclassified as discontinued operations.

39


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

The jury awarded Global $78 million. In November 2009, the court assessed $55 million in prejudgment interest and entered judgment in favor of Global in a total amount of $133 million. In December 2009, Progress Energy appealed the Broward County judgment to the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeals. Also, in December 2009, Progress Energy made a $154 million payment, which represented payment of the total judgment and a required premium equivalent to two years of interest at the then statutory rate, to the Broward County Clerk of Court bond account. The appellate briefing process has been completed. Oral argument on the appeal was held on September 27, 2011. On October 3, 2012, the Florida appellate court reversed the trial court ruling and directed a verdict on damages. The case was remanded to the trial court to determine whether specific performance is an appropriate remedy. On October 18, 1012, Global filed a Motion for Clarification and Rehearing of Panel Decision which has yet to be ruled upon. On November 1, 2012, Progress Energy filed a response in opposition to U.S. Global’s motion. Duke Energy cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

In a second suit filed in the Superior Court for Wake County, N.C., Progress Synfuel Holdings, Inc. et al. v. U.S. Global, LLC (the North Carolina Global Case), the Progress Affiliates seek declaratory relief consistent with their interpretation of the Asset Purchase Agreement. Global was served with the North Carolina Global Case on April 17, 2003. In May 2003, Global moved to dismiss the North Carolina Global Case for lack of personal jurisdiction over Global. In the alternative, Global requested that the court decline to exercise its discretion to hear the Progress Affiliates’ declaratory judgment action. In August 2003, the Wake County Superior Court denied Global’s motion to dismiss, but stayed the North Carolina Global Case, pending the outcome of the Florida Global Case. The Progress Affiliates appealed the superior court’s order staying the case. By order dated September 7, 2004, the North Carolina Court of Appeals dismissed the Progress Affiliates’ appeal. Based upon the outcome of the Florida Global Case, Duke Energy anticipates dismissal of the North Carolina Global Case.

Alaskan Global Warming Lawsuit. Lawsuit

On February 26, 2008, plaintiffs, the governing bodies of an Inupiat village in Alaska, filed suit in the U.S. Federal Court for the Northern District of California against Peabody Coal and various oil and power company defendants, including Duke Energy and certain of its subsidiaries. Plaintiffs brought the action on their own behalf and on behalf of the village’s 400 residents. The lawsuit alleges that defendants’ emissions of CO2 contributed to global warming and constitute a private and public nuisance. Plaintiffs also allege that certain defendants, including Duke Energy, conspired to mislead the public with respect to global warming. The plaintiffs in the case have requested damages in the range of $95 million to $400 million related to the cost of relocating the Village of Kivalina. On June 30, 2008, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds, together with a motion to dismiss the conspiracy claims. On October 15, 2009, the District Court granted defendantsdefendants’ motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Court of Appeals) held argument in the case on November 28, 2011. On September 21, 2012, the Court of Appeals ruled that the case could not proceed, affirming the District Court’s motion to dismiss. The Plaintiffs have filed a motion for rehearing en banc by the Court of Appeals.Appeals, which was denied on November 27, 2012. A Petition for Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court was filed on February 25, 2013. Although Duke Energy believes the likelihood of loss is remote based on current case law, it is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome of this matter.

Price Reporting Cases. Cases

A total of five lawsuits were filed against Duke Energy affiliates and other energy companies and remain pending in a consolidated, single federal court proceeding in Nevada.

Each of these cases contains similar claims, that the respective plaintiffs, and the classes they claim to represent, were harmed by the defendants’ alleged manipulation of the natural gas markets by various means, including providing false information to natural gas trade

51


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

publications and entering into unlawful arrangements and agreements in violation of the antitrust laws of the respective states. Plaintiffs seek damages in unspecified amounts.

In November 2009, the judge granted defendants’ motion for reconsideration of the denial of defendants’ summary judgment motion in two of the remaining five cases to which Duke Energy affiliates are a party. A hearing on that motion occurred on July 15, 2011, and on July 19, 2011, the judge granted the motion for summary judgment. The Plaintiffs have filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals), which held argument on October 19, 2012.

EachOn April 10, 2013, the Ninth Circuit Court of these cases contains similar claims, thatAppeals reversed the respective plaintiffs,lower Court’s decision, and returned the classes they claimcase to represent, were harmed by the defendants’ alleged manipulation of the natural gas markets by various means, including providing false information to natural gas trade publications and entering into unlawful arrangements and agreements in violation of the antitrust laws of the respective states. Plaintiffs seek damages in unspecified amounts. same Court for further proceedings.

It is not possible to predict whether Duke Energy will incur any liability or to estimate the damages, if any, that Duke Energy might incur in connection with the remaining matters. However, based on Duke Energy’s past experiences with similar cases of this nature, it does not believe its exposure under these remaining matters is material.

Crescent Litigation

On September 3, 2010, the Crescent Resources Litigation Trust filed suit against Duke Energy International Paranapanema Lawsuit. On July 16, 2008,along with various affiliates and several individuals, including current and former employees of Duke Energy, International Geracao Paranapanema S.A. (DEIGP) filed a lawsuit in the Brazilian federal court challenging transmission fee assessments imposed under two new resolutions promulgated byU.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Brazilian Electricity Regulatory Agency (ANEEL) (collectively,Western District of Texas. The case was subsequently transferred to the Resolutions).United States District Court in Austin, Texas. The Resolutions purportCrescent Resources Litigation Trust was established in May 2010 pursuant to impose additional transmission fees (retroactive to July 1, 2004 and effective through June 30, 2009) on generation companies locatedthe plan of reorganization approved in the State of São Paulo for utilization ofCrescent bankruptcy proceedings. The complaint alleges that in 2006 the electric transmission system. The new charges are based upon a flat-fee that failsdefendants caused Crescent to take into account the locational usage by each generator. DEIGP’s additional assessment under these Resolutions amounts toborrow approximately $60 million, inclusive of interest, through September 2012. Based on DEIGP’s continuing refusal to tender payment of the disputed sums, on April 1, 2009, ANEEL imposed an additional fine against DEIGP in the current amount of $10 million. DEIGP filed a request to enjoin payment of the fine$1.2 billion and for an expedited decision on the merits or, alternatively, an order requiring that all disputed sums be deposited in the court’s registry in lieu of direct payment to the distribution companies.

On June 30, 2009, the court issued a ruling in which it granted DEIGP’s request for injunction regarding the additional fine, but denied DEIGP’s request for an expedited decision on the original assessment or payment into the court registry. Under the court’s order, DEIGP was required to make installment payments on the original assessment directly to the distribution companies pending resolution on the merits. DEIGP filed an appeal and on August 28, 2009, the order was modified to allow DEIGP to deposit the disputed portion of each installment, which wasimmediately thereafter distribute most of the assessed amount, intoloan proceeds to Crescent’s parent company without benefit to Crescent. The complaint further alleges that Crescent was rendered insolvent by the transactions, and that the distribution is subject to recovery by the Crescent bankruptcy estate as an escrow account pendingalleged fraudulent transfer. The plaintiff requests return of the funds, plus interest, as well as other statutory and equitable relief, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees. Duke Energy and its affiliated defendants believe that the referenced 2006 transactions were legitimate and did not violate any state or federal law. The Defendants motions to dismiss were denied. The Defendants also filed a motion to strike the Plaintiff’s jury demand, which was denied on May 2, 2013.

Trial on this matter has been set to commence in January 2014. Mediation, held on August 21 and 22, 2012, was unsuccessful. It is not possible to predict whether Duke Energy will incur any liability or to estimate the damages, if any, that Duke Energy might incur in connection with this lawsuit. The ultimate resolution of this matter could have a material effect on the merits. In the second quarterresults of 2009,operations, cash flows or financial position of Duke Energy recorded a pre-tax charge of $33 million associated with this matter.Energy.

Brazil Expansion Lawsuit. Lawsuit

On August 9, 2011, the State of São Paulo filed a lawsuit in Brazilian state court against DEIGPDuke Energy International Geracao Paranapenema S.A. (DEIGP) based upon a claim that DEIGP is under a continuing obligation to expand installed generation capacity in the State of São Paulo by 15%15 percent pursuant to a stock purchase agreement under which DEIGP purchased generation assets from the state. On August 10, 2011, a judge granted an ex parte injunction ordering DEIGP to present a detailed expansion plan in satisfaction of the 15%15 percent obligation. DEIGP has previously taken a position that the 15%15 percent expansion obligation is no longer viable given the changes that have occurred in the electric energy sector since privatization of that sector. After filing various objections, defenses and appeals regarding the referenced order, DEIGP submitted its proposed expansion plan on November 11, 2011, but reserved its objections regarding enforceability. The parties will in due course present evidence to the court regarding their respective positions. No trial date has been set.

Crescent Litigation. On September 3, 2010, the Crescent Resources Litigation Trust filed suit against Duke Energy along with various affiliates and several individuals, including current and former employees of Duke Energy, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas. The Crescent Resources Litigation Trust was established in May 2010 pursuant to the plan of reorganization approved in the Crescent bankruptcy proceedings in the same court. The complaint alleges that in 2006 the defendants caused Crescent to borrow approximately $1.2 billion from a

40

 


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

consortium of banks and immediately thereafter distribute most of the loan proceeds to Crescent’s parent company without benefit to Crescent. The complaint further alleges that Crescent was rendered insolvent by the transactions, and that the distribution is subject to recovery by the Crescent bankruptcy estate as an alleged fraudulent transfer. The plaintiff requests return of the funds as well as other statutory and equitable relief, punitive damages and attorneys’ fees. Duke Energy and its affiliated defendants believe that the referenced 2006 transactions were legitimate and did not violate any state or federal law. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss in December 2010. On March 21, 2011, the plaintiff filed a response to the defendant’s motion to dismiss and a motion for leave to file an amended complaint, which was granted. The Defendants filed a second motion to dismiss in response to plaintiffs’ amended complaint.

The plaintiffs filed a demand for a jury trial, a motion to transfer the case to the federal district court, and a motion to consolidate the case with a separate action filed by the plaintiffs against Duke Energy’s legal counsel. On March 22, 2012, the federal District Court issued an order denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss and granting the plaintiffs’ motions for transfer and consolidation. The court has not yet made a final ruling on whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a jury trial. Trial on this matter has been set to commence in January 2014. Mediation, held on August 21 and 22, 2012, was unsuccessful. It is not possible to predict whether Duke Energy will incur any liability or to estimate the damages, if any, that Duke Energy might incur in connection with this lawsuit.

Federal Advanced Clean Coal Tax Credits. Duke Energy Carolinas has been awarded $125 million of federal advanced clean coal tax credits associated with its construction of Cliffside Unit 6 and Duke Energy Indiana has been awarded $134 million of federal advanced clean coal tax credits associated with its construction of the Edwardsport IGCC plant. In March 2008, two environmental groups, Appalachian Voices and the Canary Coalition, filed suit against the Federal government challenging the tax credits awarded to incentivize certain clean coal projects. Although Duke Energy was not a party to the case, the allegations center on the tax incentives provided for the Cliffside and Edwardsport projects. The initial complaint alleged a failure to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. The first amended complaint, filed in August 2008, added an Endangered Species Act claim and also sought declaratory and injunctive relief against the DOE and the U.S. Department of the Treasury. In 2008, the District Court dismissed the case. On September 23, 2009, the District Court issued an order granting plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint and denying, as moot, the motion for reconsideration. Plaintiffs have filed their second amended complaint. The Federal government has moved to dismiss the second amended complaint; the motion is pending. On July 26, 2010, the District Court denied plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction seeking to halt the issuance of the tax credits.

Duke Energy Carolinas

New Source Review (NSR).

In 1999-2000, the DOJ,U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), acting on behalf of the EPA and joined by various citizen groups and states, filed a number of complaints and notices of violation against multiple utilities across the country for alleged violations of the NSR provisions of the CAA. Generally, the government alleges that projects performed at various coal-fired units were major modifications, as defined in the CAA, and that the utilities violated the CAA when they undertook those projects without obtaining permits and installing the best available emission controls for SO2, NOx and particulate matter. The complaints seek injunctive relief to require installation of pollution control technology on various generating units that allegedly violated the CAA, and unspecified civil penalties in amounts of up to $32,500$37,500 per day for each violation. A number of Duke Energy Carolinas’ plants have been subject to these allegations. Duke Energy Carolinas asserts that there were no CAA violations because the applicable regulations do not require permitting in cases where the projects undertaken are “routine” or otherwise do not result in a net increase in emissions.

In 2000, the government brought a lawsuit against Duke Energy Carolinas in the U.S. District Court in Greensboro, North Carolina. The EPA claims that 29 projects performed at 25 of Duke Energy Carolinas’ coal-fired units violate these NSR provisions. Three environmental groups have intervened in the case. In August 2003, the trial court issued a summary judgment opinion adopting Duke Energy Carolinas’ legal positions on the standard to be used for measuring an increase in emissions, and granted judgment in favor of Duke Energy Carolinas. The trial court’s decision was appealed and ultimately reversed and remanded for trial by the U.S. Supreme Court. At trial, Duke Energy Carolinas will continue to assert that the projects were routine or not projected to increase emissions. On February 11, 2011, the trial judge held an initial status conference and on March 22, 2011, the judge entered an interim scheduling order. The parties have filed a stipulation in which the United States and Plaintiff-Intervenors have dismissed with prejudice 16 claims. In exchange, Duke Energy Carolinas dismissed certain affirmative defenses. The parties have filed motions for summary judgment on the remaining claims. No trial date has been set, but a trial is not expected until the second half of 2012, at the earliest.set.

It is not possible to estimate the damages, if any, that might be incurred in connection with the unresolved matters related to Duke Energy Carolinas discussed above. Ultimate resolution of these matters could have a material effect on the consolidated results of operations, cash flows or

52


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

financial position of Duke Energy Carolinas. However, the appropriate regulatory treatment will be pursued for any costs incurred in connection with such resolution.

Asbestos-related Injuries and Damages Claims. Claims

Duke Energy Carolinas has experienced numerous claims for indemnification and medical cost reimbursement relating to damages for bodily injuries alleged to have arisen from the exposure to or use of asbestos in connection with construction and maintenance activities conducted on its electric generation plants prior to 1985. As of September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, there were 13299 asserted claims for non-malignant cases with the cumulative relief sought of up to $33$18 million, and 4746 asserted claims for malignant cases with the cumulative relief sought of up to $16$15 million. Based on Duke Energy Carolinas’ experience, it is expected that the ultimate resolution of most of these claims likely will be less than the amount claimed.

Amounts recognized as asbestos-related reserves related to Duke Energy Carolinas in the respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets totaled $763$743 million and $801$751 million as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively, and are classified in Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities and Other within Current Liabilities. These reserves are based upon the minimum amount in Duke Energy Carolinas’ best estimate of the range of loss for current and future asbestos claims through 2030. Management believes that it is possible there will be additional claims filed against Duke Energy Carolinas after 2030. In light of the uncertainties inherent in a longer-term forecast, management does not believe that they can reasonably estimate the indemnity and medical costs that might be incurred after 2030 related to such potential claims. Asbestos-related loss estimates incorporate anticipated inflation, if applicable, and are recorded on an undiscounted basis. These reserves are based upon current estimates and are subject to greater uncertainty as the projection period lengthens. A significant upward or downward trend in the number of claims filed, the nature of the alleged injury, and the average cost of resolving each such claim could change our estimated liability, as could any substantial or favorable verdict at trial. A federal legislative solution, further state tort reform or structured settlement transactions could also change the estimated liability. Given the uncertainties associated with projecting matters into the future and numerous other factors outside our control, management believes that it is possible Duke Energy Carolinas may incur asbestos liabilities in excess of the recorded reserves.

41


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

Duke Energy Carolinas has a third-party insurance policy to cover certain losses related to asbestos-related injuries and damages above an aggregate self insuredself-insured retention of $476 million. Duke Energy Carolinas’ cumulative payments began to exceed the self insuranceself-insurance retention on its insurance policy in 2008. Future payments up to the policy limit will be reimbursed by Duke Energy Carolinas’ third party insurance carrier. The insurance policy limit for potential future insurance recoveries for indemnification and medical cost claim payments is $935 million in excess of the self insuredself-insured retention. Insurance recoveries of $781 and $813 million related to this policy are classified in the respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in Other within Investments and Other Assets and Receivables as of September 30, 2012both March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively. Duke Energy Carolinas is not aware of any uncertainties regarding the legal sufficiency of insurance claims. Management believes the insurance recovery asset is probable of recovery as the insurance carrier continues to have a strong financial strength rating.

Progress Energy

Synthetic Fuels Matters

In October 2009, a jury delivered a verdict in a lawsuit against Progress Energy and a number of its subsidiaries and affiliates arising out of an Asset Purchase Agreement dated as of October 19, 1999, and amended as of August 23, 2000 (the Asset Purchase Agreement) by and among U.S. Global, LLC (Global); Earthco synthetic fuels facilities (Earthco); certain affiliates of Earthco; EFC Synfuel LLC (which was owned indirectly by Progress Energy) and certain of its affiliates (collectively, the Progress Affiliates). In a case filed in the Circuit Court for Broward County, Florida. In March 2003 (the Florida Global Case), Global requested an unspecified amount of compensatory damages, as well as declaratory relief. Global asserted (i) that pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement, it was entitled to an interest in two synthetic fuels facilities previously owned by the Progress Affiliates and an option to purchase additional interests in the two synthetic fuels facilities and (ii) that it was entitled to damages because the Progress Affiliates prohibited it from procuring purchasers for the synthetic fuels facilities. As a result of the 2007 expiration of the Internal Revenue Code Section 29 tax credit program, all of Progress Energy’s synthetic fuels businesses were abandoned and the synthetic fuels businesses were reclassified as discontinued operations.

In November 2009, the court ruled in favor of Global. In December 2009, Progress Energy appealed the Broward County judgment to the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeals. Also, in December 2009, Progress Energy made a $154 million payment, which represented payment of the total judgment, including prejudgment interest, and a required premium equivalent to two years of interest, to the Broward County Clerk of Court bond account. Progress Energy continued to accrue interest related to this judgment.

On October 3, 2012, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeals reversed the lower court ruling and directed a verdict on damages under a separate Commission and Services Agreement, which was modified by the court’s December 12, 2012 ruling on Global’s motion for reconsideration. The court held that Global was entitled to approximately $90 million of the amount paid into the registry of the court. Progress Energy was entitled to a refund of the remainder of the funds. Progress Energy received and recorded a $63 million pre-tax gain for the refund in December 2012. The gain was recorded in Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.

The case was remanded to the trial court to determine whether specific performance is an appropriate remedy for the claims under the Asset Purchase Agreement. The plaintiff seeks specific performance of an award of the corporate interests in the Progress Affiliates it claims it was entitled to receive under the Asset Purchase Agreement as of the date the jury determined the breach of contract occurred (March 19, 2002). The Progress Affiliates contend that specific performance is an inapplicable remedy. A hearing on Global’s motion was held on April 19, 2013. It is not possible to predict whether Duke Energy will incur any liability or to estimate the damages, if any, that Progress Energy might incur in connection with this lawsuit.

In a second suit filed in the Superior Court for Wake County, N.C., Progress Synfuel Holdings, Inc. et al. v. U.S. Global, LLC (the North Carolina Global Case), the Progress Affiliates seek declaratory relief consistent with our interpretation of the Asset Purchase Agreement.

53


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Global was served with the North Carolina Global Case on April 17, 2003. In May 2003, Global moved to dismiss the North Carolina Global Case for lack of personal jurisdiction over Global. In the alternative, Global requested that the court decline to exercise its discretion to hear the Progress Affiliates’ declaratory judgment action. In August 2003, the Wake County Superior Court denied Global’s motion to dismiss, but stayed the North Carolina Global Case, pending the outcome of the Florida Global Case. The Progress Affiliates appealed the superior court’s order staying the case. By order dated September 7, 2004, the North Carolina Court of Appeals dismissed the Progress Affiliates’ appeal. Based upon the verdict in the Florida Global Case, Progress Energy anticipates dismissal of the North Carolina Global Case.

Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida

Spent Nuclear Fuel Matters

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (as amended) (NWPA) provides the framework for development by the federal government of interim storage and permanent disposal facilities for high-level radioactive waste materials. The DOE is responsible for the selection and construction of a facility for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Pursuant to the NWPA, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida entered into contracts with the DOE under which the DOE agreed to begin taking spent nuclear fuel by no later than January 31, 1998. All similarly situated utilities were required to sign the same Standard Contract for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel.

The DOE failed to begin taking spent nuclear fuel by January 31, 1998. In January 2004, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida filed a complaint in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims against the United States, claiming that the DOE breached the standard contract and asserting damages incurred through 2005 for storing spent nuclear fuel at their nuclear sites (Phase I litigation). In 2011, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims issued a ruling to award Duke Energy Progress substantially all its asserted damages. As a result, Duke Energy Progress recorded the award as an offset for past spent fuel storage costs incurred.

On December 12, 2011, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida filed a second complaint in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims against the United States, claiming damages incurred from January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2010. The damages stem from the same breach of contract asserted in the previous litigation. On March 23, 2012, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida filed their initial disclosure of $113 million of damages with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and the DOE, of which $90 million was attributable to Duke Energy Progress and $23 million was attributable to Duke Energy Florida. The total amount of damages could change during discovery, which is scheduled to end on May 31, 2013. Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida may file subsequent damage claims as they incur additional costs. Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida cannot predict the outcome of this matter.

Duke Energy Ohio

Antitrust Lawsuit. Lawsuit

In January 2008, four plaintiffs, including individual, industrial and nonprofit customers, filed a lawsuit against Duke Energy Ohio in federal court in the Southern District of Ohio. Plaintiffs alleged that Duke Energy Ohio (then The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company), conspired to provide inequitable and unfair price advantages for certain large business consumers by entering into non-public option agreements with such consumers in exchange for their withdrawal of challenges to Duke Energy Ohio’s pending Rate Stabilization Plan (RSP), which was implemented in early 2005. On March 31, 2009, the District Court granted Duke Energy Ohio’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs filed a motion to alter or set aside the judgment, which was denied by an order dated March 31, 2010. In April 2010, the plaintiffs filed their appeal of that order with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which heard argument on that appeal on January 11, 2012. On June 4, 2012, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s decision and remanded the matter on all claims for trial on the merits and on July 25, 2012, the Court denied Duke Energy Ohio’s petition for an en banc review of the case, and oncase. On October 15, 2012, Duke Energy filed a petition for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court.Court, which was denied on January 14, 2013. Mediations held in December 2012 and March 2013 were unsuccessful. The plaintiffs’ last mediation demand was for $99 million. It is not possible to predict at this time whether Duke Energy Ohio will incur any liability or to estimate the damages, if any, that Duke Energy Ohio might incurmay be incurred in connection with this lawsuit.

Asbestos-related Injuries and Damages Claims. Claims

Duke Energy Ohio has been named as a defendant or co-defendant in lawsuits related to asbestos at its electric generating stations. The impact on Duke Energy Ohio’s consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial position of these cases to date has not been material. Based on estimates under varying assumptions concerning uncertainties, such as, among others: (i) the number of contractors potentially exposed to asbestos during construction or maintenance of Duke Energy Ohio generating plants; (ii) the possible incidence of various illnesses among exposed workers, and (iii) the potential settlement costs without federal or other legislation that addresses asbestos tort actions, Duke Energy Ohio estimates that the range of reasonably possible exposure in existing and future suits over the foreseeable future is not material. This estimated range of exposure may change as additional settlements occur and claims are made and more case law is established.

Other Litigation and Legal Proceedings.Proceedings

The Duke Energy Registrants are involved in other legal, tax and regulatory proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business, some of which involve substantial amounts. Management believes that the final disposition of these proceedings will not have a material effect on its consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

The Duke Energy Registrants expense legal costs related to the defense of loss contingencies as incurred.

The Duke Energy Registrants have exposure to certain legal matters that are described herein. The Duke Energy Registrants have recorded reserves for these proceedings and exposures as presented in the table below. These reserves represent management’s best estimate of probable loss as defined in the accounting guidance for contingencies. The estimated reasonably possible range of loss for non-asbestos related matters in excess of the recorded reserves is not material. Duke Energy Carolinas has insurance coverage for certain of these losses incurred as presented in the table below.

54

 


(in millions)  

September 30, 2012

  

December 31, 2011

Reserves for Legal Matters(a)

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy(b)

$

 975 

  

$

 810 

Duke Energy Carolinas(b)

  

 763 

  

  

 801 

Duke Energy Indiana  

  

 7 

  

  

 4 

Probable Insurance Recoveries(c)

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy(d)

$

 781 

  

$

 813 

Duke Energy Carolinas(d)

  

 781 

  

  

 813 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Reserves are classified in the respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities and Other within Current Liabilities.

(b)

Includes reserves for aforementioned asbestos-related injuries and damages claims.

(c)

Insurance recoveries are classified in the respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in Other within Investments and Other Assets and Receivables.

(d)

Relates to recoveries associated with aforementioned asbestos-related injuries and damages claims.

       

PART I

 

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Other Commitments and ContingenciesCombined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

General.(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

March 31,

2013

 

December 31,

2012

Reserves for Legal and Other Matters(a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy(b)

 

$

 834 

 

$

 846 

Duke Energy Carolinas(b)

 

 

 743 

 

 

 751 

Progress Energy

 

 

 75 

 

 

 79 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 

 11 

 

 

 12 

Duke Energy Florida(c)

 

 

 44 

 

 

 47 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 

 7 

 

 

 8 

Probable Insurance Recoveries(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy(e)

 

$

 781 

 

$

 781 

Duke Energy Carolinas(e)

 

 

 781 

 

 

 781 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Reserves are classified in the respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities and Other within Current Liabilities.

(b)

Includes reserves for aforementioned asbestos-related injuries and damages claims.

(c)

Includes workers' compensation claims.

(d)

Insurance recoveries are classified in the respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in Other within Investments and Other Assets and Receivables.

(e)

Relates to recoveries associated with aforementioned asbestos-related injuries and damages claims.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OTHER COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

General

As part of its normal business, the Duke Energy Registrants are a party to various financial guarantees, performance guarantees and other contractual commitments to extend guarantees of credit and other assistance to various subsidiaries, investees and other third parties. To varying degrees, these guarantees involve elements of performance and credit risk, which are not included on the respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The possibility of any of the Duke Energy Registrants having to honor their contingencies is largely dependent upon future operations of various subsidiaries, investees and other third parties, or the occurrence of certain future events.

42


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

In addition, the Duke Energy Registrants enter into various fixed-price, non-cancelable commitments to purchase or sell power (tolling arrangements or power purchase contracts), take-or-pay arrangements, transportation or throughput agreements and other contracts that may or may not be recognized on thetheir respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Some of these arrangements may be recognized at fair value on the respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets if such contracts meet the definition of a derivative and the normal purchase Normal purchase/normal sale (NPNS) exception does not apply. In most cases, the Duke Energy Registrants purchase obligation contracts contain provisions for price adjustments, minimum purchase levels and other financial commitments.

 

6. Debt and Credit FacilitiesDEBT AND CREDIT FACILITIES

Duke Energy’s outstanding long-term debt, including current maturities as of September 30, 2012, includes approximately $17.2 billion related to Progress Energy. This amount includes $3.5 billion of fair value adjustments recorded in connection with purchase accounting for the Progress Energy merger, which are not part of future principal payments and will amortize over the remaining life of the debt. See Note 2 for additional information related to the merger with Progress Energy.SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT DEBT ISSUANCES

Additional significant changes toThe following table summarizes the Duke Energy Registrants’ significant debt and credit facilitiesissuances since December 31, 2011 are as follows:

First Mortgage Bonds. In September 2012 Duke Energy Carolinas issued $650 million principal amount of first mortgage bonds, which carry a fixed interest rate of 4.00% and mature September 30, 2042.  Proceeds from the issuance will be used to repay at maturity the $420 million debentures due through November 2012, as well as for general corporate purposes, including the funding of capital expenditures. (in millions).

In March 2012, Duke Energy Indiana issued $250 million principal amount of first mortgage bonds, which carry a fixed interest rate of 4.20% and mature March 15, 2042. Proceeds from the issuance were used to repay a portion of Duke Energy Indiana’s outstanding short-term debt.

Other Debt. In August 2012, Duke Energy Corporation issued $1.2 billion of senior unsecured notes, of which $700 million carry a fixed interest rate of 1.625% and mature August 15, 2017 and $500 million carry a fixed interest rate of 3.05% and mature August 15, 2022. Proceeds from the issuances were used to repay at maturity Duke Energy Ohio’s $500 million debentures due September 15, 2012, as well as for general corporate purposes, including the repayment of commercial paper. See Note 17 for further discussion of the repayment of Duke Energy Ohio’s debentures and changes in its capital structure.

In January 2012, Duke Energy Carolinas used proceeds from its December 2011 $1 billion issuance of principal amount of first mortgage bonds to repay $750 million 6.25% senior unsecured notes that matured January 15, 2012.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Issuance Date

Maturity Date

Interest Rate

 

Duke Energy (Parent)

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy

Unsecured Debt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

January 2013(a)

January 2073

 5.125 

%

 

$

 500 

 

$

 - 

 

$

 500 

Secured Debt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

February 2013(b) (c)

December 2030

2.043 

%

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 203 

February 2013(b)

June 2037

4.740 

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 220 

April 2013(d)

April 2026

5.456 

%

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 230 

First Mortgage Bonds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 2013(e)

March 2043

 4.100 

%

 

 

 - 

 

 

 500 

 

 

 500 

Total issuances

 

 

 

$

 500 

 

$

 500 

 

$

 1,653 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Callable after January 2018 at par. Proceeds from the issuance were used to redeem the $300 million 7.10% Cumulative Quarterly Income Preferred Securities (QUIPS). The securities were redeemed at par plus accrued and unpaid distributions, payable upon presentation on the redemption date. The remaining net proceeds were used to repay a portion of our commercial paper and for general corporate purposes. See Note 11 for additional information about the QUIPS.

(b)

Represents the conversion of construction loans related to a renewable energy project issued in December 2012 to term loans. No cash proceeds were received in conjunction with the conversion. The term loans have varying maturity dates. The maturity date presented represents the latest date for all components of the respective loans.

(c)

The debt is floating rate. Duke Energy has entered into a pay fixed-receive floating interest rate swap for 95 percent of the loans.

(d)

Represents primarily the conversion of a $190 million bridge loan issued in conjunction with the acquisition of Ibener in December 2012. Duke Energy received incremental proceeds of $40 million upon conversion of the bridge loan. The debt is floating rate and is denominated in U.S. dollars. Duke Energy has entered into a pay fixed-receive floating interest rate swap for 75 percent of the loan.

(e)

Proceeds from the issuance were used to repay notes payable to affiliated companies as well as for general corporate purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the first quarter of 2012, Duke Energy completed 55the previously announced sale of International Energy’s indirect 25% ownership interest in Attiki Gas Supply, S.A (Attiki), a Greek corporation, to an existing equity owner in a series of transactions that resulted in the full discharge of the related debt obligation. No gain or loss was recognized on these transactions. As of December 31, 2011, Duke Energy’s investment balance was $64 million and the related debt obligation of $64 million was reflected in Current Maturities of Long-Term Debt on Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

On April 4, 2011, Duke Energy filed a registration statement (Form S-3) with the SEC to sell up to $1 billion of variable denomination floating rate demand notes, called PremierNotes. The Form S-3 states that no more than $500 million of the notes will be outstanding at any particular time. The notes are offered on a continuous basis and bear interest at a floating rate per annum determined by the Duke Energy PremierNotes Committee, or its designee, on a weekly basis. The interest rate payable on notes held by an investor may vary based on the principal amount of the investment. The notes have no stated maturity date, but may be redeemed in whole or in part by Duke Energy at any time. The notes are non-transferable and may be redeemed in whole or in part at the investor’s option. Proceeds from the sale of the notes will be used for general corporate purposes. The balance as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, is $288 million and $79 million, respectively. The notes reflect a short-term debt obligation of Duke Energy and are reflected as Notes payable and commercial paper on Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

At September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, Duke Energy Carolinas had $400 million principal amount of 5.625% senior unsecured notes due November 2012 classified as Current maturities of long-term debt on its Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Duke Energy Carolinas will satisfy this obligation with proceeds from the September 2012 $650 million first mortgage bond issuance.

At September 30, 2012 Progress Energy Florida had $425 million principal amount of 4.80% first mortgage bonds due March 2013 classified as Current maturities of long-term debt on Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Progress Energy Florida currently anticipates satisfying this obligation with proceeds from additional borrowings.

At September 30, 2012 Duke Energy had $250 million principal amount of 5.65% senior unsecured notes due June 2013 classified as Current maturities of long-term debt on Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. At December 31, 2011, these notes were classified as Long-term Debt on Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Duke Energy currently anticipates satisfying this obligation with proceeds from additional borrowings.

At September 30, 2012 Duke Energy Ohio had $250 million principal amount of 2.10% first mortgage bonds due June 2013 classified as Current maturities of long-term debt on Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. At December 31, 2011, these notes were classified as Long-term Debt on Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Duke Energy Ohio currently anticipates satisfying this obligation with proceeds from additional borrowings.

At September 30, 2012 Duke Energy Indiana had $400 million principal amount of 5.00% senior unsecured notes due September 2013 classified as Current maturities of long-term debt on Duke Energy Indiana’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. At December 31, 2011, these notes were classified as Long-term Debt on Duke Energy Indiana’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Duke Energy Indiana currently anticipates satisfying this obligation with proceeds from additional borrowings.

At September 30, 2012 Progress Energy Carolinas had $400 million principal amount of 5.125% first mortgage bonds due September 2013 classified as Current maturities of long-term debt on Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Progress Energy Carolinas currently anticipates satisfying this obligation with proceeds from additional borrowings.

Accounts Receivable Securitization.Duke Energy Carolinas securitizes certain accounts receivable through Duke Energy Receivables Finance Company, LLC (DERF), a bankruptcy remote, special purpose subsidiary. DERF is a wholly owned limited liability company with a separate legal existence from its parent, and its assets are not intended to be generally available to creditors of Duke Energy Carolinas. As a result of the securitization,

43

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

CURRENT MATURITIES OF LONG-TERM DEBT

The following table shows the significant components of Current maturities of long-term debt on a daily basisthe Duke Energy Carolinas sells certain accounts receivable, arising from the sale of electricity and/or related services as part of Duke Energy Carolinas’ franchised electric business, to DERF. In order to fund its purchases of accounts receivable, DERF has a $300 million secured credit facility with a commercial paper conduit. In August 2012, DERF extended the expiration date for an additional year to August 2014.

Non-Recourse Notes Payable of VIEs. To fund the purchase of receivables, CRC borrows from third parties and such borrowings fluctuate based on the amount of receivables sold to CRC. The borrowings are secured by the assets of CRC and are non-recourse to Duke Energy. The debt is short-term because the facility had an expiration date in October 2012. On November 2, 2012, the facility was extended one year with a new expiration date of November 1, 2013. At September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, CRC borrowings were $275 million and $273 million, respectively, and are reflected as Non-recourse notes payable of VIEs on Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Money Pool. The Subsidiary Registrants receive support for their short-term borrowing needs through participation with Duke Energy and certain of its subsidiaries in a money pool arrangement. Under this arrangement, those companies with short-term funds may provide short-term loans to affiliates participating under this arrangement. The money pool is structured such that the Subsidiary Registrants separately manage their cash needs and working capital requirements. Accordingly, there is no net settlement of receivables and payables between the money pool participants. Per the terms of the money pool arrangement, the parent company, Duke Energy may loan funds to its participating subsidiaries, but may not borrow funds through the money pool. Accordingly, as the money pool activity is between Duke Energy and its wholly owned subsidiaries, all money pool balances are eliminated within Duke Energy’sRegistrants’ respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The following table shows the Subsidiary Registrants’ money pool balances and classification within their respectiveDuke Energy Registrants currently anticipate satisfying these obligations with proceeds from additional borrowings, unless otherwise noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

Maturity Date

Interest Rate

March 31, 2013

Unsecured Debt

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy (Parent)

June 2013

 5.650 

%

$

250 

Duke Energy Indiana

September 2013

 5.000 

%

 

400 

Duke Energy (Parent)

February 2014

 6.300 

%

 

750 

Progress Energy (Parent)

March 2014

 6.050 

%

 

300 

Secured Debt

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy(a)

June 2013

 1.009 

%

 

190 

First Mortgage Bonds

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Ohio

June 2013

 2.100 

%

 

250 

Duke Energy Progress

September 2013

 5.125 

%

 

400 

Duke Energy Carolinas

November 2013

 5.750 

%

 

400 

Other

 

 

 

 

383 

Current maturities of long-term debt

 

 

 

$

3,323 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Notes were fully offset with cash collateral, which was presented within Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. All collateral was returned when the six-month bridge loan was replaced with a $230 million non-recourse secured credit facility issued in April 2013. See Note 2 for additional information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

56


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets:Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

  

September 30, 2012

  

December 31, 2011

(in millions)

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

  

Notes payable to affiliated companies

  

Long-term debt payable to affiliated companies

  

Notes receivable from affiliated companies

  

Notes payable to affiliated companies

  

Long-term debt payable to affiliated companies

Duke Energy Carolinas

$

 811 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 300 

  

$

 923 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 300 

Duke Energy Ohio

  

 84 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 311 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Duke Energy Indiana

  

 ― 

  

  

 55 

  

  

 150 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 300 

  

  

 150 

 

Increases or decreases in money pool receivables are reflected within investing activities on the respective Subsidiary Registrants’ Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, while increases or decreases in money pool borrowings are reflected within financing activities on the respective Subsidiary Registrants Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

Available Credit Facilities. AVAILABLE CREDIT FACILITIESIn November 2011,

Duke Energy entered intohas a $6 billion, five-year master credit facility, expiring in November 2016, with $4 billion available at closing and the remaining $2 billion became effective July 2, 2012, following the closing of the merger with Progress Energy.2016. In October 2012, the Duke Energy Registrants reached an agreement with banks representing $5.63 billion of commitments under the master credit facility to extend the expiration date by one year to November 2017. Through November 2016, the available credit under this facility remains at $6 billion. The Duke Energy Registrants each have borrowing capacity under the master credit facility up to specified sublimits for each borrower. However, Duke Energy has the unilateral ability at any time to increase or decrease the borrowing sublimits of each borrower, subject to a maximum sublimit for each borrower. See the table below for the borrowing sublimits for each of the borrowers as of September 30, 2012.March 31, 2013. The amount available under the master credit facility has been reduced, as indicated in the table below, by the use of the master credit facility to backstop the issuances of commercial paper, certain letters of credit and certainvariable-rate demand tax-exempt bonds.bonds that may be put to the Duke Energy Registrants at the option of the holder. As indicated, borrowing sub limitssublimits for the Subsidiary Registrants are also reduced for certain amounts outstanding under the money pool arrangement.

This summary only includes Duke Energy’s master credit facility and, accordingly excludes certain demand facilities and committed facilities that are immaterial in size or which generally support very specific requirements, which primarily include facilities that backstop various puttable outstanding tax-exempt bonds. These facilities that backstop various outstanding tax-exempt bonds generally have non-cancelable terms in excess of one year from the balance sheet date, such that the Duke Energy Registrants have the ability to refinance such borrowings on a long-term basis. Accordingly, such borrowings are reflected as Long-term Debt on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets of the respective Duke Energy Registrant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

Duke Energy (Parent)

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy Florida

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 

Total Duke Energy

Facility size(a)

$

 1,750 

 

$

 1,250 

 

$

 750 

 

$

 750 

 

$

 750 

 

$

 750 

 

$

 6,000 

Reduction to backstop issuances

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notes payable and commercial paper(b)

 

 (486) 

 

 

 (300) 

 

 

 (26) 

 

 

 (162) 

 

 

 (163) 

 

 

 (169) 

 

 

 (1,306) 

 

Outstanding letters of credit

 

 (50) 

 

 

 (7) 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (60) 

 

Tax-exempt bonds

 

 ― 

 

 

 (75) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (84) 

 

 

 (81) 

 

 

 (240) 

Available capacity

$

 1,214 

 

$

 868 

 

$

 722 

 

$

 587 

 

$

 503 

 

$

 500 

 

$

 4,394 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Represents the sublimit of each borrower at March 31, 2013. The Duke Energy Ohio sublimit includes $100 million for Duke Energy Kentucky.

(b)

Duke Energy issued $450 million of commercial paper and loaned the proceeds through the money pool to Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Indiana. The balances are classified as long-term borrowings within Long-term Debt in Duke Energy Carolina’s and Duke Energy Indiana’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

  

  

September 30, 2012

(in millions)

  

Duke Energy (Parent)

  

Duke Energy Carolinas

  

Progress Energy Carolinas

  

Progress Energy Florida

  

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

Duke Energy Indiana

Total Duke Energy

Facility Size

  

$

 1,750 

  

$

 1,250 

  

$

 750 

  

$

 750 

  

$

 750 

  

$

 750 

  

$

 6,000 

  

Notes Payable and Commercial Paper

  

  

 (57) 

  

  

 (300) 

  

  

 (134) 

  

  

 (121) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (150) 

  

  

 (762) 

  

Outstanding Letters of Credit

  

  

 (51) 

  

  

 (7) 

  

  

 (2) 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (61) 

  

Tax-Exempt Bonds

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (95) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (84) 

  

  

 (81) 

  

  

 (260) 

Available Capacity

  

$

 1,642 

  

$

 848 

  

$

 614 

  

$

 628 

  

$

 666 

  

$

 519 

  

$

 4,917 

                         

Restrictive Debt Covenants. The Duke Energy Registrants’ debt and credit agreements contain various financial and other covenants. The master credit facility contains a covenant requiring the debt-to-total capitalization ratio to not exceed 65% for each borrower. Failure to meet those covenants beyond applicable grace periods could result in accelerated due dates and/or termination of the agreements. As of September 30, 2012, each of the Duke Energy Registrants were in compliance with all covenants related to its significant debt agreements. In addition, some credit agreements may allow for acceleration of payments or termination of the agreements due to nonpayment, or the acceleration of other significant indebtedness of the borrower or some of its subsidiaries. None of the significant debt or credit agreements contain material adverse change clauses.

4457

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

7. Goodwill, Intangible Assets and Impairments

Goodwill   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

The following tables show goodwill by segment for Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio:

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)  

  

USFE&G

  

Commercial Power

  

International Energy

  

Total

Balance at December 31, 2011:  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Goodwill  

  

$

 3,483 

  

$

 940 

  

$

 297 

  

$

 4,720 

Accumulated Impairment Charges  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (871) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (871) 

Balance at December 31, 2011, as adjusted for accumulated impairment charges  

  

  

 3,483 

  

  

 69 

  

  

 297 

  

  

 3,849 

Balance at September 30, 2012:  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Goodwill  

  

  

 3,483 

  

  

 940 

  

  

 297 

  

  

 4,720 

Acquisitions (a)

  

  

 12,342 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 12,342 

Accumulated Impairment Charges  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (871) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (871) 

Foreign Exchange and Other Changes  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (7) 

  

  

 (4) 

  

  

 (11) 

Balance at September 30, 2012, as adjusted for accumulated impairment charges  

  

$

 15,825 

  

$

 62 

  

$

 293 

  

$

 16,180 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Represents goodwill resulting from the merger with Progress Energy. See Note 2 for additional information.

Duke Energy Ohio

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

  

Franchised Electric & Gas

  

Commercial Power

  

Total

Balance at December 31, 2011:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Goodwill

  

$

 1,137 

  

$

 1,188 

  

$

 2,325 

Accumulated Impairment Charges

  

  

 (216) 

  

  

 (1,188) 

  

  

 (1,404) 

Balance at December 31, 2011, as adjusted for accumulated impairment charges

  

  

 921 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 921 

Balance at September 30, 2012:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Goodwill

  

  

 1,137 

  

  

 1,188 

  

  

 2,325 

Accumulated Impairment Charges

  

  

 (216) 

  

  

 (1,188) 

  

  

 (1,404) 

Balance at September 30, 2012, as adjusted for accumulated impairment charges

  

$

 921 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 921 

Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio are required to perform an annual goodwill impairment test as of the same date each year and, accordingly, perform their annual impairment testing of goodwill as of August 31. Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio update their test between annual tests if events or circumstances occur that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying value. As the fair value of Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio’s reporting units exceeded their respective carrying values at the date of the annual impairment analysis, Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio did not record any impairment charges in the third quarter of 2012

Intangible Assets. On August 8, 2011, the EPA’s final rule to replace CAIR was published in the Federal Register. As further discussed in Note 5, the CSAPR established state-level annual SO2 and NOx caps that were required to take effect on January 1, 2012, and state-level ozone-season NOx caps that were to take effect on May 1, 2012. The CSAPR did not utilize CAA emission allowances as the original CAIR provided. Under the CSAPR, the EPA was expected to issue new emission allowances to be used exclusively for purposes of complying with the CSAPR cap-and-trade program. After this ruling was published in 2011, Duke Energy evaluated the effect of the CSAPR on the carrying value of emission allowances recorded at its USFE&G and Commercial Power segments. Based on the provisions of the CSAPR, Duke Energy Ohio had more SO2 allowances than were needed to comply with the continuing CAA acid rain cap-and-trade program (excess emission allowances). Duke Energy Ohio incurred a pre-tax impairment of $79 million in the third quarter of 2011 to write down the carrying value of excess emission allowances held by Commercial Power to fair value. The charge is recorded in Impairment charges on Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations. This amount was based on the fair value of excess allowances held by Commercial Power for compliance under the continuing CAA acid rain cap-and-trade program as of September 30, 2011.

45


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)(Unaudited)

7. GOODWILL

GOODWILL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following tables present goodwill by reportable operating segment for Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

USFE&G

 

Commercial Power

 

International Energy

 

Total

Balance at December 31, 2012:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goodwill

 

$

 15,950 

 

$

 933 

 

$

 353 

 

$

 17,236 

Accumulated impairment charges

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (871) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (871) 

Balance at December 31, 2012, as adjusted for accumulated impairment charges

 

 

 15,950 

 

 

 62 

 

 

 353 

 

 

 16,365 

Acquisitions (a)

 

 

 10 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 (6) 

 

 

 6 

Balance at March 31, 2013:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goodwill

 

 

 15,960 

 

 

 935 

 

 

 347 

 

 

 17,242 

Accumulated impairment charges

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (871) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (871) 

Balance at March 31, 2013, as adjusted for accumulated impairment charges

 

$

 15,960 

 

$

 64 

 

$

 347 

 

$

 16,371 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Amounts represent purchase price adjustments related to the Progress Energy merger at USFE&G, a minor renewables acquisition at Commercial Power and the Ibener acquisition at International Energy. See Note 2 for further information on purchase price adjustments related to the Progress Energy Merger.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

Franchised Electric & Gas

 

Commercial Power

 

Total

Balance at December 31, 2012:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goodwill

 

$

 1,137 

 

$

 1,188 

 

$

 2,325 

Accumulated impairment charges

 

 

 (216) 

 

 

 (1,188) 

 

 

 (1,404) 

Balance at December 31, 2012, as adjusted for accumulated impairment charges

 

 

 921 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 921 

Balance at March 31, 2013:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goodwill

 

 

 1,137 

 

 

 1,188 

 

 

 2,325 

Accumulated impairment charges

 

 

 (216) 

 

 

 (1,188) 

 

 

 (1,404) 

Balance at March 31, 2013, as adjusted for accumulated impairment charges

 

$

 921 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 921 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                       

Other Impairments. Progress EnergyAs a result

Progress Energy had Goodwill of project cost overages related to$3,655 million within the Edwardsport IGCC plant, Duke Energy Indiana recorded pre-tax charges to earningsFranchised Electric operating segment as of $600 millionMarch 31, 2013 and $222 millionDecember 31, 2012, for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. See Note 4 for a further discussion of the Edwardsport IGCC project.

In the third quarter of 2012, Duke Energy and Duke Energy Carolinas recorded pre-taxwhich there are no accumulated impairment charges of $86 million and $31 million, respectively, in conjunction with the merger with Progress Energy. See Note 2 for additional information.charges.

 

8. Risk Management, Derivative Instruments and Hedging ActivitiesRISK MANAGEMENT, DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES

The Duke Energy Registrants utilizeclosely monitor the risks associated with commodity price changes and changes in interest rates on their operations and, where appropriate, use various derivativecommodity and interest rate instruments to manage risks primarily associated with commodity prices, foreign exchangethese risks. Certain of these derivative instruments qualify for hedge accounting and interest rates.are designated as hedging instruments, while others either do not qualify as hedges or have not been designated as hedges (hereinafter referred to as undesignated contracts). The Duke Energy Registrants’ primary use of energy commodity derivatives is to hedge the generation portfolio against exposure to changes in the prices of power and fuel. Interest rate derivativesswaps are entered into to manage interest rate and foreign exchange risk primarily associated with the Duke Energy Registrants’ variable-rate and fixed-rate borrowings.

Certain Additionally, Duke Energy Carolinas’, Duke Energy Progress’ and Duke Energy Florida’s nuclear decommissioning trust fund (NDTF) investment holdings may include certain derivative instruments, qualify for hedge accountingsuch as interest rate swaps and credit default swaps, as part of its overall investment strategy. As further discussed in Note 10 the NDTF’s are managed by third party investment managers who have the discretion to make investment decisions within risk management guidelines determined by management of Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida. The fair value of these derivative instruments are included within Nuclear decommissioning trust funds on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets and are designated as either cash flow hedges or fair value hedges, while others either do not qualify asmaterial to the investment balance at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012.

58


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

The accounting hedges (such as economic hedges) or have not been designated as hedges (hereinafter referred to as undesignated contracts). Allguidance for derivatives requires the recognition of all derivative instruments not meeting the criteria for theidentified as NPNS exception are recognized as either assets or liabilities at fair value in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. AsFor derivative instruments that qualify for hedge accounting, the regulatedDuke Energy Registrants may elect to designate such derivatives as either cash flow hedges or fair value hedges. The Duke Energy Registrants offset fair value amounts recognized on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets related to derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty under the same master netting agreement.

The operations of the Duke Energy RegistrantsUSFE&G business segment meet the criteria for regulatory accounting treatment, the majority of the derivative contracts entered into by the regulated operations are nottreatment. Accordingly, for derivatives that would otherwise be designated as cash flow hedges sincewithin USFE&G, gains and losses on suchare reflected as a regulatory liability or asset instead of as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI). For derivatives that would otherwise be designated as fair value hedges or left undesignated within USFE&G, gains and losses associated with the change in fair value of these derivative contracts arewould be deferred as a regulatory liabilities and assets, respectively. Thus there isliability or asset. As a result changes in fair value of these derivatives have no immediate earnings impact associated with changes in fair values of such derivative contracts. Cash flows relative to derivative instruments are considered operating activities based onimpact.

Within the nature of the underlying transactions.

ForDuke Energy Registrants’ unregulated businesses, for derivative instruments that qualify for hedge accounting and are designated as cash flow hedges, the effective portion of the gain or loss is reported as a component of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (AOCI)AOCI and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged transaction affects earnings. Any gains or losses on the derivative that represent either hedge ineffectiveness or hedge components excluded from the assessment of effectiveness are recognized in current earnings. For derivative instruments that qualify and are designated as a fair value hedge, the gain or loss on the derivative as well as the fully or partially offsetting loss or gain on the hedged item are recognized in earnings in the current period. Any gainsThe Duke Energy Registrants include the gain or lossesloss on the derivative are included in the same line item as the offsetting loss or gain on the hedged item in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations forOperations. Additionally, the Duke Energy Registrants enter into derivative agreements that are economic hedges that either do not qualify for hedge accounting or have not been designated as a hedge. The changes in the Condensed Consolidated Statementsfair value of Comprehensive Income for Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Ohio, and Duke Energy Indiana.

Information presented in the tables below relates to Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio. As regulatory accounting treatment is applied to substantially all of Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Indianathese undesignated derivative instruments and the carrying value of the respective derivative instruments comprise a small portion of Duke Energy’s overall balance, separate disclosures for each of these registrants is not presented.are reflected in current earnings.

Commodity Price RiskCOMMODITY PRICE RISK

The Duke Energy Registrants are exposed to the impact of market changes in the future prices of electricity (energy, capacity and financial transmission rights), coal, oil, natural gas and emission allowances (SO2, seasonal NOX and annual NOX) as a result of their energy operations such as electricity generation and the transportation and sale of natural gas. With respect to commodity price risks associated with electricity generation, the Duke Energy Registrants are exposed to changes including, but not limited to, the cost of the coal and natural gas used to generate electricity, the prices of electricity sold in wholesale markets, the cost of capacity and electricity purchased for resale in wholesale markets and the cost of emission allowances primarily at the Duke Energy Registrants’ coal fired power plants. Risks associated with commodity price changes on future operations are closely monitored and, where appropriate, various commodity contracts are used to mitigate the effect of such fluctuations on operations. Exposure to commodity price risk is influenced by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the term of the contract, the liquidity of the market and delivery location.

Commodity Fair Value Hedges.Hedges

At September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, there were no open commodity derivative instruments that were designated as fair value hedges.

Commodity Cash Flow Hedges.

At September 30, 2012, there were noMarch 31, 2013, open commodity derivative instruments that were designated as cash flow hedges.  hedges were not material.

Undesignated Contracts

The Duke Energy Registrants use derivative contracts as economic hedges to manage the market risk exposures that arise from providing electricity generation and capacity to large energy customers, energy aggregators, retail customers and other wholesale companies. Undesignated contracts may include contracts not designated as a hedge, contracts that do not qualify for hedge accounting, derivatives that do not or no longer qualify for the NPNS scope exception, and de-designated hedge contracts. These undesignated contracts expire as late as 2016.2017.

Undesignated contracts also include contracts associated with operations that Duke Energy continues to wind down or has included as discontinued operations. As these undesignated contracts expire as late as 2021, Duke Energy has entered into economic hedges that leave it minimally exposed to changes in prices over the duration of these contracts.

Duke Energy Carolinas usesand Duke Energy Progress use derivative contracts primarily as economic hedges to manage the market risk exposures that arise from electricity generation. Duke Energy Carolinas hasand Duke Energy Progress have also entered into a firm power sale agreement,agreements, which isare accounted for as a derivative instrument,instruments, as part of the Interim FERC Mitigation in connection with Duke Energy’s merger with Progress Energy. See Note 2. UndesignatedDuke Energy Carolinas’ undesignated contracts at September 30, 2012as of March 31, 2013, are primarily associated with forward sales and purchases of power. Duke Energy Progress’ undesignated contracts as of March 31, 2013, are primarily associated with forward purchases of fuel used in electricity generation.

Duke Energy Florida uses derivative contracts primarily as economic hedges to manage the market risk exposures that arise from electricity generation. Undesignated contracts at March 31, 2013, are primarily associated with forward purchases of fuel used in electricity generation.

Duke Energy Ohio uses derivative contracts as economic hedges to manage the market risk exposures that arise from providing electricity generation and capacity to large energy customers, energy aggregators, retail customers and other wholesale companies. Undesignated contracts at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, are primarily associated with forward sales and purchases of power, coal naturaland gas and emission allowances, for the Commercial Power segment.

4659

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

Duke Energy Indiana uses derivative contracts as economic hedges to manage the market risk exposures that arise from electricity generation. Undesignated contracts at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, are primarily associated with forward purchases and sales of power, coal, natural gas,and financial transmission rights and emission allowances.rights.

InterestVolumes

The table below shows information relating to the volume of the Duke Energy registrants outstanding commodity derivative activity. Amounts disclosed represent the notional volumes of commodities contracts accounted for at fair value. For option contracts, notional amounts include only the delta-equivalent volumes which represent the notional volumes times the probability of exercising the option based on current price volatility. Volumes associated with contracts qualifying for the NPNS exception have been excluded from the table below. Amounts disclosed represent the absolute value of notional amounts. The Duke Energy Registrants have netted contractual amounts where offsetting purchase and sale contracts exist with identical delivery locations and times of delivery. Where all commodity positions are perfectly offset, no quantities are shown below. For additional information on notional dollar amounts of debt subject to derivative contracts accounted for at fair value, see “Interest Rate RiskRisk” section below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

 

 

Duke Energy

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy Florida

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

Commodity contracts  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Electricity-energy (Gigawatt-hours)(a)

 56,890 

 

 1,802 

 

 1,850 

 

 1,850 

 

 ― 

 

 53,173 

 

 406 

Natural gas (millions of decatherms)

 516 

 

 ― 

 

 335 

 

 110 

 

 225 

 

 181 

 

 ― 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December, 31, 2012

 

 

Duke Energy

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy Florida

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Electricity-energy (Gigawatt-hours)(a)

 52,104 

 

 2,028 

 

 1,850 

 

 1,850 

 

 ― 

 

 51,215 

 

 97 

Natural gas (millions of decatherms)

 528 

 

 ― 

 

 348 

 

 118 

 

 230 

 

 180 

 

 ― 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Amounts at Duke Energy Ohio include intercompany positions that are eliminated at Duke Energy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INTEREST RATE RISK

The Duke Energy Registrants are exposed to risk resulting from changes in interest rates as a result of their issuance or anticipated issuance of variable and fixed-rate debt and commercial paper. Interest rate exposure is managed by limiting variable-rate exposures to a percentage of total debt and by monitoring the effects of market changes in interest rates. To manage risk associated with changes in interest rates, the Duke Energy Registrants may enter into financial contracts; primarily interest rate swaps and U.S. Treasury lock agreements. Additionally, in anticipation of certain fixed-rate debt issuances, a series of forward starting interest rate swaps may be executed to lock in components of the market interest rates at the time and terminated prior to or upon the issuance of the corresponding debt. When these transactions occur within a business that meets the criteria for regulatory accounting treatment, these contracts may be treated as undesignated and any pre-tax gain or loss recognized from inception to termination of the hedges would be recorded as a regulatory liability or asset and amortized as a component of interest expense over the life of the debt. Alternatively,In businesses that don’t meet the criteria for regulatory accounting treatment, these derivatives may be designated as hedges whereby any pre-tax gain or loss recognized from inception to termination of the hedges would be recorded in AOCI and amortized as a component of interest expense over the life of the debt.

Duke Energy has a combination foreign exchange, pay fixed-receive floating interest rate swap to fix the US Dollar equivalent payments on a floating rate Chilean debt issue.

As discussed above, within the Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress, and Duke Energy Florida NDTFs, certain of the fixed income investment managers have authorization to use interest rate swaps and credit default swaps in their investment strategies to either manage risk or enhance returns. Notional amounts for these contracts are not included in the table below as they are not material to the investment balance at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012.

The following table shows the notional amounts for derivatives related to interest rate risk:

risk.

Notional Amounts of Derivative Instruments Related to Interest Rate

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

Duke

Energy

  

Duke

Energy

Carolinas

  

Duke

Energy

Ohio

  

Duke

Energy

Indiana

(in millions)  

  

September 30, 2012

Cash Flow Hedges(a)

  

$

 869 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Undesignated Contracts  

  

  

 342 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 27 

  

  

 200 

Fair Value Hedges  

  

  

 275 

  

  

 25 

  

  

 250 

  

  

 ― 

  

Total Notional Amount  

  

$

 1,486 

  

$

 25 

  

$

 277 

  

$

 200 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)  

  

December 31, 2011

Cash Flow Hedges(a)

  

$

 841 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Undesignated Contracts  

  

  

 247 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 27 

  

  

 200 

Fair Value Hedges  

  

  

 275 

  

  

 25 

  

  

 250 

  

  

 ― 

  

Total Notional Amount  

  

$

 1,363 

  

$

 25 

  

$

 277 

  

$

 200 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Includes amounts related to non-recourse variable rate long-term debt of VIEs of $442 million at September 30, 2012 and $466 million at December 31, 2011.

Volumes

The following tables show information relating to the volume of Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio’s outstanding commodity derivative activity. Amounts disclosed represent the notional volumes of commodities contracts accounted for at fair value. For option contracts, notional amounts include only the delta-equivalent volumes which represent the notional volumes times the probability of exercising the option based on current price volatility. Volumes associated with contracts qualifying for the NPNS exception have been excluded from the table below. Amounts disclosed represent the absolute value of notional amounts. Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio have netted contractual amounts where offsetting purchase and sale contracts exist with identical delivery locations and times of delivery. Where all commodity positions are perfectly offset, no quantities are shown below. For additional information on notional dollar amounts of debt subject to derivative contracts accounted for at fair value, see “Interest Rate Risk” section above.

Underlying Notional Amounts for Commodity Derivative Instruments Accounted for At Fair Value

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Duke Energy

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

   

September 30, 2012

Commodity contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

Electricity-energy (Gigawatt-hours)(a)(c)

  

 27,820 

  

  

 29,770 

Electricity-capacity (Gigawatt-months)  

  

 5 

  

  

 ― 

Oil (millions of gallons)  

  

 6 

  

  

 ― 

Natural gas (millions of decatherms)(b)

  

 436 

  

  

 131 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

December 31, 2011

Commodity contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

Electricity-energy (Gigawatt-hours)(a)

  

 14,118 

  

  

 14,655 

Emission allowances NO(thousands of tons)  

  

 9 

  

  

 9 

Natural gas (millions of decatherms)  

  

 40 

  

  

 2 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Amounts at Duke Energy Ohio include intercompany positions that are eliminated at Duke Energy.

(b)

Amounts at Duke Energy include 297 million decatherms of natural gas relate to Progress Energy.

(c)

Amounts at Duke Energy include amounts related to Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas Interim FERC mitigation contracts entered into as part of the Progress Energy merger.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Duke

Energy

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke

Energy

Ohio

 

Duke

Energy

Indiana

Cash flow hedges(a)

 

$

 1,047 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

Undesignated contracts

 

 

 238 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 27 

 

 

 200 

Fair value hedges

 

 

 250 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 250 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total notional amount

 

$

 1,535 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 277 

 

$

 200 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Duke

Energy

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke

Energy

Ohio

 

Duke

Energy

Indiana

Cash flow hedges(a)

 

$

 1,047 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

Undesignated contracts

 

 

 290 

 

 

 50 

 

 

 50 

 

 

 27 

 

 

 200 

Fair value hedges

 

 

 250 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 250 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total notional amount

 

$

 1,587 

 

$

 50 

 

$

 50 

 

$

 277 

 

$

 200 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Duke Energy includes amounts related to non-recourse variable rate long-term debt of VIEs of $620 million at March 31, 2013, and at December 31, 2012, respectively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4760

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

DUKE ENERGY

The following tables show fair value amounts of derivative contracts, and the line items in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in which such amounts are included. The fair values of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject to master netting arrangements where Duke Energy nets the fair value of derivative contracts subject to master netting arrangements with the same counterparty on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Cash collateral payables and receivables associated with the derivative contracts have not been netted against the fair value amounts.

 

The following tables show fair value amounts of derivative contracts, and the line item(s) in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

in which such amounts are included. The fair values of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject to master netting arrangements where Duke Energy nets the fair value of derivative contracts subject to master netting arrangements with the same counterparty on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Cash collateral payables and receivables associated with the derivative contracts have not been netted against the fair value amounts.

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Location and Fair Value Amounts of Derivatives Reflected in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Duke Energy

  

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

September 30, 2012

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

(in millions)

Asset

  

Liability

  

Asset

  

Liability

(in millions)

Asset

 

Liability

 

 

Asset

 

Liability

Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

Commodity contracts

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current liabilities: other

Current liabilities: other

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 1 

Interest rate contracts

Interest rate contracts

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current assets: other

Current assets: other

 

 2 

 

 ― 

 

 2 

 

 ― 

Investments and other assets: other

Investments and other assets: other

 

 3 

 

 ― 

 

 7 

 

 ― 

Current Liabilities: Other

Current Liabilities: Other

$

 ― 

  

$

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Current Liabilities: Other

 

 (2) 

 

 70 

 

 ― 

 

 81 

Interest rate contracts

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Current Assets: Other

  

 5 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 4 

  

  

 ― 

Current Liabilities: Other

  

 ― 

  

  

 11 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities: Other

  

 ― 

  

  

 107 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 30 

 

 ― 

 

 35 

Total Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

Total Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 5 

  

$

 119 

  

$

 4 

  

$

 ― 

Total Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 3 

 

$

 102 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 119 

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

Commodity contracts

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current Assets: Other(a)

$

 55 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 33 

  

$

 12 

Investments and Other Assets: Other

  

 35 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 16 

  

  

 1 

Current Liabilities: Other

  

 94 

  

  

 377 

  

  

 85 

  

  

 110 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities: Other

  

 55 

  

  

 325 

  

  

 39 

  

  

 51 

Current assets: other

Current assets: other

$

 52 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 41 

 

$

 2 

Investments and other assets: other

Investments and other assets: other

 

 32 

 

 6 

 

 106 

 

 50 

Current liabilities: other

Current liabilities: other

 

 151 

 

 372 

 

 106 

 

 407 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 71 

 

 293 

 

 2 

 

 255 

Interest rate contracts

Interest rate contracts

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current Liabilities: Other(b)

  

 ― 

  

  

 96 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities: Other

  

 ― 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 8 

Current liabilities: other

Current liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 57 

 

 ― 

 

 76 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 6 

 

 ― 

 

 8 

Total Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

Total Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 239 

  

$

 812 

  

$

 173 

  

$

 183 

Total Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 306 

 

$

 743 

 

$

 255 

 

$

 798 

Total Derivatives

Total Derivatives

$

 244 

  

$

 931 

  

$

 177 

  

$

 183 

Total Derivatives

$

 309 

 

$

 845 

 

$

 264 

 

$

 917 

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Amount at Duke Energy includes $17 million related to commodity contracts at Duke Energy Indiana which receive regulatory accounting treatment.

(b)

Amount at Duke Energy includes $71 million related to interest rate swaps at Duke Energy Indiana which receive regulatory accounting treatment.

The tables below show the balance sheet location of the derivative contracts subject to enforceable master netting agreements and include collateral posted to offset the net position. This disclosure is intended to enable users to evaluate the effect of netting arrangements on Duke Energy’s financial position. The amount shown in the net position column is calculated by counterparty.

Most derivatives are entered into with counterparties under enforceable master netting agreements, or with an Independent System Operator (ISO) such as MISO or PJM. Derivatives entered into with a clearinghouse are usually over-collateralized due to the requirement to post initial margin upon entering into contracts. The amounts shown as offset are limited by the amount of exposure to a counterparty such that an over collateralized position at one counterparty is not allowed to reduce an under collateralized position at another counterparty. In addition to the amounts shown as offset, in the table, Duke Energy may also have available accounts receivable or accounts payable, that are subject to master netting agreements that would offset exposures in the event of bankruptcy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 182 

 

$

 157 

 

$

 25 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 21 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 21 

 

Total Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 203 

 

 

 157 

 

 

 46 

(a)

Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 91 

 

 

 75 

 

 

 16 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 15 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 15 

 

Total Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 106 

 

 

 75 

 

 

 31 

(b)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 350 

 

 

 222 

 

 

 128 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 159 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 159 

 

Total Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 509 

 

 

 222 

 

 

 287 

(c)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 295 

 

 

 118 

 

 

 177 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 41 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 41 

 

Total Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 336 

 

 

 118 

 

 

 218 

(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 127 

 

$

 114 

 

$

 13 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 22 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 22 

 

Total Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 149 

 

 

 114 

 

 

 35 

(a)

Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 96 

 

 

 54 

 

 

 42 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 19 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 19 

 

Total Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 115 

 

 

 54 

 

 

 61 

(b)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 402 

 

 

 151 

 

 

 251 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 166 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 166 

 

Total Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 568 

 

 

 151 

 

 

 417 

(c)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 295 

 

 

 90 

 

 

 205 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 54 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 54 

 

Total Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 349 

 

 

 90 

 

 

 259 

(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(b)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(c)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(d)

Included in Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

4861

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

 

  

   

Duke Energy

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

   

December 31, 2011

(in millions)  

Asset

  

Liability

  

Asset

  

Liability

Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Interest rate contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Current Assets: Other  

$

 4 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 3 

  

$

 ― 

Investments and Other Assets: Other  

  

 2 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 ― 

Current Liabilities: Other  

  

 ― 

  

  

 11 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities: Other  

  

 ― 

  

  

 76 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Total Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments  

$

 6 

  

$

 87 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 ― 

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Commodity contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Current Assets: Other  

$

 81 

  

$

 31 

  

$

 79 

  

$

 39 

Investments and Other Assets: Other  

  

 35 

  

  

 17 

  

  

 29 

  

  

 18 

Current Liabilities: Other  

  

 136 

  

  

 168 

  

  

 136 

  

  

 146 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities: Other  

  

 25 

  

  

 93 

  

  

 22 

  

  

 33 

Interest rate contracts   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Current Liabilities: Other  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities: Other(a)

  

 ― 

  

  

 75 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 8 

Total Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments  

$

 277 

  

$

 386 

  

$

 266 

  

$

 245 

Total Derivatives  

$

 283 

  

$

 473 

  

$

 271 

  

$

 245 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Amounts at Duke Energy include $67 million related to interest rate swaps at Duke Energy Indiana which receive regulatory accounting treatment.

  

The following table shows the amount of the gains and losses recognized on derivative instruments designated and qualifying as

cash flow hedges by type of derivative contract, and the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations line items in which such gains and losses are included for Duke Energy.

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

Cash Flow Hedges—Location and Amount of Pre-Tax Gains (Losses) Recognized in Comprehensive Income

  

   

  

 ��

  

  

  

  

   

Three Months Ended

  

   

September 30,

(in millions)  

2012 

  

2011 

Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI  

  

  

  

  

  

Interest rate contracts  

$

 (4) 

  

$

 (73) 

Commodity contracts  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI  

$

 (3) 

  

$

 (73) 

Location of Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings(a)

  

  

  

  

  

Interest rate contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

Interest expense  

$

 2 

  

$

 (1) 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings  

$

 2 

  

$

 (1) 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Represents the gains and losses on cash flow hedges previously recorded in AOCI during the term of the hedging relationship and reclassified into earnings during the current period.

The following table shows the amount of gains and losses recognized on derivative instruments designated and qualifying as cash flow hedges by type of derivative contract, and the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations line items in which such gains and losses are included when reclassified from AOCI.

The following table shows the amount of gains and losses recognized on derivative instruments designated and qualifying as cash flow hedges by type of derivative contract, and the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations line items in which such gains and losses are included when reclassified from AOCI.

   

Nine Months Ended

 

 

 

 

 

   

September 30,

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

(in millions)

2012 

  

2011 

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI

Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI

  

  

  

  

Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate contracts

Interest rate contracts

$

 (30) 

  

$

 (80) 

Interest rate contracts

$

 13 

 

$

 18 

Commodity Contracts

  

 1 

  

 ― 

Commodity contracts

Commodity contracts

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI

$

 (29) 

  

$

 (80) 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI

$

 14 

 

$

 18 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings(a)

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings(a)

  

  

  

  

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings(a)

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate contracts

  

  

  

  

Interest rate contracts(b)

Interest rate contracts(b)

 

 

 

 

 

Interest expense

Interest expense

$

 ― 

  

$

 (4) 

Interest expense

$

 (1) 

 

$

 (1) 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings

$

 ― 

  

$

 (4) 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings

$

 (1) 

 

$

 (1) 

(a)

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Represents the gains and losses on cash flow hedges previously recorded in AOCI during the term of the hedging relationship and reclassified into earnings during the current period.

(b)

Amounts in AOCI related to terminated hedges are reclassified to earnings as the interest expense is recorded. The effective portion of the hedges will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt.

   

  

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Represents the gains and losses on cash flow hedges previously recorded in AOCI during the term of the hedging relationship and reclassified into earnings during the current period.

4962

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

There was no hedge ineffectiveness during the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, and no gains or losses have been excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness during the same periods.

At March 31, 2013, and 2012, $144 million and $102 million, respectively of pre-tax deferred net losses on derivative instruments related to interest rate cash flow hedges were included as a component of AOCI and a $4 million pre-tax gain is expected to be recognized in earnings during the next 12 months as the hedged transactions occur.

The following tables show the amount of pre-tax gains and losses recognized on undesignated contracts by type of derivative instrument, and the line items in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income in which such gains and losses are included or deferred on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as regulatory assets or liabilities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized in Earnings

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue, regulated electric

$

 6 

 

$

 ― 

Revenue, nonregulated electric, natural gas and other

 

 (82) 

 

 

 36 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power regulated

 

 (52) 

 

 

 ― 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - nonregulated

 

 (7) 

 

 

 ― 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Interest expense

 

 (4) 

 

 

 ― 

Total Pre-tax (Losses) Gains Recognized in Earnings

$

 (139) 

 

$

 36 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets or Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

$

 105 

 

$

 (1) 

Regulatory liability

 

 (5) 

 

 

 5 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

 

 13 

 

 

 22 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets of Liabilities

$

 113 

 

$

 26 

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS

The following tables show fair value amounts of derivative contracts, and the line items in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in which such amounts are included. The fair values of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject to master netting arrangements where Duke Energy Carolinas nets the fair value of derivative contracts subject to master netting arrangements with the same counterparty on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Cash collateral payables and receivables associated with the derivative contracts have not been netted against the fair value amounts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Asset

 

Liability

 

Asset

 

Liability

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current liabilities: other

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 6 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 6 

Total Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 ― 

 

$

 5 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 12 

Total Derivatives

$

 ― 

 

$

 5 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 12 

63


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

The tables below show the balance sheet location of the derivative contracts subject to enforceable master netting agreements and include collateral posted to offset the net position. This disclosure is intended to enable users to evaluate the effect of netting arrangements on Duke Energy Carolinas’ financial position. The amount shown in the net position column is calculated by counterparty.

Most derivatives are entered into with counterparties under enforceable master netting agreements, or with an ISO such as MISO or PJM. Derivatives entered into with a clearinghouse are usually over-collateralized due to the requirement to post initial margin upon entering into contracts. The amounts shown as offset are limited by the amount of exposure to a counterparty such that an over collateralized position at one counterparty is not allowed to reduce an under collateralized position at another counterparty. In addition to the amounts shown as offset, in the table, Duke Energy Carolinas may also have available accounts receivable or accounts payable to offset exposures in the event of bankruptcy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 2 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

(a)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 3 

(b)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 6 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 6 

(a)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 6 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 6 

(b)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(b)

Included in Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There were insignificant losses on cash flow hedges reclassified at Duke Energy Carolinas for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

At March 31, 2013 and 2012, there were no pre-tax deferred net gains or losses on outstanding derivative instruments related to cash flow hedges remaining in AOCI for Duke Energy Carolinas.

At March 31, 2013 and 2012, there were no pre-tax losses recognized on undesignated contracts for Duke Energy Carolinas.

PROGRESS ENERGY

The following tables show fair value amounts of derivative contracts, and the line items in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in which such amounts are included. The fair values of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject to master netting arrangements where Progress Energy nets the fair value of derivative contracts subject to master netting arrangements with the same counterparty on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Cash collateral payables and receivables associate with the derivative contracts have not been netted against the fair value amounts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Asset

 

Liability

 

Asset

 

Liability

Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current liabilities: other

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Total Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 3 

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current assets: other

$

 13 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

Investments and other assets: other

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 8 

 

 

 ― 

Current liabilities: other

 

 20 

 

 

 140 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 231 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 12 

 

 

 159 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 195 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 11 

Total Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 47 

 

$

 299 

 

$

 11 

 

$

 437 

Total Derivatives

$

 47 

 

$

 301 

 

$

 11 

 

$

 440 

64


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

The tables below show the balance sheet location of the derivative contracts subject to enforceable master netting agreements and include collateral posted to offset the net position. This disclosure is intended to enable users to evaluate the effect of netting arrangements on Progress Energy’s financial position. The amount shown in the net position column is calculated by counterparty.

Most derivatives are entered into with counterparties under enforceable master netting agreements, or with an ISO such as MISO or PJM. Derivatives entered into with a clearinghouse are usually over-collateralized due to the requirement to post initial margin upon entering into contracts The amounts shown as offset are limited by the amount of exposure to a counterparty such that an over collateralized position at one counterparty is not allowed to reduce an under collateralized position at another counterparty. In addition to the amounts shown as offset, in the table, Progress Energy may also have available accounts receivable or accounts payables to offset exposures in the event of bankruptcy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 33 

 

$

 21 

 

$

 12 

(a)

Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 14 

 

 

 12 

 

 

 2 

(b)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 141 

 

 

 34 

 

 

 107 

(c)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 156 

 

 

 34 

 

 

 122 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 4 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 4 

 

Total Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 160 

 

 

 34 

 

 

 126 

(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

��

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 3 

(a)

Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 8 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 8 

(b)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 244 

 

 

 22 

 

 

 222 

(c)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 192 

 

 

 36 

 

 

 156 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 4 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 4 

 

Total Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 196 

 

 

 36 

 

 

 160 

(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(b)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(c)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(d)

Included in Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

The following table shows the amount of gains and losses recognized on derivative instruments designated and qualifying as cash flow hedges by type of derivative contract, and the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income line items in which such gains and losses are included when reclassified from AOCI.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

$

 1 

 

$

 ― 

Interest rate contracts

 

 ― 

 

 

 4 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI

$

 1 

 

$

 4 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings(a)

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate contracts(b)

 

 

 

 

 

Interest expense

$

 ― 

 

$

 (4) 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings

$

 ― 

 

$

 (4) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Represents the gains and losses on cash flow hedges previously recorded in AOCI during the term of the hedging relationships and reclassified into earnings during the current period.

(b)

Amounts in AOCI related to terminated hedges are reclassified to earnings as the interest expense is recorded. The effective portion of the hedges will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

65


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

At March 31, 2013, and 2012 $68 million and $226 million, respectively of pre-tax deferred net losses on derivative instruments related to interest rate cash flow hedges were included as a component of AOCI and a $5 million pre-tax loss is expected to be recognized in earnings during the next 12 months as the hedged transactions occur.

The following tables show the amount of pre-tax gains and losses recognized on undesignated contracts by type of derivative instrument, and the line items in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income in which such gains and losses are included or deferred on the consolidated Balance Sheets as regulatory assets or liabilities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized in Earnings

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue, regulated electric

$

 6 

 

$

 ― 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - regulated(a)

 

 (52) 

 

 

 (105) 

Other income and expenses, net

 

 ― 

 

 

 8 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Interest expense

 

 (4) 

 

 

 ― 

Total Pre-tax (Losses) Gains Recognized in Earnings

$

 (50) 

 

$

 (97) 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets or Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts(c)

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

$

 105 

 

$

 (206) 

Interest rate contracts(b)

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

 

 5 

 

 

 ― 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets of Liabilities

$

 110 

 

$

 (206) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

After the settlement of the derivatives and the consumption of the fuel, gains or losses are passed through the fuel cost-recovery clause.

(b)

Amounts in regulatory assets and liabilities related to terminated hedges are reclassified to earnings as the interest expense is recorded. The hedges will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt.

(c)

Amounts are recorded as regulatory assets and liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets until gains or losses are passed through the fuel cost-recovery clause.

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS

The following tables show fair value amounts of derivative contracts, and the line items in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in which such amounts are included. The fair values of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject to master netting arrangements where Duke Energy Progress nets the fair value of derivative contracts subject to master netting arrangements with the same counterparty on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Cash collateral payables and receivables associated with the derivative contracts have not been netted against the fair value amounts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Asset

 

Liability

 

Asset

 

Liability

Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current liabilities: other

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Total Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts(a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current assets: other

$

 4 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 ― 

Investments and other assets: other

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

Current liabilities: other

 

 8 

 

 

 52 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 85 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 2 

 

 

 54 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 68 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 11 

Total Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 14 

 

$

 106 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 164 

Total Derivatives

$

 14 

 

$

 108 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 166 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Substantially all of these contracts receive regulatory treatment.

66


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

The tables below show the balance sheet location of the derivative contracts subject to enforceable master netting agreements and include collateral posted to offset the net position. This disclosure is intended to enable users to evaluate the effect of netting arrangements on Duke Energy Progress’ financial position. The amount shown in the net position column is calculated by counterparty.

Most derivatives are entered into with counterparties under enforceable master netting agreements, or with an ISO such as MISO or PJM. Derivatives entered into with a clearinghouse are usually over-collateralized due to the requirement to post initial margin upon entering into contracts. The amounts shown as offset are limited by the amount of exposure to a counterparty such that an over collateralized position at one counterparty is not allowed to reduce an under collateralized position at another counterparty. In addition to the amounts shown as offset, in the table, Duke Energy Progress may also have available accounts receivable or accounts payable to offset exposures in the events of bankruptcy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 12 

 

$

 8 

 

$

 4 

(a)

Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 2 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

(b)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 53 

 

 

 8 

 

 

 45 

(c)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 55 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 50 

(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 1 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

(a)

Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

(b)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 97 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 95 

(c)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 69 

 

 

 7 

 

 

 62 

(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(b)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(c)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(d)

Included in Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

67


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

The following table shows the amount of gains and losses recognized on derivative instruments designated and qualifying as cash flow hedges by type of derivative contract, and the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income line items in which such gains and losses are included when reclassified from AOCI.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate contracts(b)

$

 ― 

 

$

 5 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recorded in AOCI

$

 ― 

 

$

 5 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings(a)

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate contracts(b)

 

 

 

 

 

Interest expense

$

 ― 

 

$

 (3) 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings

$

 ― 

 

$

 (3) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Represents the gains and losses on cash flow hedges previously recorded in AOCI during the term of the hedging relationships and reclassified into earnings during the current period

(b)

Amounts in AOCI related to terminated hedges are reclassified to earnings as the interest expense is recorded. The effective portion of the hedges will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At March 31, 2012, $109 million of pre-tax deferred net losses on derivative instruments related to interest rate cash flow hedges were included as a component of AOCI.

The following tables show the amount of pre-tax gains and losses recognized on undesignated contracts by type of derivative instrument and the line items in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income in which such gains and losses are included or deferred on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as regulatory assets or liabilities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized in Earnings

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue, regulated electric

$

 6 

 

$

 ― 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power -regulated(a)

 

 (17) 

 

 

 (26) 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Interest expense

 

 (3) 

 

 

 ― 

Total Pre-tax (Losses) Gains Recognized in Earnings

$

 (14) 

 

$

 (26) 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets or Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts(c)

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

$

 36 

 

$

 (59) 

Interest rate contracts(b)

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets of Liabilities

$

 39 

 

$

 (59) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

After the settlement of the derivatives and the consumption of fuel, gains or losses are passed through the fuel cost-recovery clause.

(b)

Amounts in regulatory assets and liabilities related to terminated hedges are reclassified to earnings as the interest expense is recorded. The hedges will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt.

(c)

Amounts are recorded in regulatory assets and liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets until gains or losses are passed through the fuel cost-recovery clause.

DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA

The following tables show fair value amounts of derivative contracts, and the line items in the Condensed Balance Sheets in which such amounts are included. The fair value of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject to master netting arrangements where Duke Energy Florida nets the fair value of derivative contracts subject to master netting arrangements with the same counterparty on the Condensed Balance Sheets. Cash collateral payables and receivables associated with the derivative contracts have not been netted against the fair value amounts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Asset

 

Liability

 

Asset

 

Liability

Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current liabilities: other

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

Total Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts(a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current Assets: Other

$

 8 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 ― 

Investments and Other Assets: Other

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 7 

 

 

 ― 

Current liabilities: other

 

 13 

 

 

 89 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 146 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 10 

 

 

 101 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 123 

Total Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 33 

 

$

 190 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 269 

Total Derivatives

$

 33 

 

$

 190 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 270 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Substantially all of these contracts receive regulatory treatment.

68


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

The tables below show the balance sheet location of the derivative contracts subject to enforceable master netting agreements and include collateral posted to offset the net position. This disclosure is intended to enable users to evaluate the effect of netting arrangements on Duke Energy Florida’s financial position. The amount shown in the net position column is calculated by counterparty.

Most derivatives are entered into with counterparties under enforceable master netting agreements, or with an ISO such as MISO or PJM. Derivatives entered into with a clearinghouse are usually over-collateralized due to the requirement to post initial margin upon entering into contracts. The amounts shown as offset are limited by the amount of exposure to a counterparty such that an over collateralized position at one counterparty is not allowed to reduce an under collateralized position at another counterparty. In addition to the amounts offset, in the table, Duke Energy Florida may also have available accounts receivable or accounts payable to offset exposures in the event of bankruptcy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on Condensed Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 21 

 

$

 13 

 

$

 8 

(a)

Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 12 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 2 

(b)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 89 

 

 

 26 

 

 

 63 

(c)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 101 

 

 

 29 

 

 

 72 

(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on Condensed Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 2 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

(a)

Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 7 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 7 

(b)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 147 

 

 

 20 

 

 

 127 

(c)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 123 

 

 

 29 

 

 

 94 

(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Current Assets on the Condensed Balance Sheet.

(b)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Balance Sheet.

(c)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities on the Condensed Balance Sheet.

(d)

Included in Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Balance Sheet.

There were insignificant gains on cash flow hedges recorded or reclassified at Duke Energy Florida for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

At March 31, 2012, $42 million of pre-tax deferred net losses on derivative instruments related to outstanding interest rate cash flow hedges that were included as a component of AOCI.

69


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

The following tables show the amount of pre-tax gains and losses recognized on undesignated contracts by type of derivative instrument and the line items in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income in which such gains and losses are included or deferred on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as regulatory assets or liabilities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized in Earnings

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - regulated(a)

$

 (35) 

 

$

 (79) 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Interest expense

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

Total Pre-tax (Losses) Gains Recognized in Earnings

$

 (36) 

 

$

 (79) 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets or Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts(b)

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

$

 69 

 

$

 (147) 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets of Liabilities

$

 70 

 

$

 (147) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

After the settlement of the derivatives and the consumption of fuel, gains or losses are passed through the fuel cost-recovery clause.

(b)

Amounts are recorded in regulatory assets and liabilities in the Condensed Balance Sheets until gains or losses are passed through the fuel cost-recovery clause.

DUKE ENERGY OHIO

The following tables show fair value amounts of derivative contracts, and the line items in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in which such amounts are included. The fair values of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject to master netting arrangements where Duke Energy Ohio nets the fair value of derivative contracts subject to master netting arrangements with the same counterparty on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Cash collateral payables and receivables associated with the derivative contracts have not been netted against the fair value amounts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Asset

 

Liability

 

Asset

 

Liability

Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate contracts

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current assets: other

$

 2 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 ― 

Total Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 2 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 ― 

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current assets: other

$

 42 

 

$

 32 

 

$

 31 

 

$

 4 

Investments and other assets: other

 

 13 

 

 

 7 

 

 

 81 

 

 

 51 

Current liabilities: other

 

 130 

 

 

 182 

 

 

 106 

 

 

 132 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 57 

 

 

 91 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 4 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Deferred credits and other liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 

 6 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 7 

Total Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 242 

 

$

 319 

 

$

 218 

 

$

 199 

Total Derivatives

$

 244 

 

$

 319 

 

$

 220 

 

$

 199 

The tables below show the balance sheet location of the derivative contracts subject to enforceable master netting agreements and include collateral posted to offset the net position. This disclosure is intended to enable users to evaluate the effect of netting arrangements on Duke Energy Ohio’s financial position. The amount shown in the net position column is calculated by counterparty.

Most derivatives are entered into with counterparties under enforceable master netting agreements, or with an ISO such as MISO or PJM. Derivatives entered into with a clearinghouse are usually over-collateralized due to the requirement to post initial margin upon entering into contracts. The amounts shown as offset are limited by the amount of exposure to a counterparty such that an over collateralized position at one counterparty is not allowed to reduce an under collateralized position at another counterparty. In addition to the amounts shown as offset, in the table, Duke Energy Ohio may also have available accounts receivable or accounts payable to offset exposures in the event of bankruptcy.

70


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 172 

 

$

 163 

 

$

 9 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

 

Total Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 174 

 

 

 163 

 

 

 11 

(a)

Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 70 

 

 

 63 

 

 

 7 

(b)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 214 

 

 

 209 

 

 

 5 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

Total Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 215 

 

 

 209 

 

 

 6 

(c)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 98 

 

 

 90 

 

 

 8 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 6 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 6 

 

Total Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 104 

 

 

 90 

 

 

 14 

(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 137 

 

$

 110 

 

$

 27 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

 

Total Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 139 

 

 

 110 

 

 

 29 

(a)

Derivative Assets: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 81 

 

 

 51 

 

 

 30 

(b)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 136 

 

 

 125 

 

 

 11 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

Total Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 137 

 

 

 125 

 

 

 12 

(c)

Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 55 

 

 

 51 

 

 

 4 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 7 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 7 

 

Total Derivative Liabilities: Non-current

 

 

 62 

 

 

 51 

 

 

 11 

(d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(b)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(c)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(d)

Included in Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

 

There were no gains or losses on cash flow hedges recorded or reclassified at Duke Energy Ohio for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012, and 2011, respectively. There were no hedge ineffectiveness during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, and no gains or losses have been excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness during the same periods for all Duke Energy Registrants.

Duke EnergyAt September 30, 2012, and DecemberMarch 31, 2011, $136 million and $115 million, respectively of pre-tax deferred net losses on derivative instruments related to interest rate cash flow hedges remains in AOCI and a $2 million pre-tax gain is expected to be recognized in earnings during the next 12 months as the hedged transactions occur.

Duke Energy OhioAt September 30, 2012, and December 31, 20112013, there were no pre-tax deferred net gains or losses on derivative instruments related to cash flow hedges remaining in AOCI.AOCI for Duke Energy Ohio.

The following tables show the amount of the pre-tax gains and losses recognized on undesignated contracts by type of derivative instrument, and the line items in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income in which such gains and losses are included or deferred on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as regulatory assets or liabilities.

 

  

The following tables show the amount of the pre-tax gains and losses recognized on undesignated contracts by type of derivative

instrument, and the line item(s) in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income in which such gains and losses are included or deferred on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as regulatory assets or liabilities.

  

Undesignated Contracts—Location and Amount of Pre-Tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized in Income or as Regulatory Assets

or Liabilities

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Duke Energy

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

   

Three Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)  

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized in Earnings  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Commodity contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Revenue, regulated electric  

$

 (22) 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas and other  

  

 (28) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (42) 

  

  

 (6) 

Other income and expenses  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - Regulated  

  

 (135) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Interest rate contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Interest expense  

  

 (4) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Total Pre-tax (Losses) Gains Recognized in Earnings  

$

 (190) 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 (42) 

  

$

 (6) 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets or Liabilities  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Commodity contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Regulatory Asset  

$

 61 

  

$

 2 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 2 

Regulatory Liability(a)

  

 12 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Interest rate contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Regulatory Asset(b)

  

 7 

  

  

 (146) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (4) 

Regulatory Liability(c)

  

 ― 

  

  

 (60) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets or Liabilities  

$

 80 

  

$

 (202) 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 (2) 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Amounts relate to commodity contracts at Duke Energy Indiana for the three months ended September 30, 2012.

(b)

Includes $82 million and $60 million related to interest rate swaps at Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Indiana, respectively for the three months ended September 30, 2011.

(c)

Amounts relate to interest rate swaps at Duke Energy Carolinas for the three months ended September 30, 2011.

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Duke Energy

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

   

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)  

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized in Earnings  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Commodity contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Revenue, regulated electric  

$

 (22) 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas and other  

  

 8 

  

  

 (25) 

  

  

 33 

  

  

 (28) 

Other income and expenses  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - Regulated  

  

 (135) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - non-regulated  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (1) 

Interest rate contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Interest expense  

  

 (4) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 (1) 

Total Pre-tax (Losses) Gains Recognized in Earnings  

$

 (154) 

  

$

 (26) 

  

$

 32 

  

$

 (30) 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets or Liabilities  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Commodity contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Regulatory Asset  

$

 61 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 (2) 

  

$

 1 

Regulatory Liability(a)

  

 34 

  

  

 12 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

Interest rate contracts  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Regulatory Asset(b)

  

 (3) 

  

  

 (155) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (4) 

Regulatory Liability(c)

  

 ― 

  

  

 (60) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets or Liabilities  

$

 92 

  

$

 (202) 

  

$

 (1) 

  

$

 (3) 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Amounts relate to commodity contracts at Duke Energy Indiana for the nine months ended September 30, 2012

(b)

Includes $91 million and $60 million related to interest rate swaps at Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Indiana, respectively for the nine months ended September 30, 2011.

(c)

Amounts relate to interest rate swaps at Duke Energy Carolinas for the nine months ended September 30, 2011.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized in Earnings

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue, nonregulated electric, natural gas and other

$

 (91) 

 

$

 71 

Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - nonregulated

 

 (7) 

 

 

 ― 

Total Pre-tax (Losses) Gains Recognized in Earnings

$

 (98) 

 

$

 71 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets or Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

$

 ― 

 

$

 (2) 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets of Liabilities

$

 1 

 

$

 (1) 

5071

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

 

Credit RiskDUKE ENERGY INDIANA

The following tables show fair value amounts of derivative contracts, and the line items in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in which such amounts are included. The fair values of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject to master netting arrangements where Duke Energy Indiana nets the fair value of derivative contracts subject to master netting arrangements with the same counterparty on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Cash collateral payables and receivables associated with the derivative contracts have not been netted against the fair value amounts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Asset

 

Liability

 

Asset

 

Liability

Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current assets: other

$

 5 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 10 

 

$

 ― 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current liabilities: other

 

 ― 

 

 

 55 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 63 

Total Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments

$

 5 

 

$

 55 

 

$

 10 

 

$

 63 

Total Derivatives

$

 5 

 

$

 55 

 

$

 10 

 

$

 63 

The tables below show the balance sheet location of the derivative contracts subject to enforceable master netting agreements and include collateral posted to offset the net position. This disclosure is intended to enable users to evaluate the effect of netting arrangements on Duke Energy Indiana’s financial position. The amount shown in the net position column is calculated by counterparty.

Most derivatives are entered into with counterparties under enforceable master netting agreements, or with an ISO such as MISO or PJM. Derivatives entered into with a clearinghouse are usually over-collateralized due to the requirement to post initial margin upon entering into contracts. The amounts shown as offset are limited by the amount of exposure to a counterparty such that an over collateralized position at one counterparty is not allowed to reduce an under collateralized position at another counterparty. In addition to the amounts shown as offset, in the table, Duke Energy Indiana may also have available accounts receivable or accounts payable to offset exposures in the event of bankruptcy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 5 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 5 

(a)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 55 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 55 

(b)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Gross amounts recognized

 

Gross amounts offset

 

Net amounts included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

 

Derivative Assets: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject to Master Netting

 

$

 10 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 10 

(a)

Derivative Liabilities: Current

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not Subject to Master Netting

 

 

 63 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 63 

(b)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(b)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

72


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

There were insignificant gains on cash flow hedges reclassified at Duke Energy Indiana for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

There were no pre-tax deferred net gains or losses on derivative instruments related to cash flow hedges remaining in AOCI for Duke Energy Indiana at March 31, 2013, and 2012, respectively.

The following tables show the amount of the pre-tax gains and losses recognized on undesignated contracts by type of derivative instrument and line items in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income in which such gains and losses are included or deferred on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as regulatory assets or liabilities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Location of Pre-tax Gains and (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets or Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory liability

$

 4 

 

$

 4 

Interest rate contracts

 

 

 

 

 

Regulatory asset

 

 8 

 

 

 21 

Total Pre-tax Gains (Losses) Recognized as Regulatory Assets of Liabilities

$

 12 

 

$

 25 

CREDIT RISK

Certain derivative contracts of the Duke Energy and Duke Energy Ohio’s derivative contractsRegistrants contain contingent credit features, such as material adverse change clauses or payment acceleration clauses that could result in immediate payments, the posting of letters of credit or the termination of the derivative contract before maturity if specific events occur, such as a downgrade of Duke Energy or Duke Energy Ohio’s credit rating downgrade below investment grade.

The following table shows information with respect to derivative contracts that are in a net liability position and contain objective credit-risk related payment provisions. The amounts disclosed in the table below represent the aggregate fair value amounts of such derivative instruments at the end of the reporting period, the aggregate fair value of assets that are already posted as collateral under such derivative instruments at the end of the reporting period, and the aggregate fair value of additional assets that would be required to be transferred in the event that credit-risk-related contingent features were triggered.

Information Regarding Derivative Instruments that Contain Credit-risk Related Contingent Features

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy

  

Duke Energy Ohio

(in millions)

  

September 30, 2012

Aggregate Fair Value Amounts of Derivative Instruments in a Net Liability Position

  

$

 524 

  

$

 195 

Collateral Already Posted

  

$

 158 

  

$

 84 

Additional Cash Collateral or Letters of Credit in the Event Credit-risk-related Contingent Features were Triggered at the End of the Reporting Period

  

$

 259 

  

$

 7 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

  

December 31, 2011

Aggregate Fair Value Amounts of Derivative Instruments in a Net Liability Position

  

$

 96 

  

$

 94 

Collateral Already Posted

  

$

 36 

  

$

 35 

Additional Cash Collateral or Letters of Credit in the Event Credit-risk-related Contingent Features were Triggered at the End of the Reporting Period

  

$

 5 

  

$

 5 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Duke

Energy

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke

Energy

Progress

 

Duke

Energy

Florida

 

Duke

Energy

Ohio

Aggregate fair value amounts of derivative instruments in a net liability position

 

$

 512 

 

$

 230 

 

$

 79 

 

$

 151 

 

$

 279 

Collateral already posted

 

 

 215 

 

 

 35 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 32 

 

 

 180 

Additional cash collateral or letters of credit in the event credit-risk-related contingent features were triggered at the end of the reporting period

 

 

 202 

 

 

 195 

 

 

 76 

 

 

 119 

 

 

 7 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Duke

Energy

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke

Energy

Progress

 

Duke

Energy

Florida

 

Duke

Energy

Ohio

Aggregate fair value amounts of derivative instruments in a net liability position

 

$

 466 

 

$

 286 

 

$

 108 

 

$

 178 

 

$

 176 

Collateral already posted

 

 

 163 

 

 

 59 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 50 

 

 

 104 

Additional cash collateral or letters of credit in the event credit-risk-related contingent features were triggered at the end of the reporting period

 

 

 230 

 

 

 227 

 

 

 99 

 

 

 128 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Netting of Cash Collateral and Derivative Assets and Liabilities Under Master Netting Arrangements. In accordance with applicable accounting rules,guidance, the Duke Energy and Duke Energy OhioRegistrants have elected to offset fair value amounts (or amounts that approximate fair value) recognized on their Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets related to cash collateral amounts receivable or payable against fair value amounts recognized for derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty under the same master netting agreement. The amounts disclosed in the table below represent the receivables related to the right to reclaim cash collateral and payables related to the obligation to return cash collateral under master netting arrangements. See Note 9 for additional information on fair value disclosures related to derivatives.

 

Information Regarding Cash Collateral under Master Netting Arrangements

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

  

September 30, 2012

(in millions)

Receivables

  

Payable

  

Receivables

  

Payable

Amounts offset against net derivative positions

$

 93 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 20 

  

$

 ― 

Amounts not offset against net derivative positions

$

 72 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 70 

  

$

 ― 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

December 31, 2011

(in millions)

Receivables

  

Payable

  

Receivables

  

Payable

Amounts offset against net derivative positions

$

 10 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 9 

  

$

 ― 

Amounts not offset against net derivative positions

$

 30 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 28 

  

$

 ― 

5173

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Receivables

 

Payables

 

Receivables

 

Payables

Duke Energy

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amounts offset against net derivative positions

$

 107 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 73 

 

$

 ― 

Amounts not offset against net derivative positions

 

 108 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 93 

 

 

 ― 

Progress Energy

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amounts offset against net derivative positions

 

 35 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 58 

 

 

 ― 

Amounts not offset against net derivative positions

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amounts offset against net derivative positions

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 ― 

Amounts not offset against net derivative positions

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

Duke Energy Florida

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amounts offset against net derivative positions

 

 32 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 49 

 

 

 ― 

Amounts not offset against net derivative positions

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amounts offset against net derivative positions

 

 72 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 15 

 

 

 ― 

Amounts not offset against net derivative positions

$

 108 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 92 

 

$

 ― 

 

9. Fair Value of Financial Assets and LiabilitiesFAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND LIABILITIES

Under existing accounting guidance, fair value is considered to be the exchange price in an orderly transaction between market participants to sell an asset or transfer a liability at the measurement date. The fair value definition focuses on an exit price, which is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability versus an entry price, which would be the price paid to acquire an asset or received to assume a liability. Fair value measurements require the use of market data or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, including assumptions about risk and the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. These inputs can be readily observable, corroborated by market data or generally unobservable. Valuation techniques are required to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. A midmarket pricing convention (the midpoint price between bid and ask prices) is permitted for use as a practical expedient.

The Duke Energy Registrants classify recurring and non-recurring fair value measurements based on the following fair value hierarchy, as prescribed by the accounting guidance for fair value, whichvalue. The hierarchy prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three levels:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities thatthe Duke Energy hasRegistrants have the ability to access. An active market for the asset or liability is one in which transactions for the asset or liability occursoccur with sufficient frequency and volume to provide ongoing pricing information. The Duke Energy does not adjust quoted market prices onRegistrants’ Level 1 for any blockage factor.primarily consists of financial instruments such as exchange-traded derivatives and listed equities.

Level 2—a fair value measurement utilizing inputs other than a quoted market price that are observable, either directly or indirectly, for the asset or liability. Level 2 inputs include, but are not limited to, quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in an active market, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active and inputs other than quoted market prices that are observable for the asset or liability, such as interest rate curves and yield curves observable at commonly quoted intervals, volatilities, credit risk and default rates. A Level 2 measurement cannot have more than an insignificant portion of the valuation based on unobservable inputs. Instruments in this category include non-exchange-traded derivatives, such as over-the-counter forwards, swaps and options; certain marketable debt securities; and financial instruments traded in less than active markets.

Level 3—any fair value measurements which include unobservable inputs for the asset or liability for more than an insignificant portion of the valuation. A level 3 measurementThese inputs may be based primarily onused with internally developed methodologies that result in management’s best estimate of fair value. Level 2 inputs.3 instruments may include longer-term instruments that extend into periods in which quoted prices or other observable inputs are not available.

The fair value accounting guidance for financial instruments permits entities to elect to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value that are not required to be accounted for at fair value under other GAAP. There are no financial assets or financial liabilities that are not required to be accounted for at fair value under GAAP for which the option to record at fair value has been elected by the Duke Energy Registrants. However, in the future, the Duke Energy Registrants may elect to measure certain financial instruments at fair value in accordance with this accounting guidance.

Transfers out of and into (out of) Levels 1, 2 or 3 represent existing assets or liabilities previously categorized as a higher level for which the inputs to the estimate became less observable or assets and liabilities that were previously classified as Level 2 or 3 for which the lowest significant input became more observable during the period.period, respectively. The Duke Energy Registrant’s Policypolicy for the recognition of transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy is to recognize the transfer at the end of the period. There were no transfers out of or into (out of) Levels 1, 2 and 3 during the period.three months ended March 31, 2013.

74


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

Valuation methods of the primary fair value measurements disclosed below are as follows:

Investments in equity securities. securities

Investments in equity securities, other than those accounted for as equity and cost method investments, are typically valued at the closing price in the principal active market as of the last business day of the quarter. Principal active markets for equity prices include published exchanges such as NASDAQ and NYSE. Foreign equity prices are translated from their trading currency using the currency exchange rate in effect at the close of the principal active market. Prices have not been adjusted to reflect for after-hours market activity. The majority of investments in equity securities are valued using Level 1 measurements. For certain investments that are valued on a net asset value per share (or its equivalent), or the net asset value basis, when the Duke Energy doesRegistrants do not have the ability to redeem the investment in the near term at net asset value per share (or its equivalent), or the net asset value is not available as of the measurement date, the fair value measurement of the investment is categorized as Level 3.

Investments in available-for-sale auction rate securities.securities

Duke Energy holdsand Duke Energy Carolinas hold auction rate securities for which an active market does not currently exist. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, $39 million of these investments in auction rate securities were redeemed at full par value plus accrued interest. Auction rate securities held are student loan securities for which at March 31, 2013  approximately 90%84 percent is ultimately backed by the U.S. government. Approximately 18%At March 31, 2013, approximately 24 percent of these securities are AAA rated. As of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013, and December, 31 20112012 all of these auction rate securities are classified as long-term investments and are valued asusing Level 3 measurements. The methods and significant assumptions used to determine the fair values of the investment in auction rate debt securities represent estimations of fair value using internal discounted cash flow models which incorporate primarily management’s own assumptions as to the term over which such investments will be recovered at par (ranging from 710 to 1719 years), the current level of interest rates (less than 0.5%0.3%), and the appropriate risk-adjusted discount rates (up to 5.0% reflecting a tenor of up to 1719 years). In preparing the valuations, all significant value drivers were considered, including the underlying collateral (primarily evaluated on the basis of credit ratings, parity ratios and the percentage of loans backed by the U.S. government). Auction rate securities which are classified as Short-term investments are valued using Level 2 measurements, as they are valued at par based on a commitment by the issuer to redeem at par value. There were no auction rate securities classified as Short-term investments as of September 30, 2012 or December 31, 2011.

There were no other-than-temporary impairments associated with investments in auction rate debt securities during the three months ended and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 or 2011.2012.

Investments in debt securities.securities

Most debt investments, (includingincluding those held in the Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Funds (NDTF)), are valued based on a calculation using interest rate curves and credit spreads applied to the terms of the debt instrument (maturity and coupon interest rate) and consider the counterparty credit rating. Most debt valuations are Level 2 measurements. If the market for a particular fixed income security is relatively inactive or illiquid, the measurement is a Level 3 measurement. U.S. Treasury debt is typically a Level 1 measurement.

53


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

Commodity derivatives.derivatives

The pricing for commodity derivatives is primarily a calculated value which incorporates the forward price and is adjusted for liquidity (bid-ask spread), credit or non-performance risk (after reflecting credit enhancements such as collateral) and discounted to present value. The primary difference between a Level 2 and a Level 3 measurement hasrelates to do with the level of activity in forward markets for the commodity. If the market is relatively inactive, the measurement is deemed to be a Level 3 measurement. Commodity derivatives with clearinghouses are classified as Level 1 measurements. For commodity derivative contracts classified as Level 3, Duke Energy utilizes internally-developed financial models based upon the income approach (discounted cash flow method) to measure the fair values. The primary inputs to these models are the forward commodity prices used to develop the forward price curves for the respective instrument. The pricing inputs are derived from published exchange transaction prices and other observable or public data sources. In the absence of observable market information that supports the pricing inputs, there is a presumption that the transaction price is equal to the last observable price for a similar period. For the commodity derivative contracts classified as Level 3, the pricing inputs for natural gas and electricity forward price curves are not observable for the full term of the related contracts. In isolation, increases (decreases) in unobservable natural gas forward prices would result in favorable (unfavorable) fair value adjustments for gas purchase contracts. In isolation, increases (decreases) in unobservable electricity forward prices would result in unfavorable (favorable) fair value adjustments for electricity sales contracts. Duke Energy regularly evaluates and validates the pricing inputs used to estimate fair value of gas purchase contracts by a market participant price verification procedure, which provides a comparison of internal forward commodity curves to market participant generated curves.

Interest rate derivatives

Most over-the-counter interest rate contract derivatives are valued using financial models which utilize observable inputs for similar instruments and are classified within Level 2. Such models may be internally developed, but are similar to models commonly used across industries to value derivative contracts. To determine fair value, the Duke Energy Registrants utilize various inputs and factors including market data and assumptions that market participants would use in pricing assets or liabilities as well as assumptions about the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. The inputs and factors may include forward interest rate curves, notional amounts, interest rates and credit quality of the Duke Energy Registrants and their counterparties.

Goodwill and Long-lived Assets. See Note 7 for a discussion of the valuation for goodwill and long-lived assets.

DUKE ENERGY

The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for assets and liabilities recorded on Duke Energy's Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the valuation of fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels. Derivative amounts in the table

Duke Energy

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for financial assets and liabilities recorded at fair value on Duke Energy's Condensed

Consolidated Balance Sheets. Derivative amounts in the table below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8. See Note 10 for additional information related to investments by major security type.

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

Total Fair Value Amounts at

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

  

September 30, 2012

  

Level 1

  

     Level 2

  

    Level 3

Investments in available-for-sale auction rate securities(a)

  

$

 41 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 41 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities  

  

  

 2,779 

  

  

 2,707 

  

  

 53 

  

  

 19 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities  

  

  

 1,376 

  

  

 234 

  

  

 1,095 

  

  

 47 

Other long-term trading and available-for-sale equity securities(b)

  

  

 77 

  

  

 68 

  

  

 9 

  

  

 ― 

Other trading and available-for-sale debt securities(c)

  

  

 650 

  

  

 66 

  

  

 584 

  

  

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

  

  

 89 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 10 

  

  

 79 

  

Total Assets  

  

  

 5,012 

  

  

 3,075 

  

  

 1,751 

  

  

 186 

Derivative liabilities(d)

  

  

 (776) 

  

  

 (24) 

  

  

 (598) 

  

  

 (154) 

  

Net Assets  

  

$

 4,236 

  

$

 3,051 

  

$

 1,153 

  

$

 32 

  

   

  

Total Fair Value Amounts at

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

  

December 31, 2011

  

Level 1

  

Level 2

  

Level 3

Investments in available-for-sale auction rate securities(a)

  

$

 71 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 71 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities  

  

  

 1,337 

  

  

 1,285 

  

  

 46 

  

  

 6 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities  

  

  

 723 

  

  

 109 

  

  

 567 

  

  

 47 

Other long-term trading and available-for-sale equity securities(b)

  

  

 68 

  

  

 61 

  

  

 7 

  

  

 ― 

Other trading and available-for-sale debt securities(c)

  

  

 382 

  

  

 22 

  

  

 360 

  

  

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

  

  

 74 

  

  

 43 

  

  

 6 

  

  

 25 

  

Total Assets  

  

  

 2,655 

  

  

 1,520 

  

  

 986 

  

  

 149 

Derivative liabilities(d)

  

  

 (264) 

  

  

 (36) 

  

  

 (164) 

  

  

 (64) 

  

Net Assets  

  

$

 2,391 

  

$

 1,484 

  

$

 822 

  

$

 85 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(b)

Included in Other within Current Assets and Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(c)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets and Short-term Investments on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(d)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

  

The following tables provide a reconciliation of beginning and ending balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a

recurring basis where the determination of fair value includes significant unobservable inputs (Level 3):

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

Available-for-Sale Auction Rate Securities

  

Available-for-Sale NDTF Investments

  

Derivatives (net)

  

Total

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at June 30, 2012

$

 41 

  

$

 64 

  

$

 (19) 

  

$

 86 

Amounts acquired in Progress Energy Merger

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (30) 

  

  

 (30) 

  

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized losses included in earnings:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Regulated electric

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 12 

  

  

 12 

  

  

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (6) 

  

  

 (6) 

  

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Purchases

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

Issuances

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (24) 

  

  

 (24) 

  

  

Settlements

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (10) 

  

  

 (10) 

  

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 3 

Balance at September 30, 2012

$

 41 

  

$

 66 

  

$

 (75) 

  

$

 32 

Three Months Ended September 30, 2011

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at June 30, 2011

$

 90 

  

$

 53 

  

$

 (22) 

  

$

 121 

  

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 8 

  

Total pre-tax losses included in other comprehensive income:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Gains on available for sale securities and other

  

 8 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 8 

  

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Purchases

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 8 

  

  

Settlements

  

 (1) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (2) 

  

  

 (3) 

  

Total gains (losses) included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 (16) 

  

  

 (15) 

  

Transfers out of Level 3

  

 (25) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (25) 

Balance at September 30, 2011

$

 72 

  

$

 54 

  

$

 (24) 

  

$

 102 

5475

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8. See Note 10 for additional information related to investments by major security type.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Investments in available-for-sale auction rate securities(a)

 

$

 28 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 28 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

 

 

 3,104 

 

 

 3,026 

 

 

 57 

 

 

 21 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities

 

 

 1,432 

 

 

 356 

 

 

 1,027 

 

 

 49 

Other trading and available-for-sale equity securities(b)

 

 

 93 

 

 

 84 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 ― 

Other trading and available-for-sale debt securities(c)

 

 

 634 

 

 

 94 

 

 

 540 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

 

 

 75 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 20 

 

 

 54 

 

Total assets

 

 

 5,366 

 

 

 3,561 

 

 

 1,653 

 

 

 152 

Derivative liabilities(d)

 

 

 (611) 

 

 

 (77) 

 

 

 (398) 

 

 

 (136) 

 

Net assets

 

$

 4,755 

 

$

 3,484 

 

$

 1,255 

 

$

 16 

 

(in millions)

Available-for-Sale Auction Rate Securities

  

Available-for-Sale NDTF Investments

  

Derivatives (net)

  

Total

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at December 31, 2011

$

 71 

  

$

 53 

  

$

 (39) 

  

$

 85 

Amounts acquired in Progress Energy Merger

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (30) 

  

  

 (30) 

  

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized losses included in earnings:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Regulated electric

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 37 

  

  

 37 

  

  

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (9) 

  

  

 (9) 

  

Total pre-tax gains included in other comprehensive income:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Gains on available for sale securities and other

  

 9 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 9 

  

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

 ��

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Purchases

  

 ― 

  

  

 10 

  

  

 22 

  

  

 32 

  

  

Issuances

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (24) 

  

  

 (24) 

  

  

Settlements

  

 (39) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (34) 

  

  

 (73) 

  

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 5 

Balance at September 30, 2012

$

 41 

  

$

 66 

  

$

 (75) 

  

$

 32 

Pre-tax amounts included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income related to Level 3 measurements outstanding at September 30, 2012

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 5 

Total

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 5 

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at December 31, 2010

$

 118 

  

$

 47 

  

$

 (19) 

  

$

 146 

  

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Regulated electric

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 8 

  

  

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (19) 

  

  

 (19) 

  

Total pre-tax gains included in other comprehensive income:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Gains on available for sale securities and other

  

 13 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 13 

  

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Purchases

  

 ― 

  

  

 7 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 15 

  

  

Sales

  

 ― 

  

  

 (3) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (3) 

  

  

Settlements

  

 (25) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (5) 

  

  

 (30) 

  

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 6 

  

Transfers out of Level 3

  

 (34) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (34) 

Balance at September 30, 2011

$

 72 

  

$

 54 

  

$

 (24) 

  

$

 102 

Pre-tax amounts included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income related to Level 3 measurements outstanding at September 30, 2011

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (12) 

  

  

 (12) 

Total

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 (12) 

  

$

 (12) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

Level 2

 

Level 3

Investments in available-for-sale auction rate securities(a)

 

$

 29 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 29 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

 

 

 2,837 

 

 

 2,762 

 

 

 54 

 

 

 21 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities

 

 

 1,405 

 

 

 317 

 

 

 1,040 

 

 

 48 

Other trading and available-for-sale equity securities(b)

 

 

 72 

 

 

 63 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 ― 

Other trading and available-for-sale debt securities(c)

 

 

 602 

 

 

 40 

 

 

 562 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

 

 

 103 

 

 

 18 

 

 

 22 

 

 

 63 

 

Total assets

 

 

 5,048 

 

 

 3,200 

 

 

 1,687 

 

 

 161 

Derivative liabilities(d)

 

 

 (756) 

 

 

 (17) 

 

 

 (591) 

 

 

 (148) 

 

Net assets

 

$

 4,292 

 

$

 3,183 

 

$

 1,096 

 

$

 13 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(b)

Included in Other within Current Assets and Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

(c)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets and Short-term Investments on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(d)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The following tables provide a reconciliation of beginning and ending balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis where the determination of fair value includes significant unobservable inputs (Level 3).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

(in millions)

Available-for-Sale Auction Rate Securities

 

Available-for-Sale NDTF Investments

 

Derivatives (net)

 

Total

Balance at December 31, 2012

$

 29 

 

$

 69 

 

$

 (85) 

 

$

 13 

 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regulated electric

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (6) 

 

 

 (6) 

 

 

Revenue, nonregulated electric, natural gas, and other

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (4) 

 

 

 (4) 

 

Total pre-tax gains included in other comprehensive income:

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Losses on available for sale securities and other

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Issuances

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 6 

 

 

 6 

 

 

Settlements

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 7 

 

 

 7 

 

Total gains included on the Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Balance at March 31, 2013

$

 28 

 

$

 70 

 

$

 (82) 

 

$

 16 

Pre-tax amounts included in the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income related to Level 3 measurements outstanding at March 31, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regulated electric

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

 

 

 1 

 

 

Revenue, nonregulated electric, natural gas, and other

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (10) 

 

 

 (10) 

Total

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 (9) 

 

$

 (9) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5576

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for assets and liabilities recorded on Duke Energy Carolinas’

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value. Derivative amounts in the table below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8. See Note 10 for additional information related to investments by major security type.

  

  

   

  

  

Total Fair Value Amounts at

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

September 30, 2012

  

Level 1

  

Level 2

  

Level 3

Investments in available-for-sale auction rate securities(a)

  

$

 6 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 6 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities  

  

  

 1,553 

  

  

 1,487 

  

  

 47 

  

  

 19 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities  

  

  

 758 

  

  

 102 

  

  

 609 

  

  

 47 

  

Total Assets  

  

$

 2,317 

  

$

 1,589 

  

$

 656 

  

$

 72 

Derivative liabilities(c)

  

  

 (12) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (12) 

  

Net Assets  

  

$

 2,305 

  

$

 1,589 

  

$

 656 

  

$

 60 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

(in millions)

Available-for-Sale Auction Rate Securities

 

Available-for-Sale NDTF Investments

 

Derivatives (net)

 

Total

Balance at December 31, 2011

$

 71 

 

$

 53 

 

$

 (39) 

 

$

 85 

 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regulated electric

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 8 

 

 

 8 

 

 

Revenue, nonregulated electric, natural gas, and other

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (2) 

 

Total pre-tax gains included in other comprehensive income:

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gains on available for sale securities and other

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Purchases

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

 

 

Settlements

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (9) 

 

 

 (9) 

 

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Balance at March 31, 2012

$

 72 

 

$

 56 

 

$

 (42) 

 

$

 86 

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS

The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for assets and liabilities recorded on Duke Energy Carolinas’ Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value. Derivative amounts in the table below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8. See Note 10 for additional information related to investments by major security type. Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the valuation of fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

Level 2

 

Level 3

Investments in available-for-sale auction rate securities(a)

 

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 3 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

 

 

 1,734 

 

 

 1,663 

 

 

 50 

 

 

 21 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities

 

 

 785 

 

 

 180 

 

 

 556 

 

 

 49 

 

Total assets

 

$

 2,522 

 

$

 1,843 

 

$

 606 

 

$

 73 

Derivative liabilities(b)

 

 

 (5) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (5) 

 

Net assets

 

$

 2,517 

 

$

 1,843 

 

$

 606 

 

$

 68 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

  

Total Fair Value Amounts at

  

  

  

  

  

  

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

(in millions)

  

December 31, 2011

  

Level 1

  

Level 2

  

Level 3

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

Level 2

 

Level 3

Investments in available-for-sale auction rate securities(a)

Investments in available-for-sale auction rate securities(a)

  

$

 12 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 12 

Investments in available-for-sale auction rate securities(a)

 

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 3 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

  

 1,337 

  

 1,285 

  

 46 

  

 6 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

 

 1,592 

 

 1,523 

 

 48 

 

 21 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities

  

 723 

  

 109 

  

 567 

  

 47 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities

 

 762 

 

 155 

 

 559 

 

 48 

Derivative assets(b)

  

 1 

  

 ― 

  

 1 

  

 ― 

Total Assets  

  

$

 2,073 

  

$

 1,394 

  

$

 614 

  

$

 65 

Total assets

 

$

 2,357 

 

$

 1,678 

 

$

 607 

 

$

 72 

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Derivative liabilities(b)

Derivative liabilities(b)

 

 (12) 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 (12) 

(a)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Net Assets

 

$

 2,345 

 

$

 1,678 

 

$

 607 

 

$

 60 

(b)

Included in Other within Current Assets and Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(b)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

 

  

The following tables provide a reconciliation of beginning and ending balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value

on a recurring basis where the determination of fair value includes significant unobservable inputs (Level 3):

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

Available-for-Sale Auction Rate Securities

  

Available-for-Sale NDTF Investments

  

Derivatives (net)

  

Total

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at June 30, 2012

$

 6 

  

$

 64 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 70 

  

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Purchases

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

Issuances

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (14) 

  

  

 (14) 

  

  

Settlements

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 2 

  

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

Balance at September 30, 2012

  

 6 

  

$

 66 

  

$

 (12) 

  

$

 60 

Three Months Ended September 30, 2011

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at June 30, 2011

$

 12 

  

$

 53 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 65 

  

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

Balance at September 30, 2011

$

 12 

  

$

 54 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 66 

The following tables provide a reconciliation of beginning and ending balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a  recurring basis where the determination of fair value includes significant unobservable inputs (Level 3).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,2013

 

 

 

Available-for-Sale Auction Rate Securities

 

Available-for-Sale NDTF Investments

 

Derivatives (net)

 

Total

Balance at December 31, 2012

$

 3 

 

$

 69 

 

$

 (12) 

 

$

 60 

 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

Settlements

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 7 

 

 

 7 

 

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Balance at March 31, 2013

$

 3 

 

$

 70 

 

$

 (5) 

 

$

 68 

Pre-tax amounts included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income related to Level 3 measurements outstanding at March 31, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regulated electric

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 (5) 

 

 

 (5) 

Total

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 (5) 

 

$

 (5) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5677

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

 

  

  

  

Available-for-Sale Auction Rate Securities

  

Available-for-Sale NDTF Investments

  

Derivatives (net)

  

Total

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at December 31, 2011

$

 12 

  

$

 53 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 65 

  

Total pre-tax gains included in other comprehensive income: 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Gains on available for sale securities and other

  

 2 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Purchases

  

 ― 

  

  

 10 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 10 

  

  

Issuances

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (14) 

  

  

 (14) 

  

  

Settlements

  

 (8) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 (6) 

  

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

Balance at September 30, 2012

$

 6 

  

$

 66 

  

$

 (12) 

  

$

 60 

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Balance at December 31, 2010

$

 12 

  

$

 47 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 59 

  

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Purchases

  

 ― 

  

  

 7 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 7 

  

  

Sales

  

 ― 

  

  

 (3) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (3) 

  

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

Balance at September 30, 2011

$

 12 

  

$

 54 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 66 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

 

 

 

Available-for-Sale Auction Rate Securities

 

Available-for-Sale NDTF Investments

 

Derivatives (net)

 

Total

Balance at December 31, 2011

$

 12 

 

$

 53 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 65 

 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Purchases

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

 

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

Balance at March 31, 2012

$

 12 

 

$

 56 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 68 

PROGRESS ENERGY

The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for assets and liabilities recorded on Progress Energy's Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Derivative amounts in the table below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8. See Note 10 for additional information related to investments by major security type. Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the valuation of fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

 

$

 1,369 

 

$

 1,363 

 

$

 6 

 

$

 ― 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities and other

 

 

 648 

 

 

 177 

 

 

 471 

 

 

 ― 

Other trading and available-for-sale debt securities and other(a)

 

 

 60 

 

 

 20 

 

 

 40 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

 

 

 15 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 15 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total assets

 

 

 2,092 

 

 

 1,560 

 

 

 532 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative liabilities(c)

 

 

 (269) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (238) 

 

 

 (31) 

 

Net assets

 

$

 1,823 

 

$

 1,560 

 

$

 294 

 

$

 (31) 

 

Duke Energy Ohio

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for assets and liabilities recorded on Duke Energy Ohio’s

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Derivative amounts in the table below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8.

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

Total Fair Value Amounts at

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)  

  

September 30, 2012

  

Level 1

  

     Level 2

  

    Level 3

Derivative assets(a)

  

$

 40 

  

$

 27 

  

$

 4 

  

$

 9 

Derivative liabilities(b)

  

  

 (46) 

  

  

 (20) 

  

  

 (9) 

  

  

 (17) 

  

Net Assets (Liabilities)  

  

$

 (6) 

  

$

 7 

  

$

 (5) 

  

$

 (8) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

 

$

 1,245 

 

$

 1,239 

 

$

 6 

 

$

 ― 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities and other

 

 

 643 

 

 

 162 

 

 

 481 

 

 

 ― 

Other trading and available-for-sale debt securities and other(a)

 

 

 57 

 

 

 17 

 

 

 40 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

 

 

 11 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total assets

 

 

 1,956 

 

 

 1,418 

 

 

 538 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative liabilities(c)

 

 

 (440) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (402) 

 

 

 (38) 

 

Net assets

 

$

 1,516 

 

$

 1,418 

 

$

 136 

 

$

 (38) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(b)

Included in Other Current Assets within Current Assets and Other within Investments and Other Assets in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(c)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

78

 


  

   

  

Total Fair Value Amounts at

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)  

  

December 31, 2011

  

Level 1

  

     Level 2

  

    Level 3

Derivative assets(a)

  

$

 56 

  

$

 42 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 9 

Derivative liabilities(b)

  

  

 (30) 

  

  

 (10) 

  

  

 (8) 

  

  

 (12) 

  

Net Assets (Liabilities)  

  

$

 26 

  

$

 32 

  

$

 (3) 

  

$

 (3) 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Included in Other within Current Assets and Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(b)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

The following tables provide a reconciliation of beginning and ending balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a

recurring basis where the determination of fair value includes significant unobservable inputs (Level 3):.

  

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

(in millions)

Derivatives (net)

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012

Balance at June 30,December 31, 2012

 

$

 (2)(38) 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

 

Regulated electric

 1 

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

 (6) 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

Settlements

 (1) 

Balance at September 30, 2012

$

 (8) 

Three Months Ended September 30, 2011

Balance at June 30, 2011

$

 7 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

 (1) 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

 

 

 

SettlementsIssuances

 

 

 (1)  6 

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 

 

 2  1 

Balance at September 30, 2011

$

 7 

57


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(in millions)March 31, 2013

 

Derivatives (net)$

 (31) 

Pre-tax amounts included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income related to Level 3 measurements outstanding at March 31, 2013

Regulated electric

$

 6 

Total

$

 6 

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

(in millions)

Derivatives (net)

Balance at December 31, 2011

 

$

 (3)  (24) 

 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

Regulated Electric

 1 

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

 (5) 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

Settlements

 1 

Total gainslosses included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 

 (3) 

Balance at March 31, 2012

$

 (27) 

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS

The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for assets and liabilities recorded on Duke Energy Progress' Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Derivative amounts in the table below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8. See Note 10 for additional information related to investments by major security type. Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the valuation of fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

 

$

 894 

 

$

 894 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities and other

 

 

 453 

 

 

 123 

 

 

 330 

 

 

 ― 

Other trading and available-for-sale debt securities and other(a)

 

 

 4 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

 

 

 5 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total assets

 

 

 1,356 

 

 

 1,021 

 

 

 335 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative liabilities(c)

 

 

 (98) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (67) 

 

 

 (31) 

 

Net assets

 

$

 1,258 

 

$

 1,021 

 

$

 268 

 

$

 (31) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

 

$

 811 

 

$

 811 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities and other

 

 

 448 

 

 

 119 

 

 

 329 

 

 

 ― 

Other trading and available-for-sale debt securities and other(a)

 

 

 3 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total assets

 

 

 1,264 

 

 

 933 

 

 

 331 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative liabilities(c)

 

 

 (166) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (128) 

 

 

 (38) 

 

Net assets

 

$

 1,098 

 

$

 933 

 

$

 203 

 

$

 (38) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(b)

Included in Other Current Assets within Current Assets and Other within Investments and Other Assets in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(c)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

79


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

The following tables provide a reconciliation of beginning and ending balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis where the determination of fair value includes significant unobservable inputs (Level 3).

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

 (2) Derivatives (net)

Balance at September 30,December 31, 2012

 

$

 (8)(38) 

Pre-tax amounts included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income related to Level 3 measurements outstanding at September 30, 2012:

 

Revenue, non-regulated electric and other

$

 1 

Total

$

 1 

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011

Balance at December 31, 2010

$

 13 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

Revenue, non-regulated electric, natural gas, and other

 (7) 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

 

 

 

SettlementsIssuances

 

 

 (2)  6 

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 

 

 3  1 

Balance at September 30, 2011March 31, 2013

 

$

 7  (31) 

Pre-tax amounts included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income related to Level 3 measurements outstanding at September 30, 2011:March 31, 2013

Regulated electric

$

 6 

Total

$

 6 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

(in millions)

Derivatives (net)

Balance at December 31, 2011

$

 (24) 

Total losses included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 (3) 

Balance at March 31, 2012

$

 (27) 

DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA

The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for assets and liabilities recorded on Duke Energy Florida's Condensed Balance Sheets. Derivative amounts in the table below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8. See Note 10 for additional information related to investments by major security type. Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the valuation of fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

 

$

 474 

 

$

 468 

 

$

 6 

 

$

 ― 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities and other

 

 

 196 

 

 

 54 

 

 

 142 

 

 

 ― 

Other trading and available-for-sale debt securities and other(a)

 

 

 45 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 40 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

 

 

 10 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total assets

 

 

 725 

 

 

 527 

 

 

 198 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative liabilities(c)

 

 

 (167) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (167) 

 

 

 ― 

 

Net assets

 

$

 558 

 

$

 527 

 

$

 31 

 

$

 ― 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund equity securities

 

$

 435 

 

$

 429 

 

$

 6 

 

$

 ― 

Nuclear decommissioning trust fund debt securities and other

 

 

 194 

 

 

 43 

 

 

 151 

 

 

 ― 

Other trading and available-for-sale debt securities and other(a)

 

 

 43 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 40 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

 

 

 9 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 ― 

 

Total assets

 

 

 681 

 

 

 475 

 

 

 206 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative liabilities(c)

 

 

 (270) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (270) 

 

 

 ― 

 

Net assets (liabilities)

 

$

 411 

 

$

 475 

 

$

 (64) 

 

$

 ― 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets in the Condensed Balance Sheets.

(b)

Included in Other Current Assets within Current Assets and Other within Investments and Other Assets in the Condensed Balance Sheets.

(c)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities in the Condensed Balance Sheets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

80


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

DUKE ENERGY OHIO

The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for assets and liabilities recorded on Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Derivative amounts in the table below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8. Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the valuation of fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Derivative assets(a)

 

$

 19 

 

$

 8 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 9 

Derivative liabilities(b)

 

 

 (94) 

 

 

 (72) 

 

 

 (8) 

 

 

 (14) 

 

Net liabilities

 

$

 (75) 

 

$

 (64) 

 

$

 (6) 

 

$

 (5) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Derivative assets(a)

 

$

 59 

 

$

 48 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 9 

Derivative liabilities(b)

 

 

 (38) 

 

 

 (15) 

 

 

 (8) 

 

 

 (15) 

 

Net assets (liabilities)

 

$

 21 

 

$

 33 

 

$

 (6) 

 

$

 (6) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Included in Other within Current Assets and Other within Investments and Other Assets in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(b)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The following tables provide a reconciliation of beginning and ending balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis where the determination of fair value includes significant unobservable inputs (Level 3).

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

(in millions)

Derivatives (net)

Balance at December 31, 2012

$

 (6) 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

Revenue, nonregulated electric, natural gas, and other

 4 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

Settlements

 (3) 

Balance at March 31, 2013

$

 (5) 

Pre-tax amounts included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income related to Level 3 measurements outstanding at March 31, 2013:

Revenue, non-regulated electric and other

$

 (2) 

Total

$

 (2) 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

(in millions)

Derivatives (net)

Balance at December 31, 2011

$

 (3) 

Total losses included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 (1) 

Balance at March 31, 2012

$

 (4) 

Pre-tax amounts included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income related to Level 3 measurements outstanding at March 31, 2012:

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue, non-regulated electric and other

 

$

 1 

Total

 

$

 1 

 

Duke Energy Indiana

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

         The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for assets and liabilities recorded on Duke Energy Indiana’s

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Derivative amounts in the table below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8. See Note 10 for additional information related to investments by major security type.

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

Total Fair Value Amounts at

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)  

  

September 30, 2012

  

Level 1

  

     Level 2

  

    Level 3

Available-for-sale equity securities(a)

  

$

 49 

  

$

 49 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Available-for-sale debt securities(a)

  

  

 28 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 28 

  

  

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

  

  

 17 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 17 

  

Total Assets  

  

  

 94 

  

  

 49 

  

  

 28 

  

$

 17 

Derivative liabilities(c)

  

  

 (71) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (71) 

  

  

 ― 

  

Net Assets (Liabilities)  

  

$

 23 

  

$

 49 

  

$

 (43) 

  

$

 17 

5881

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA

The following tables provide the fair value measurement amounts for assets and liabilities recorded on Duke Energy Indiana’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Derivative amounts in the table below exclude cash collateral amounts which are disclosed in Note 8. See Note 10 for additional information related to investments by major security type. Financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the valuation of fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Available-for-sale equity securities(a)

 

$

 54 

 

$

 54 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

Available-for-sale debt securities(a)

 

 

 29 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 29 

 

 

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

 

 

 5 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 4 

 

Total assets

 

  

 88 

 

  

 55 

 

  

 29 

 

$

 4 

Derivative liabilities(c)

 

 

 (55) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (55) 

 

 

 ― 

 

Net assets (liabilities)

 

$

 33 

 

$

 55 

 

$

 (26) 

 

$

 4 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

  

Total Fair Value Amounts at

  

  

  

  

  

  

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

(in millions)

  

December 31, 2011

  

Level 1

  

     Level 2

  

    Level 3

(in millions)

 

Total Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

     Level 2

 

    Level 3

Available-for-sale equity securities(a)

Available-for-sale equity securities(a)

  

$

 46 

  

$

 46 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Available-for-sale equity securities(a)

 

$

 49 

 

$

 49 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

Available-for-sale debt securities(a)

Available-for-sale debt securities(a)

  

 28 

  

 ― 

  

 28 

  

 ― 

Available-for-sale debt securities(a)

 

 29 

 

 ― 

 

 29 

 

 ― 

Derivative assets(b)

Derivative assets(b)

  

 4 

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 4 

Derivative assets(b)

 

 10 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 10 

Total Assets  

  

 78 

  

 46 

  

 28 

  

$

 4 

Total assets

 

  

 88 

 

  

 49 

 

  

 29 

 

$

 10 

Derivative liabilities(c)

Derivative liabilities(c)

  

 (69) 

  

 (1) 

  

 (68) 

  

 ― 

Derivative liabilities(c)

 

 (63) 

 

 ― 

 

 (63) 

 

 ― 

Net Assets (Liabilities)  

  

$

 9 

  

$

 45 

  

$

 (40) 

  

$

 4 

Net assets (liabilities)

 

$

 25 

 

$

 49 

 

$

 (34) 

 

$

 10 

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(b)(a)

Included in Other within Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Included in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(c)(b)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Included in Other within Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

(c)

Included in Other within Current Liabilities and Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

The following tables provide a reconciliation of beginning and ending balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value

on a recurring basis where the determination of fair value includes significant unobservable inputs (Level 3):.

Three Months Ended  March 31, 2013

(in millions)

Derivatives (net)

Balance at December 31, 2012

$

 10 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

Regulated electric

 (5) 

Total losses included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 (1) 

Balance at March 31, 2013

$

 4 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DerivativesThree Months Ended March 31, 2012

(in millions)

Derivatives (net)

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012

Balance at June 30, 2012December 31, 2011

$

 22 $

 4 

 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

 

 

Regulated electric

 11 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

 

 

Settlements

 (16) 

Balance at September 30, 2012

$

 17 

Three Months Ended September 30, 2011

Balance at June 30, 2011

$

 10 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

Regulated electric

 8 

 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

 

 

 

 

Purchases

 8 

Settlements

 

 (2) 

Total losses included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 (18) 

Balance at September 30, 2011

$

 6 

Derivatives

(in millions)

(net)

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012

Balance at December 31, 2011

$

 4 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

Regulated  electric

 35 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

Sales

 22 

Settlements

 (45) (10) 

 

Total gains included on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as regulatory asset or liability

 1 

Balance at September 30,March 31, 2012

$

 17 

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011

Balance at December 31, 2010

$

 

Total pre-tax realized or unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings:

Regulated  electric

 8 

Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements:

Purchases

 8 

Settlements

 (14) 

Balance at September 30, 2011

$

 63 

QUANTITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT UNOBSERVABLE INPUTS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table includes quantitative information about the Duke Energy Registrants' derivatives classified as Level 3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

Investment Type

 

Fair Value

(in millions)

 

Valuation Technique

 

Unobservable Input

 

Range

Duke Energy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity natural gas contracts

 

$

 (85) 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward natural gas curves - price per MMBtu

 

$

 2.84 

$

 10.30 

FERC mitigation power sale agreements

 

 

(10)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

 

 25.35 

-

 54.56 

Financial transmission rights (FTRs)

 

 

 

RTO market pricing

 

FTR price

 

 

 (0.42) 

-

 12.72 

Commodity power contracts

 

 

17 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

 

 28.40 

-

 81.60 

Commodity capacity contracts

 

 

(3)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward capacity curves - price per MW day

 

 

 95.16 

-

 122.64 

Commodity capacity option contracts

 

 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward capacity option curves  - price per MW day

 

 

 31.15 

-

 81.60 

Reserves

 

 

(7)

 

 

 

Bid-ask spreads, implied volatility, probability of default

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FERC mitigation power sale agreements

 

$

(5)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

$

 28.18 

-

 54.56 

Progress Energy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity natural gas contracts

 

$

 (26) 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward natural gas curves - price per MMBtu

 

$

 4.13 

-

 4.54 

FERC mitigation power sale agreements

 

 

(5)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

 

 25.35 

-

 48.68 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity natural gas contracts

 

$

 (26) 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward natural gas curves - price per MMBtu

 

$

 4.13 

-

 4.54 

FERC mitigation power sale agreements

 

 

(5)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

 

 25.35 

-

 48.68 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity power contracts

 

$

 25 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

$

 28.40 

-

 61.35 

Commodity natural gas contracts

 

 

 (23) 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward natural gas curves - price per MMBtu

 

 

 3.98 

-

 4.69 

Reserves

 

 

 (7) 

 

 

 

Bid-ask spreads, implied volatility, probability of default

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financial transmission rights (FTRs)

 

$

 4 

 

RTO market pricing

 

FTR price

 

$

 (0.42) 

$

 12.72 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5982

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

 

Additional Fair Value Disclosures—Long-term debt, including current maturities:

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

         The fair value of long-term debt is summarized in the following table. Judgment is required in interpreting market data to develop the estimates of fair value. Accordingly, the estimates determined are not necessarily indicative of the amounts the Duke Energy Registrants could have settled in current markets. The fair value of the long-term debt is determined using Level 2 measurements.

  

  

  

  

   

As of September 30, 2012

  

As of December 31, 2011

(in millions)  

Book Value

  

Fair Value

  

Book Value

  

Fair Value

Duke Energy (a)

$

 38,597 

  

$

 43,908 

  

$

 20,573 

  

$

 23,053 

Duke Energy Carolinas(b)

$

 9,166 

  

$

 10,744 

  

$

 9,274 

  

$

 10,629 

Duke Energy Ohio  

$

 2,046 

  

$

 2,236 

  

$

 2,555 

  

$

 2,688 

Duke Energy Indiana  

$

 3,704 

  

$

 4,427 

  

$

 3,459 

  

$

 4,048 

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Includes book value of Non-recourse long-term debt of variable interest entities of $911  million and $949 million September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

(b)

Includes book value of Non-recourse long-term debt of variable interest entities of $300 million at both September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

Investment Type

 

Fair Value

(in millions)

 

Valuation Technique

 

Unobservable Input

 

Range

Duke Energy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity natural gas contracts

 

$

 (53) 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward natural gas curves - price per MMBtu

 

$

 2.33 

$

 9.99 

FERC mitigation power sale agreements

 

 

(23)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

 

 25.83 

-

 48.69 

Financial transmission rights (FTRs)

 

 

11 

 

RTO market pricing

 

FTR price

 

 

 23.63 

-

 39.22 

Commodity power contracts

 

 

(8)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

 

 24.82 

-

 77.96 

Commodity capacity contracts

 

 

(3)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward capacity curves - price per MW day

 

 

 95.16 

-

 105.36 

Commodity capacity option contracts

 

 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward capacity option curves  - price per MW day

 

 

 4.68 

-

 77.96 

Reserves

 

 

(12)

 

 

 

Bid-ask spreads, implied volatility, probability of default

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FERC mitigation power sale agreements

 

$

(12)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

$

 25.83 

-

 48.69 

Progress Energy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity natural gas contracts

 

$

 (27) 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward natural gas curves - price per MMBtu

 

$

 4.07 

-

 4.45 

FERC mitigation power sale agreements

 

 

(11)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

 

 25.83 

-

 48.69 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity natural gas contracts

 

$

 (27) 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward natural gas curves - price per MMBtu

 

$

 4.07 

-

 4.45 

FERC mitigation power sale agreements

 

 

(11)

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

 

 25.83 

-

 48.69 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financial transmission rights (FTRs)

 

$

 1 

 

RTO market pricing

 

FTR price

 

$

 27.17 

$

 39.22 

Commodity power contracts

 

 

 (1) 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward electricity curves - price per MWh

 

 

 25.90 

-

 57.50 

Commodity natural gas contracts

 

 

 5 

 

Discounted cash flow

 

Forward natural gas curves - price per MMBtu

 

 

 3.30 

-

 4.51 

Reserves

 

 

 (11) 

 

 

 

Bid-ask spreads, implied volatility, probability of default

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financial transmission rights (FTRs)

 

$

 10 

 

RTO market pricing

 

FTR price

 

$

 23.63 

$

 35.43 

83


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

OTHER FAIR VALUE DISCLOSURES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The fair value of long-term debt, including current maturities, is summarized in the following table. Judgment is required in interpreting market data to develop the estimates of fair value. Accordingly, the estimates determined are not necessarily indicative of the amounts the Duke Energy Registrants could have settled in current markets. The fair value of the long-term debt is determined using Level 2 measurements.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Book Value

 

Fair Value

 

Book Value

 

Fair Value

Duke Energy (a)

$

 39,662 

 

$

 44,068 

 

$

 39,461 

 

$

 44,001 

Duke Energy Carolinas(b)

 

 8,740 

 

 

 10,036 

 

 

 8,741 

 

 

 10,096 

Progress Energy

 

 14,224 

 

 

 16,276 

 

 

 14,428 

 

 

 16,563 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 5,336 

 

 

 5,757 

 

 

 4,840 

 

 

 5,277 

Duke Energy Florida

 

 4,894 

 

 

 5,730 

 

 

 5,320 

 

 

 6,222 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 1,994 

 

 

 2,142 

 

 

 1,997 

 

 

 2,117 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 3,702 

 

 

 4,228 

 

 

 3,702 

 

 

 4,268 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Includes book value of Non-recourse long-term debt of variable interest entities of $1,255 million and $852 million March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.

(b)

Includes book value of Non-recourse long-term debt of variable interest entities of $300 million at both March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At both September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2011,2012, the fair value of cash and cash equivalents, accounts and notes receivable, accounts payable, notes payable and commercial paper and non-recourse notes payable of variable interest entities are not materially different from their carrying amounts because of the short-term nature of these instruments and/or because the stated rates approximate market rates.

 

10. Investments in Debt and Equity Securities

The Duke Energy Registrants classify their investments in debt and equity securities into two categories – trading and available-for-sale.

Trading Securities.TRADING SECURITIES

Investments in debt and equity securities held in grantor trusts associated with certain deferred compensation plans and certain other investments are classified as trading securities and are reported at fair value in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets with net realized and unrealized gains and losses included in earnings each period. At both September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2011,2012, the fair value of these investments was $32 million.$25 million and $33 million, respectively.

84


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Available for Sale Securities.Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

AVAILABLE FOR SALE SECURITIES

All other investments in debt and equity securities are classified as available-for-sale securities, which are also reported at fair value on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets with unrealized gains and losses excluded from earnings and reported either as a regulatory asset or liability, as discussed further below, or as a component of other comprehensive income (OCI) until realized.

Duke Energy’s available-for-sale securities are primarily comprised of investments held in the Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Fund (NDTF)(i) NDTF at Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress and ProgressDuke Energy Florida, (ii) investments in grantor trusts at both Duke Energy Indiana and ProgressDuke Energy Florida related to other post-retirement benefitOPEB plans as required by the IURC and FPSC, respectively.FERC, respectively, and at Duke Energy Progress, (iii) Duke Energy captive insurance investment portfolio, (iv) Duke Energy’s foreign operations investment portfolio and (v) investments of Duke Energy and Duke Energy Carolinas in auction rate debt securities.

NDTF and Grantor Trust

The investments within the NDTF at Duke Energy Carolinas, andDuke Energy Progress, Duke Energy NDTFFlorida and the Duke Energy Indiana, Duke Energy Progress and ProgressDuke Energy Florida grantor trusts (Investment Trusts) are managed by independent investment managers with discretion to buy, sell and invest pursuant to the objectives set forth by the trust agreements. Therefore, the Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy and Duke Energy IndianaRegistrants have limited oversight of the day-to-day management of these investments. Since day-to-day investment decisions, including buy and sell decisions, are made by the investment manager, the ability to hold investments in unrealized loss positions is outside the control of the Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy and Duke Energy Indiana.Registrants. Accordingly, all unrealized gains and losses associated with debt and equity securities within the Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF, Progress Energy NDTF  and the Duke Energy Indiana and Progress Energy grantor trustsInvestment Trusts are considered other-than-temporary and are recognized immediately when the fair value of individual investments is less than the cost basis of the investment. Pursuant to regulatory accounting, substantially all unrealized gains and losses associated with investments in debt and equity securities within the Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF, Progress Energy NDTF and the Duke Energy Indiana and Progress Energy grantor trustsInvestment Trusts are deferred as a regulatory asset or liability. As a result, there is no immediate impact on the earnings of the Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy, or Duke Energy Indiana.Registrants.

Other Available for Sale Securities

For investments in debt and equity securities held in the captive insurance investment portfolio, Duke Energy’sthe foreign operations investment portfolio and investments in auction rate debt securities, unrealized gains and losses are included in other comprehensive income until realized, unless it is determined that the carrying value of an investment is other-than-temporarily impaired. If so, the write-down to fair value may be included in earnings based on the criteria discussed below.

60


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

For available-for-sale securities outside offor which other-than-temporary-impairments are required, the Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF, Progress Energy NDTF, and the Duke Energy Indiana and Progress Energy grantor trusts, which are discussed separately above, Duke Energy analyzesRegistrants analyze all investment holdings each reporting period to determine whether a decline in fair value should be considered other-than-temporary. Criteria used to evaluate whether an impairment associated with equity securities is other-than-temporary includes, but is not limited to, the length of time over which the market value has been lower than the cost basis of the investment, the percentage decline compared to the cost of the investment and management’s intent and ability to retain its investment in the issuer for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in market value. If a decline in fair value is determined to be other-than-temporary, the investment is written down to its fair value through a charge to earnings.

With respect to investments in debt securities, under the accounting guidance for other-than-temporary impairment, if the entity does not have an intent to sell the security and it is not more likely than not that management will be required to sell the debt security before the recovery of its cost basis, the impairment write-down to fair value would be recorded as a component of other comprehensive income, except for when it is determined that a credit loss exists. In determining whether a credit loss exists, management considers, among other things, the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than the amortized cost basis, changes in the financial condition of the issuer of the security, or in the case of an asset backed security, the financial condition of the underlying loan obligors, consideration of underlying collateral and guarantees of amounts by government entities, ability of the issuer of the security to make scheduled interest or principal payments and any changes to the rating of the security by rating agencies. If it is determined that a credit loss exists, the amount of impairment write-down to fair value would be split between the credit loss, which would be recognized in earnings, and the amount attributable to all other factors, which would be recognized in other comprehensive income. Management believes, based on consideration of the criteria above, that no credit loss exists as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2011.2012. Management does not have the intent to sell such investments in auction rate debt securities and the investments in debt securities within its captive insurance investment portfolio and foreign operations investment portfolio, and it is not more likely than not that management will be required to sell these securities before the anticipated recovery of their cost basis. Management has concluded that there were no other-than-temporary impairments for debt or equity securities necessary as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2011.2012. Accordingly, all changes in the market value of investments other than those held in the Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF, Progress Energy NDTF and the Duke Energy Indiana and Progress Energy grantor trustsInvestment Trusts, which receive regulatory accounting as discussed above, were reflected as a component of other comprehensive income in 20122013 and 2011.2012.

See Note 9 for additional information related to fair value measurements for investments in auction rate debt securities.

Short-term and Long-term investmentsInvestments

Investments in debt and equity securities are classified as either short-term investments or long-term investments based on management’s intent and ability to sell these securities, taking into consideration illiquidity factors in the current markets.

Duke Energy holds corporate debt securities which were purchased using excess cash from its foreign operations. These investments are classified as Short-term Investmentsinvestments on the balance sheetCondensed Consolidated Balance Sheet and are available for current operations of Duke Energy’s foreign business. Duke Energy held short-term investments with aThe fair value of $335these investments was $288 million as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and $190$333 million as of December 31, 2011.2012.

Duke Energy classifies its investments in debt and equity securities held in the Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF, Progress Energy NDTF (see Note 9 for further information), the Duke Energy Indiana and Progress Energy grantor trustsInvestment Trusts and the captive insurance investment portfolio as long-term. Additionally, Duke Energy has classified $41$28 million carrying value ($5034 million par value) and $71$29 million carrying value ($89

85


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

($34 million par value) of investments in auction rate debt securities as long-term at September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2011,2012, respectively, due to market illiquidity factors as a result of continued failed auctions, and since management does not intend to use these investments in current operations. All of these investments are classified as available-for-sale and, therefore, are reflected on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at estimated fair value based on either quoted market prices or management’s best estimate of fair value based on expected future cash flow using appropriate risk-adjusted discount rates.

DUKE ENERGY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the estimated fair value of short-term and long-term investments for Duke Energy. For investments held within the NDTF, and investments within Grantor Trusts which are classified as Other Investments below, unrealized holding gains and losses are recognized immediately and recorded as Regulatory assets or Regulatory liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

NDTF

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 91 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 105 

Equity securities

 

 1,380 

 

 

 19 

 

 

 3,104 

 

 

 1,132 

 

 

 19 

 

 

 2,837 

Corporate debt securities

 

 17 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 333 

 

 

 21 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 338 

Municipal bonds

 

 10 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 189 

 

 

 12 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 194 

U.S. government bonds

 

 20 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 666 

 

 

 24 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 625 

Other debt securities

 

 12 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 163 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 164 

Total NDTF

$

 1,439 

 

$

 26 

 

$

 4,546 

 

$

 1,199 

 

$

 23 

 

$

 4,263 

Other Investments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 21 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 17 

Equity securities

 

 16 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 84 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 63 

Corporate debt securities

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 347 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 381 

Municipal bonds

 

 4 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 75 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 70 

U.S. government bonds

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 73 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 23 

Other debt securities

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 103 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 86 

Auction rate securities

 

 ― 

 

 

 6 

 

 

 28 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 6 

 

 

 29 

Total Other Investments(a)

$

 22 

 

$

 7 

 

$

 731 

 

$

 17 

 

$

 7 

 

$

 669 

Total Investments

$

 1,461 

 

$

 33 

 

$

 5,277 

 

$

 1,216 

 

$

 30 

 

$

 4,932 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

These amounts are recorded in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The table below summarizes the maturity date for debt securities held by Duke Energy. The table below excludes auction rate securities based on the stated maturity date. See Note 9 for information about fair value measurements related to investments in auction rate debt securities.

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31, 2013

Due in one year or less

 

$

 328 

Due after one through five years

 

 

 435 

Due after five through 10 years

 

 

 398 

Due after 10 years

 

 

 788 

Total

 

$

 1,949 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents realized gains and losses, which were determined on a specific basis, from sales of Duke Energy's available-for-sale securities.

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

 

2013 

 

2012 

Realized gains

 

$

 31 

 

$

 21 

Realized losses

 

 

 7 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the estimated fair value of short-term and long-term investments for Duke Energy Carolinas. For investments held within the NDTF, unrealized holding gains and losses are recognized immediately and recorded as Regulatory assets or Regulatory liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

NDTF

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 41 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 40 

Equity securities

 

 736 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 1,735 

 

 

 600 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 1,592 

Corporate debt securities

 

 9 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 239 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 250 

Municipal bonds

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 21 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 40 

U.S. government bonds

 

 8 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 345 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 304 

Other debt securities

 

 11 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 136 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 135 

Total NDTF

$

 764 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 2,517 

 

$

 632 

 

$

 8 

 

$

 2,361 

Other Investments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Auction rate securities

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 3 

Total Other Investments(a)

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 3 

Total Investments

$

 764 

 

$

 10 

 

$

 2,520 

 

$

 632 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 2,364 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

These amounts are recorded in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

The table below summarizes the maturity date for debt securities held by Duke Energy Carolinas. The table below excludes auction rate securities based on the stated maturity date. See Note 9 for information about fair value measurements related to investments in auction rate debt securities.

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31, 2013

Due in one year or less

 

$

 18 

Due after one through five years

 

 

 173 

Due after five through 10 years

 

 

 185 

Due after 10 years

 

 

 365 

Total

 

$

 741 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents realized gains and losses, which were determined on a specific basis, from sales of Duke Energy Carolinas' available-for-sale securities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

 

2013 

 

2012 

Realized gains

 

$

 25 

 

$

 20 

Realized losses

 

 

 4 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PROGRESS ENERGY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the estimated fair value of short-term and long-term investments for Progress Energy. For investments held within the NDTF, and investments within Grantor Trusts which are classified as Other Investments below, unrealized holding gains and losses are recognized immediately and recorded as Regulatory assets or Regulatory liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

NDTF

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 50 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 65 

Equity securities

 

 644 

 

 

 15 

 

 

 1,369 

 

 

 532 

 

 

 14 

 

 

 1,245 

Corporate debt securities

 

 8 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 94 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 89 

Municipal bonds

 

 10 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 168 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 154 

U.S. government bonds

 

 12 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 321 

 

 

 14 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 321 

Other debt securities

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 27 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 28 

Total NDTF

$

 675 

 

$

 17 

 

$

 2,029 

 

$

 567 

 

$

 15 

 

$

 1,902 

Other Investments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 21 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 17 

Municipal bonds

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 40 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 40 

Total Other Investments(a)

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 61 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 57 

Total Investments

$

 678 

 

$

 17 

 

$

 2,090 

 

$

 570 

 

$

 15 

 

$

 1,959 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

These amounts are recorded in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The table below summarizes the maturity date for debt securities held by Progress Energy.

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31, 2013

Due in one year or less

 

$

 26 

Due after one through five years

 

 

 145 

Due after five through 10 years

 

 

 164 

Due after 10 years

 

 

 315 

Total

 

$

 650 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents realized gains and losses, which were determined on a specific basis, from sales of Progress Energy's available-for-sale securities.

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

 

2013 

 

2012 

Realized gains

 

$

 5 

 

$

 7 

Realized losses

 

 

 2 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the estimated fair value of short-term and long-term investments for Duke Energy Progress. For investments held within the NDTF, and investments within Grantor Trusts which are classified as Other Investments below, unrealized holding gains and losses are recognized immediately and recorded as Regulatory assets or Regulatory liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

NDTF

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 39 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 55 

Equity securities

 

 413 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 894 

 

 

 337 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 811 

Corporate debt securities

 

 6 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 84 

 

 

 8 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 78 

Municipal bonds

 

 4 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 95 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 80 

U.S. government bonds

 

 11 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 233 

 

 

 13 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 241 

Other debt securities

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 10 

Total NDTF

$

 435 

 

$

 12 

 

$

 1,356 

 

$

 363 

 

$

 11 

 

$

 1,275 

Other Investments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 4 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 3 

Total Other Investments(a)

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 4 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 3 

Total Investments

$

 435 

 

$

 12 

 

$

 1,360 

 

$

 363 

 

$

 11 

 

$

 1,278 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

These amounts are recorded in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The table below summarizes the maturity date for debt securities held by Duke Energy Progress.

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31, 2013

Due in one year or less

 

$

 11 

Due after one through five years

 

 

 128 

Due after five through 10 years

 

 

 76 

Due after 10 years

 

 

 208 

Total

 

$

 423 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents realized gains and losses, which were determined on a specific basis, from sales of Duke Energy Progress' available-for-sale securities.

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

 

2013 

 

2012 

Realized gains

 

$

 2 

 

$

 5 

Realized losses

 

 

 1 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the estimated fair value of short-term and long-term investments for Duke Energy Florida. For investments held within the NDTF, and investments within Grantor Trusts which are classified as Other Investments below, unrealized holding gains and losses are recognized immediately and recorded as Regulatory assets or Regulatory liabilities on the Condensed Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

NDTF

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 11 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 10 

Equity securities

 

 231 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 475 

 

 

 194 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 434 

Corporate debt securities

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 11 

Municipal bonds

 

 6 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 73 

 

 

 7 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 74 

U.S. government bonds

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 88 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 80 

Other debt securities

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 16 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 18 

Total NDTF

$

 240 

 

$

 5 

 

$

 673 

 

$

 204 

 

$

 4 

 

$

 627 

Other Investments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 1 

Municipal bonds

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 40 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 40 

Total Other Investments(a)

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 43 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 41 

Total Investments

$

 243 

 

$

 5 

 

$

 716 

 

$

 207 

 

$

 4 

 

$

 668 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

These amounts are recorded in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Balance sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The table below summarizes the maturity date for debt securities held by Duke Energy Florida.

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31, 2013

Due in one year or less

 

$

 15 

Due after one through five years

 

 

 17 

Due after five through 10 years

 

 

 88 

Due after 10 years

 

 

 107 

Total

 

$

 227 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents realized gains and losses, which were determined on a specific basis, from sales of Duke Energy Florida's available-for-sale securities.

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

 

2013 

 

2012 

Realized gains

 

$

 3 

 

$

 2 

Realized losses

 

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the estimated fair value of short-term and long-term investments for Duke Energy Indiana. Unrealized holding gains and losses on these investments are recognized immediately and recorded as Regulatory assets or Regulatory liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

 

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

 

Estimated Fair Value

Other Investments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Equity securities

$

 14 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 54 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 50 

Municipal bonds

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 29 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 28 

Total Other Investments(a)

$

 15 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 83 

 

$

 10 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 78 

Total Investments

$

 15 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 83 

 

$

 10 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 78 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

These amounts are recorded in Other within Investments and Other Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The table below summarizes the maturity date for debt securities held by Duke Energy Indiana.

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

March 31, 2013

Due in one year or less

 

$

 1 

Due after one through five years

 

 

 21 

Due after five through 10 years

 

 

 4 

Due after 10 years

 

 

 3 

Total

 

$

 29 

 

 

 

 

 

Realized gains and losses, which were determined on a specific basis, from sales of Duke Energy Indiana's available-for-sale securities were insignificant for each of the three months ended March 31, 2013, and March 31, 2012.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                               

6186

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

  

The estimated fair values of short-term and long-term investments for Duke Energy, Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy and

 Duke Energy Indiana are as follows (in millions):

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

September 30, 2012

  

December 31, 2011

(in millions)

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

  

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

  

Estimated Fair Value

  

Gross Unrealized Holding Gains

  

Gross Unrealized Holding Losses

  

Estimated Fair Value

Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Equity Securities  

$

 587 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 1,553 

  

$

 443 

  

$

 16 

  

$

 1,337 

Corporate Debt Securities  

  

 13 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 234 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 205 

Municipal Bonds  

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 62 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 51 

U.S. Government Bonds  

  

 13 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 306 

  

  

 16 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 306 

Other  

  

 7 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 156 

  

  

 4 

  

  

 4 

  

  

 161 

Total Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF(a)

$

 623 

  

$

 7 

  

$

 2,311 

  

$

 473 

  

$

 22 

  

$

 2,060 

Progress Energy NDTF  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Equity Securities  

  

 534 

  

  

 21 

  

  

 1,226 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Corporate Debt Securities  

  

 9 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 85 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Municipal Bonds  

  

 10 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 134 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

U.S. Government Bonds  

  

 17 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 295 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Other  

  

 3 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 104 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Total Progress Energy NDTF(a)

$

 573 

  

$

 23 

  

$

 1,844 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Duke Energy Indiana Grantor Trust  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Equity Securities  

$

 9 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 49 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 46 

Municipal Bonds  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 28 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 28 

Total Duke Energy Indiana Grantor Trust(a)

$

 10 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 77 

  

$

 6 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 74 

Other Investments  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Equity Securities  

  

 2 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 19 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 14 

Corporate Debt Securities  

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 384 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 241 

Municipal Bonds  

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 40 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

U.S. Government Bonds  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 46 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 21 

Other  

  

 2 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 128 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 68 

Auction Rate Securities(b)

  

 ― 

  

  

 9 

  

  

 41 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 17 

  

  

 71 

Total Other Investments  

$

 10 

  

$

 11 

  

$

 658 

  

$

 4 

  

$

 19 

  

$

 415 

Total Duke Energy Investments  

$

 1,216 

  

$

 41 

  

$

 4,890 

  

$

 483 

  

$

 42 

  

$

 2,549 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Unrealized gains and losses on investments within the Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF, Progress Energy NDTF, and the Duke Energy Indiana and Progress Energy grantor trusts are deferred as regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities, respectively, pursuant to regulatory accounting treatment.

(b)

At September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, $6 million and $12 million of these securities were held by Duke Energy Carolinas, respectively. Gross unrealized holding gains on these securities held by Duke Energy Carolinas were insignificant at both September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011.  Gross unrealized holding losses on these securities held by Duke Energy Carolinas were $1 million at September 30, 2012 and $3 million at December 31, 2011.

  

The table below summarizes the fair value of debt securities held by Duke Energy, Duke Energy Carolinas, and Duke Energy Indiana

by contractual maturity date.

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

< 1 Year

  

1-5 Years

  

6-10 Years

  

Thereafter

Duke Energy(a)

$

 325 

  

$

 428 

  

$

 363 

  

$

 776 

Duke Energy Carolinas(a)

$

 44 

  

$

 152 

  

$

 191 

  

$

 371 

Duke Energy Indiana  

$

 ― 

  

$

 22 

  

$

 4 

  

$

 2 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Excludes auction rate securities based on the stated maturity date. See Note 9 for information about fair value measurements related to investments in auction rate debt securities. 

62


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)(Unaudited)

The fair values and gross unrealized losses of available-for-sale debt and equity securities which are in an unrealized loss position for which other-than-temporary impairment losses have not been recorded, summarized by investment type and length of time that the securities have been in a continuous loss position, are presented in the table below for Duke Energy, Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy and Duke Energy Indiana.

 

  

   

September 30, 2012

  

December 31, 2011

  

   

  

  

  

Unrealized

  

Unrealized

  

  

  

  

Unrealized

  

Unrealized

  

   

  

  

  

Loss

  

Loss

  

  

  

  

Loss

  

Loss

  

   

  

  

  

Position

  

Position

  

  

  

  

Position

  

Position

(in millions)

Fair Value

  

>12 months

  

<12 months

  

Fair Value

  

>12 months

  

<12 months

Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Equity Securities  

$

 60 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 111 

  

$

 4 

  

$

 12 

Corporate Debt Securities  

  

 10 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 57 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

Municipal Bonds  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

U.S. Government Bonds  

  

 27 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Other  

  

 16 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 113 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 3 

Total Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF(a)

$

 114 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 7 

  

$

 289 

  

$

 6 

  

$

 16 

Progress Energy NDTF  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Equity Securities  

$

 89 

  

$

 13 

  

$

 8 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Corporate Debt Securities  

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Municipal Bonds  

  

 14 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

U.S. Government Bonds  

  

 10 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Other  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Total Progress Energy NDTF(a)

$

 117 

  

$

 14 

  

$

 9 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Duke Energy Indiana Grantor Trust

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Equity Securities  

$

 9 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 8 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 1 

Municipal Bonds  

  

 6 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Total Duke Energy Indiana Grantor Trust(a)

$

 15 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 11 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 1 

Other Investments  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Equity Securities  

$

 6 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 4 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 ― 

Corporate Debt Securities  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 201 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

Municipal Bonds  

  

 4 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

U.S. Government Bonds  

  

 6 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Other  

  

 18 

  

  

 14 

  

  

 16 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Auction Rate Securities(b)

  

 41 

  

  

 9 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 71 

  

  

 17 

  

  

 ― 

Total Other Investments  

$

 76 

  

$

 24 

  

$

 16 

  

$

 284 

  

$

 19 

  

$

 ― 

Total Duke Energy Investments  

$

 322 

  

$

 38 

  

$

 32 

  

$

 584 

  

$

 25 

  

$

 17 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Unrealized losses on investments within the Duke Energy Carolinas NDTF, Progress Energy NDTF, and the Duke Energy Indiana and Progress Energy grantor trusts are deferred as regulatory assets pursuant to regulatory accounting treatment.

(b)

At September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, $6 million and $12 million of these securities, respectively, were held by Duke Energy

  

Carolinas. The gross unrealized losses on these securities held by Duke Energy Carolinas which were in an unrealized loss position greater than 12 months were $1million at September 30, 2012 and $3 million at December 31, 2011.

 

11. Variable Interest EntitiesVARIABLE INTEREST ENTITIES

A VIE is an entity that is evaluated for consolidation using more than a simple analysis of voting control. The analysis to determine whether an entity is a VIE considers contracts with an entity, credit support for an entity, the adequacy of the equity investment of an entity and the relationship of voting power to the amount of equity invested in an entity. This analysis is performed either upon the creation of a legal entity or upon the occurrence of an event requiring reevaluation, such as a significant change in an entity’s assets or activities. If an entity is determined to be a VIE, a qualitative analysis of control determines the party that consolidates a VIE based on what party has the power to direct the most significant activities of the VIE that impact its economic performance as well as what party has rights to receive benefits or is obligated to absorb losses that are significant to the VIE. The analysis of the party that consolidates a VIE is a continual reassessment.

CONSOLIDATED VIEs

The table below shows the VIEs that Duke Energy and Duke Energy Carolinas consolidate and how these entities impact Duke Energy’s and Duke Energy Carolinas’ respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. None of these entities are consolidated by Progress Energy, Duke Energy Progress, Duke Energy Florida, Duke Energy Ohio or Duke Energy Indiana.

63


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

Other than the discussion below related to CRC, no financial support was provided to any of the consolidated VIEs during the ninethree months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and the year ended December 31, 2011,2012, or is expected to be provided in the future, that was not previously contractually required.

  

  

September 30, 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 31, 2013

(in millions)

(in millions)

 

DERF(a)

 

CRC

 

CinCapV

 

Renewables

 

Other

 

Total

Restricted Receivables of VIEs

Restricted Receivables of VIEs

 

$

 680 

 

$

 585 

 

$

 16 

 

$

 23 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 1,304 

Other Current Assets

Other Current Assets

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 5 

 

 208 

 

 2 

 

 215 

Intangibles, net

Intangibles, net

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 11 

 

 ― 

 

 11 

Restricted Other Assets of VIEs

Restricted Other Assets of VIEs

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 48 

 

 6 

 

 ― 

 

 54 

Other Assets

Other Assets

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 12 

 

 1 

 

 2 

 

 15 

Property, Plant and Equipment, Cost

Property, Plant and Equipment, Cost

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 1,564 

 

 15 

 

 1,579 

Accumulated Depreciation and Amortization

Accumulated Depreciation and Amortization

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 (114) 

 

 (5) 

 

 (119) 

Other Deferred Debits

Other Deferred Debits

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 33 

 

 ― 

 

 33 

Total Assets

 

 680 

 

 585 

 

 81 

 

 1,732 

 

 14 

 

 3,092 

Accounts Payable

Accounts Payable

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 2 

 

 ― 

 

 2 

Non-Recourse Notes Payable of VIEs

Non-Recourse Notes Payable of VIEs

 

 ― 

 

 325 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 325 

Taxes Accrued

Taxes Accrued

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 3 

 

 ― 

 

 3 

Current Maturities of Long-Term Debt

Current Maturities of Long-Term Debt

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 13 

 

 52 

 

 ― 

 

 65 

Other Current Liabilities

Other Current Liabilities

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 6 

 

 29 

 

 ― 

 

 35 

Non-Recourse Long-Term Debt

Non-Recourse Long-Term Debt

 

 300 

 

 ― 

 

 44 

 

 911 

 

 ― 

 

 1,255 

Deferred Income Taxes

Deferred Income Taxes

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 275 

 

 ― 

 

 275 

Asset Retirement Obligations

Asset Retirement Obligations

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 23 

 

 ― 

 

 23 

Other Liabilities

Other Liabilities

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 11 

 

 33 

 

 ― 

 

 44 

Total Liabilities

 

 300 

 

 325 

 

 74 

 

 1,328 

 

 ― 

 

 2,027 

Noncontrolling Interests

Noncontrolling Interests

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Net Assets of Consolidated VIEs

Net Assets of Consolidated VIEs

 

$

 380 

 

$

 260 

 

$

 7 

 

$

 404 

 

$

 14 

 

$

 1,065 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Duke Energy Receivables Finance Company, LLC (DERF) is a wholly owned limited liability company of Duke Energy Carolinas.

  

  

Duke Energy  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

Receivables  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

Financing  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 

 

December 31, 2012

(in millions)

(in millions)

  

LLC (DERF)(a)

  

CRC

  

CinCapV

  

Renewables

  

Other

  

Total

(in millions)

 

DERF(a)

 

CRC

 

CinCapV

 

Renewables

 

Other

 

Total

Restricted Receivables of VIEs

Restricted Receivables of VIEs

  

$

 738  

  

$

 486 

  

$

 15 

  

$

 8 

  

$

 3 

  

$

 1,250 

Restricted Receivables of VIEs

 

$

 637 

 

$

 534 

 

$

 15 

 

$

 16 

 

$

 (1) 

 

$

 1,201 

Other Current Assets

Other Current Assets

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 2 

  

 143 

  

 11 

  

 156 

Other Current Assets

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 4 

 

 133 

 

 2 

 

 139 

Intangibles, net

Intangibles, net

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 12 

  

 ― 

  

 12 

Intangibles, net

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 12 

 

 ― 

 

 12 

Restricted Other Assets of VIEs

Restricted Other Assets of VIEs

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 55 

  

 3 

  

 57 

  

 115 

Restricted Other Assets of VIEs

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 52 

 

 2 

 

 ― 

 

 54 

Other Assets

Other Assets

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 11 

  

 ― 

  

 1 

  

 12 

Other Assets

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 10 

 

 ― 

 

 2 

 

 12 

Property, Plant and Equipment, Cost

Property, Plant and Equipment, Cost

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 945 

  

 16 

  

 961 

Property, Plant and Equipment, Cost

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 1,543 

 

 15 

 

 1,558 

Accumulated Depreciation and Amortization

Accumulated Depreciation and Amortization

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 (89) 

  

 (5) 

  

 (94) 

Accumulated Depreciation and Amortization

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 (98) 

 

 (5) 

 

 (103) 

Other Deferred Debits

Other Deferred Debits

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 23 

  

 1 

  

 24 

Other Deferred Debits

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 40 

 

 ― 

 

 40 

Total Assets

  

  

 738  

  

  

 486 

  

 83 

  

 1,045 

  

 84 

  

 2,436 

Total Assets

 

 637 

 

 

 534 

 

 81 

 

 1,648 

 

 13 

 

 2,913 

Accounts Payable

Accounts Payable

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 1 

  

 2 

  

 3 

Accounts Payable

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 1 

 

 ― 

 

 1 

Non-Recourse Notes Payable

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 275 

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 275 

Non-Recourse Notes Payable of VIEs

Non-Recourse Notes Payable of VIEs

 

 ― 

 

 

 312 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 312 

Taxes Accrued

Taxes Accrued

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 5 

  

 ― 

  

 5 

Taxes Accrued

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 62 

 

 ― 

 

 62 

Current Maturities of Long-Term Debt

Current Maturities of Long-Term Debt

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 12 

  

 31 

  

 5 

  

 48 

Current Maturities of Long-Term Debt

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 13 

 

 459 

 

 ― 

 

 472 

Other Current Liabilities

Other Current Liabilities

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 3 

  

 20 

  

 (1) 

  

 22 

Other Current Liabilities

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 4 

 

 25 

 

 ― 

 

 29 

Non-Recourse Long-Term Debt

Non-Recourse Long-Term Debt

  

  

 300  

  

  

 ― 

  

 51 

  

 502 

  

 58 

  

 911 

Non-Recourse Long-Term Debt

 

 300 

 

 

 ― 

 

 48 

 

 504 

 

 ― 

 

 852 

Deferred Income Taxes

Deferred Income Taxes

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 158 

  

 ― 

  

 158 

Deferred Income Taxes

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 154 

 

 ― 

 

 154 

Asset Retirement Obligations

Asset Retirement Obligations

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 14 

  

 ― 

  

 14 

Asset Retirement Obligations

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 23 

 

 ― 

 

 23 

Other Liabilities

Other Liabilities

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 10 

  

 45 

  

 (1) 

  

 54 

Other Liabilities

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 10 

 

 39 

 

 ― 

 

 49 

Total Liabilities

  

  

 300  

  

  

 275 

  

 76 

  

 776 

  

 63 

  

 1,490 

Total Liabilities

 

 300 

 

 

 312 

 

 75 

 

 1,267 

 

 ― 

 

 1,954 

Noncontrolling Interests

Noncontrolling Interests

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 2 

  

 2 

Noncontrolling Interests

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Net Assets of Consolidated VIEs

Net Assets of Consolidated VIEs

  

$

 438  

  

$

 211 

  

$

 7 

  

$

 269 

  

$

 19 

  

$

 944 

Net Assets of Consolidated VIEs

 

$

 337 

 

$

 222 

 

$

 6 

 

$

 381 

 

$

 13 

 

$

 959 

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

DERF is a wholly owned limited liability company of Duke Energy Carolinas.

DERF is a wholly owned limited liability company of Duke Energy Carolinas.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6488

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

  

  

  

December 31, 2011

  

  

  

Duke Energy  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Receivables  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Financing  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(in millions)

  

 LLC (DERF)(a)

  

CRC

  

CinCapV

  

Renewables

  

Other

  

Total

Restricted Receivables of VIEs

  

$

 581  

  

$

 547 

  

$

 13 

  

$

 13 

  

$

 3 

  

$

 1,157 

Other Current Assets

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 124 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 134 

Intangibles, net

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 12 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 12 

Restricted Other Assets of VIEs

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 65 

  

  

 10 

  

  

 60 

  

  

 135 

Other Assets

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 14 

  

  

 36 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 50 

Property, Plant and Equipment, Cost

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 913 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 913 

Accumulated Depreciation and Amortization

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (62) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (62) 

Other Deferred Debits

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 24 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 26 

  

Total Assets

  

  

 581  

  

  

 547 

  

  

 94 

  

  

 1,070 

  

  

 73 

  

  

 2,365 

Accounts Payable

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 2 

Non-Recourse Notes Payable

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 273 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 273 

Taxes Accrued

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

Current Maturities of Long-Term Debt

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 11 

  

  

 49 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 65 

Other Current Liabilities

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 59 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 62 

Non-Recourse Long-Term Debt

  

  

 300  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 60 

  

  

 528 

  

  

 61 

  

  

 949 

Deferred Income Taxes

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 160 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 160 

Asset Retirement Obligation

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 13 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 13 

Other Liabilities

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 13 

  

  

 37 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 50 

  

Total Liabilities

  

  

 300  

  

  

 273 

  

  

 87 

  

  

 850 

  

  

 67 

  

  

 1,577 

Noncontrolling Interests

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

Net Assets of Consolidated VIEs

  

$

 281  

  

$

 274 

  

$

 7 

  

$

 220 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 787 

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

DERF is a wholly owned limited liability company of Duke Energy Carolinas.

DERF

DERF.Duke Energy Carolinas securitizes certain accounts receivable through DERF, a bankruptcy remote, special purpose subsidiary. DERF is a wholly owned limited liability company of Duke Energy Carolinas with a separate legal existence from its parent, and its assets are not intended to be generally available to creditors of Duke Energy Carolinas. As a result of the securitization, on a daily basis Duke Energy Carolinas sells certain accounts receivable, arising from the sale of electricity and/or related services as part of Duke Energy Carolinas’ franchised electric business, to DERF. In order to fund its purchases of accounts receivable, DERF has a $300 million secured credit facility with a commercial paper conduit, which expires in August 2014. Duke Energy Carolinas provides the servicing for the receivables (collecting and applying the cash to the appropriate receivables). Duke Energy Carolinas’ borrowing under the credit facility is limited to the amount of qualified receivables sold, which has been and is expected to be in excess of the amount borrowed, which is maintained at $300 million. The debt is classified as long-term since the facility has an expiration date of greater than one year from the balance sheet date.

The obligations of DERF under the facility are non-recourse to Duke Energy Carolinas. Duke Energy and its subsidiaries have no requirement to provide liquidity, purchase assets of DERF or guarantee performance. DERF is considered a VIE because the equity capitalization is insufficient to support its operations. If deficiencies in the net worth of DERF were to occur, those deficiencies would be cured through funding from Duke Energy Carolinas. In addition, the most significant activity of DERF relates to the decisions made with respect to the management of delinquent receivables. Since those decisions are made by Duke Energy Carolinas and any net worth deficiencies of DERF would be cured through funding from Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Carolinas consolidates DERF.

CRC

CRC was formed in order to secure low cost financing for Duke Energy Ohio, including Duke Energy Kentucky, and Duke Energy Indiana. Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana sell on a revolving basis at a discount, nearly all of their customer accounts receivable and related collections to CRC. The receivables which are sold are selected in order to avoid any significant concentration of credit risk and exclude delinquent receivables. The receivables sold are securitized by CRC through a facility managed by two unrelated third parties and the receivables are used as collateral for commercial paper issued by the unrelated third parties. These loans provide the cash portion of the

89


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

proceeds paid by CRC to Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana. The proceeds obtained by Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana from the sales of receivables are cash and a subordinated note from CRC (subordinated retained interest in the sold receivables) for a portion of the purchase price (typically approximates 25%25 percent of the total proceeds). The amount borrowed by CRC against these receivables is non-recourse to the general credit of Duke Energy, and the associated cash collections from the accounts receivable sold is the sole source of funds to satisfy the related debt obligation. Borrowing is limited to approximately 75%75 percent of the transferred receivables. Losses on collection in excess of the discount are first absorbed by the equity of CRC and next by the subordinated retained interests held by Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana. The discount on the receivables reflects interest expense plus an allowance for bad debts net of a servicing fee charged by Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana. Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana are responsible for the servicing of the receivables (collecting and applying the cash to the appropriate receivables). Depending on the experience with collections, additional equity infusions to CRC may be required to be made by Duke Energy in order to maintain a minimum equity balance of $3 million. There were no equity infusions to CRC during the ninethree months ended September 30, 2012. During the nine months ended September 30, 2011, Duke Energy infused $6 million of equity to Cinergy receivables to remedy net worth deficiencies.March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The amount borrowed fluctuates based on the amount of

65


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

receivables sold. The debt is short term because the facility has an expiration date of less than one year from the balance sheet date. The current expiration date is November 2013. CRC is considered a VIE because the equity capitalization is insufficient to support its operations.operations, the power to direct the most significant activities of the entity are not performed by the equity holder, Cinergy, and deficiencies in the net worth of CRC are not funded by Cinergy, but by Duke Energy. The most significant activity of CRC relates to the decisions made with respect to the management of delinquent receivables. These decisions, as well as the requirement to make up deficiencies in net worth, are made by Duke Energy and not by Duke Energy Ohio, Duke Energy Kentucky or Duke Energy Indiana. Thus, Duke Energy consolidates CRC. Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana do not consolidate CRC.

CinCap V. V

CinCap V was created to finance and execute a power sale agreement with Central Maine Power Company for approximately 35 MW of capacity and energy. This agreement expires in 2016. CinCap V is considered a VIE because the equity capitalization is insufficient to support its operations. As Duke Energy has the power to direct the most significant activities of the entity, which are the decisions to hedge and finance the power sales agreement, CinCap V is consolidated by Duke Energy.

Renewables.Renewables

Duke Energy’s renewable energy facilities include Green Frontier Windpower, LLC, Top of The World Wind Energy LLC, Los Vientos Windpower IA LLC, Los Vientos Windpower IB, LLC and various solar projects, all subsidiaries of DEGS, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy.

Green Frontier Windpower, LLC, Top of the World Wind Energy, LLC and the various solar projects are VIEs due to power purchase agreements with terms that approximate the expected life of the projects. These fixed price agreements effectively transfer the commodity price risk to the buyer of the power. Los Vientos Windpower IA, LLC and Los Vientos Windpower IB, LLC are VIEs due to Duke Energy issuing debt service reserve guarantees and operations and maintenance reserve guarantees in support of the debt financings in December 2012. Duke Energy has consolidated these entities since inception because the most significant activities that impact the economic performance of these renewable energy facilities were the decisions associated with the siting, negotiation of the purchase power agreement, engineering, procurement and construction, and decisions associated with ongoing operations and maintenance related activities, all of which were made solely by Duke Energy.

The debt held by these renewable energy facilities is non-recourse to the general credit of Duke Energy. Duke Energy and its subsidiaries have no requirement to provide liquidity or purchase the assets of these renewable energy facilities. Duke Energy does not guarantee performance except for an immaterial multi-purpose letter of credit and various immaterial debt service reserve and operations and maintenance reserve guarantees. The assets are restricted and they cannot be pledged as collateral or sold to third parties without the prior approval of the debt holders.

Other. Duke Energy has other VIEs with restricted assets and non-recourse debt. These VIEs include certain on-site power generation facilities. Duke Energy consolidates these particular on-site power generation entities because Duke Energy has the power to direct the majority of the most significant activities, which, most notably involve the oversight of operation and maintenance related activities that impact the economic performance of these entities.

NON-CONSOLIDATED VIEs

The tables below show the VIEs that the Duke Energy Registrants do not consolidate and how these entities impact the Duke Energy Registrants respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. As discussed above, while Duke Energy consolidated CRC, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana do not consolidate CRC as they are not the primary beneficiary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

September 30, 2012

 

 

March 31, 2013

  

  

  

Duke Energy

  

  

  

  

 

 

 

Duke Energy

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

(in millions)

  

DukeNet

  

Renewables

  

FPC Capital I Trust

  

Other

  

Total

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

Duke Energy Indiana

(in millions)

 

DukeNet

 

Renewables

 

Other

 

Total

 

Duke Energy

Ohio

 

Duke Energy

Indiana

Receivables

Receivables

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 85 

  

$

 118 

Receivables

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 115 

 

$

 135 

Investments in equity method unconsolidated affiliates

Investments in equity method unconsolidated affiliates

  

  

 120 

  

 154 

  

 9 

  

 27 

  

 310 

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

Investments in equity method unconsolidated affiliates

 

 117 

 

 

 149 

 

 

 27 

 

 293 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Intangibles

Intangibles

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

 ― 

  

 106 

  

 106 

  

 106 

  

 ― 

Intangibles

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 102 

 

 102 

 

 

 102 

 

 ― 

Investments and other assets

Investments and other assets

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 2 

 

 2 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Total Assets

  

  

 120 

  

 154 

  

 9 

  

 133 

  

 416 

  

 191 

  

 118 

Total assets

 

 117 

 

 

 149 

 

 

 131 

 

 397 

 

 

 217 

 

 135 

Other Current Liabilities

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 2 

  

 2 

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 320 

  

 17 

  

 337 

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

Other current liabilities

Other current liabilities

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 1 

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

Deferred credits and other liabilities

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 16 

 

 16 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Total Liabilities

  

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

  

 320 

  

 19 

  

 339 

  

 ― 

  

 ― 

Total liabilities

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 17 

 

 17 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Net Assets (Liabilities)

  

$

 120 

  

$

 154 

  

 (311) 

  

$

 114 

  

$

 77 

  

$

 191 

  

$

 118 

Net assets

Net assets

 

$

 117 

 

$

 149 

 

$

 114 

 

$

 380 

 

$

 217 

 

$

 135 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2012

 

 

Duke Energy

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

(in millions)

 

DukeNet

 

Renewables

 

FPC Capital I Trust(a)

Other

 

Total

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

Receivables

Receivables

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

$

 ― 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 97 

 

$

 116 

Investments in equity method unconsolidated affiliates

Investments in equity method unconsolidated affiliates

 

 118 

 

 

 147 

 

 

 ― 

 

 27 

 

 292 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Intangibles

Intangibles

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 104 

 

 104 

 

 

 104 

 

 ― 

Investments and other assets

Investments and other assets

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 9 

 

 2 

 

 11 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Total assets

 

 118 

 

 

 147 

 

 

 9 

 

 133 

 

 407 

 

 

 201 

 

 116 

Other current liabilities

Other current liabilities

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 3 

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Deferred credits and other liabilities

Deferred credits and other liabilities

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 319 

 

 17 

 

 336 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Total liabilities

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 319 

 

 20 

 

 339 

 

 

 ― 

 

 ― 

Net assets (liabilities)

Net assets (liabilities)

 

$

 118 

 

$

 147 

 

$

 (310) 

$

 113 

 

$

 68 

 

$

 201 

 

$

 116 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

The entire balance of Investments and other assets and $274 million of the Deferred credits and other liabilities balance applies to Progress Energy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                           

  

  

  

December 31, 2011

  

  

  

Duke Energy

  

Duke Energy

  

Duke Energy

(in millions)

  

DukeNet

  

Renewables

  

Other

  

Total

  

Ohio

  

Indiana

Receivables

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 129 

  

$

 139 

Investments in equity method unconsolidated affiliates

  

  

 129 

  

  

 81 

  

  

 25 

  

  

 235 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Intangibles

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 111 

  

  

 111 

  

  

 111 

  

  

 ― 

  

Total Assets

  

  

 129 

  

  

 81 

  

  

 136 

  

  

 346 

  

  

 240 

  

  

 139 

Other Current Liabilities

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 18 

  

  

 18 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

Total Liabilities

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 21 

  

  

 21 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Net Assets

  

$

 129 

  

$

 81 

  

$

 115 

  

$

 325 

  

$

 240 

  

$

 139 

6690

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

No financial support that was not previously contractually required was provided to any of the unconsolidated VIEs during the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012, and 2011,respectively, or is expected to be provided in the future.

With the exception of the power purchase agreement with the Ohio Valley Electric Corporation (OVEC), which is discussed below, and various guarantees, reflected in the table above as “Deferred Creditscredits and Other Liabilities”other liabilities”, the Duke Energy Registrants are not aware of any situations where the maximum exposure to loss significantly exceeds the carrying values shown above.

DukeNet

In 2010, Duke Energy sold a 50%50 percent ownership interest in DukeNet to Alinda. The sale resulted in DukeNet becoming a joint venture with Duke Energy and Alinda each owning a 50%50 percent interest. In connection with the formation of the new DukeNet joint venture, a five-year,5-year, $150 million senior secured credit facility was executed with a syndicate of ten10 external financial institutions. This credit facility is non-recourse to Duke Energy. DukeNet is considered a VIE because it has entered into certain contractual arrangements that provide DukeNet with additional forms of subordinated financial support. The most significant activities that impact DukeNet’s economic performance relate to its business development and fiber optic capacity marketing and management activities. The power to direct these activities is jointly and equally shared by Duke Energy and Alinda. As a result, Duke Energy does not consolidate the DukeNet joint venture.DukeNet. Accordingly, DukeNet is a non-consolidated VIE that is reported as an equity method investment.

Unless consent by Duke Energy is given otherwise, Duke Energy and its subsidiaries have no requirement to provide liquidity, purchase the assets of DukeNet, or guarantee performance.

Renewables

Duke Energy has investments in various entities that generate electricity through the use of renewable energy technology. Some of these entities which were part of the Catamount acquisition, are VIEs which are not consolidated due to the joint ownership of the entities when they were created and the power to direct and control key activities is shared jointlyjointly. Instead, Duke Energy’s investment is recorded under the equity method of accounting. These entities are VIEs due to power purchase agreements with terms that approximate the expected life of the project. These fixed price agreements effectively transfer the commodity price risk to the buyer of the power.

DS Cornerstone, LLC, a 50/50 joint venture entity with a third-party joint venture partner, owns two windpower projects and has executed a third party financing against the two windpower projects. DS Cornerstone was a consolidated VIE of Duke Energy through August 31, 2012, as the members equity was not sufficient to support the operations of the joint venture as demonstrated by the third party financing. Duke Energy provided a Production Tax Credit (PTC) Remedy Agreement to the joint venture partner whereby Duke Energy guaranteed the two windpower projects would achieve commercial operation in 2012 and an agreed to number of wind turbines would qualify for production tax credits. In the event the agreed to number of wind turbines of the two wind generating facilities failed to qualify, the joint venture partner had the option to put its equity ownership interest back to Duke Energy. The PTC Remedy Agreement resulted in greater loss exposure to Duke Energy and, as a result, Duke Energy consolidated DS Cornerstone, LLC through August 31, 2012, until both projects reached commercial operation and the appropriate number of wind turbines qualified for PTC. As of September 30, 2012, both projects have reached commercial operation,March 31, 2013, DS Cornerstone is a non-consolidated VIE. The most significant activities that impact DS Cornerstone’s economic performance are the decisions related to the ongoing operations and maintenance activities. The power to direct these activities is jointly and equally shared by Duke Energy and the agreed to number of wind turbines are now eligible for PTC, thereforethird-party joint venture partner. As a result, Duke Energy no longer consolidateddoes not consolidate the DS Cornerstone. Accordingly, DS Cornerstone LLCis a non-consolidated VIE that is reported as of September 30, 2012.an equity method investment.

FPC Capital I Trust I

.At December 31, 2012, Progress Energy hashad variable interests in the FPC Capital I Trust (the Trust) which iswas a VIE of which Duke Energy iswas not the primary beneficiary. The Trust, a finance subsidiary, was established in 1999 for the sole purpose of issuing $300 million of 7.10% Cumulative Quarterly Income Preferred Securities due 2039, and usingused the proceeds thereof to purchase from Florida Progress Funding Corporation (Funding Corp.), a wholly owned subsidiary of Progress Energy, $300 million of 7.10% Junior Subordinated Deferrable Interest Notes due 2039. The Trust hashad no other operations and its sole assets are the subordinated notes and related guarantees. Funding Corp. was

91


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

formed for the sole purpose of providing financing to ProgressDuke Energy Florida and its subsidiaries.Florida. Funding Corp. doesdid not engage in business activities other than such financing and hashad no independent operations. Progress Energy has guaranteed the payments of all distributions required by the Trust. On February 1, 2013, Duke Energy redeemed the $300 million of 7.10% Cumulative Quarterly Income Preferred Securities and subsequently terminated the Trust.

Other

Duke Energy has investments in various other entities that are VIEs which are not consolidated. The most significant of these investments is Duke Energy Ohio’s 9%9 percent ownership interest in OVEC. Through its ownership interest in OVEC, Duke Energy Ohio has a contractual arrangement through June 2040 to buy power from OVEC’s power plants. The proceeds from the sale of power by OVEC to its power purchase agreement counterparties, including Duke Energy Ohio, are designed to be sufficient for OVEC to meet its operating expenses, fixed costs, debt amortization and interest expense, as well as earn a return on equity.ROE. Accordingly, the value of this contract is subject to variability due to fluctuations in power prices and changes in OVEC’s costs of business, including costs associated with its 2,256 megawattsMW of coal-fired generation capacity. As discussed in Note 5, the proposed rulemaking on cooling water intake structures, MATS, CSAPR and CCP’s could increase the costs of OVEC which would be passed through to Duke Energy Ohio. The initial carrying value of this contract was recorded as an intangible asset when Duke Energy acquired Cinergy in April 2006.

In addition, the company has guaranteed the performance of certain entities in which the company no longer has an equity interest. As a result, the company has a variable interest in certain other VIEs that are non-consolidated.not consolidated.

CRC

As discussed above, CRC is consolidated only by Duke Energy. Accordingly, the retained interest in the sold receivables recorded on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets of Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana are eliminated in consolidation at Duke Energy.

The proceeds obtained from the sales of receivables are largely cash but do include a subordinated note from CRC for a portion of the purchase price (typically approximates 25%25 percent of the total proceeds). The subordinated note is a retained interest (right to receive a specified portion of cash flows from the sold assets) and is classified within Receivables in Duke Energy Ohio’s and Duke Energy Indiana’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.Sheets at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. The retained interests reflected on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets of Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana approximate fair value.

The carrying values of the retained interests are determined by allocating the carrying value of the receivables between the assets sold and the interests retained based on relative fair value. Because the receivables generally turnover in less than two months, credit losses are reasonably predictable due to the broad customer base and lack of significant concentration, and the purchased beneficial interest (equity in CRC) is subordinate to all retained interests and thus would absorb losses first, the allocated basis of the subordinated notes are not materially different than their face value. The hypothetical effect on the fair value of the retained interests assuming both a 10%10 percent and a 20%20 percent unfavorable variation in credit losses or discount rates is not material due to the short turnover of receivables and historically low credit loss history. Interest accrues to Duke Energy Ohio Duke Energy Indiana and Duke Energy KentuckyIndiana on the retained interests using the accretableacceptable yield method, which generally approximates the stated rate on the notes since the allocated basis and the face value are nearly equivalent. An impairment charge is recorded against the carrying value of both the retained interests and purchased beneficial interest whenever it is determined that an other-than-temporary impairment has occurred. The key assumptions used in estimating the fair value in 20122013 and 20112012 is detailed in the following table:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 

2013 

 

2012 

 

2013 

 

2012 

Anticipated credit loss ratio

 

 0.6 

%

 

 0.7 

%

 

 0.3 

%

 

 0.3 

%

Discount rate

 

 1.2 

%

 

 1.2 

%

 

 1.2 

%

 

 1.2 

%

Receivable turnover rate

 

 12.8 

%

 

 12.7 

%

 

 10.3 

%

 

 10.2 

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table shows the gross and net receivables sold:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

(in millions)

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

 

March 31, 2013

 

December 31, 2012

Receivables sold

 

$

 304 

 

$

282 

 

$

 317 

 

$

289 

Less: Retained interests

 

 

 115 

 

 

97 

 

 

 135 

 

 

116 

Net receivables sold

 

$

 189 

 

$

185 

 

$

 182 

 

$

173 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following tables show the retained interests, sales, and cash flows related to receivables sold:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

 

2013 

 

2012 

 

2013 

 

2012 

Sales

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Receivables sold

 

$

 638 

 

$

 610 

 

$

 747 

 

$

 706 

Loss recognized on sale

 

 

 3 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 3 

Cash flows

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash proceeds from receivables sold

 

 

 617 

 

 

 636 

 

 

 725 

 

 

 724 

Collection fees received

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

Return received on retained interests

 

 

 1 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                      

6792

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

  

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

Duke Energy Indiana

  

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Anticipated credit loss ratio

  

 0.8 

%

  

 0.8 

%

  

 0.4 

%

  

 0.4 

%

Discount rate

  

 1.2 

%

  

 2.6 

%

  

 1.2 

%

  

 2.6 

%

Receivable turnover rate

  

 12.7 

%

  

 12.7 

%

  

 10.2 

%

  

 10.2 

%

  

The following table shows the gross and net receivables sold:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

Duke Energy Indiana

(in millions)

  

September 30, 2012

  

December 31, 2011

  

September 30, 2012

  

December 31, 2011

Receivables sold

  

$

 241 

  

$

302 

  

$

 282 

  

$

279 

Less: Retained interests

  

  

 85 

  

  

129 

  

  

 118 

  

  

139 

Net receivables sold

  

$

 156 

  

$

173 

  

$

 164 

  

$

140 

  

The following tables show the retained interests, sales, and cash flows related to receivables sold:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

Duke Energy Indiana

  

  

  

Three Months Ended September 30,

  

Three Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Sales

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Receivables sold

  

$

 518 

  

$

 592 

  

$

 711 

  

$

 711 

Loss recognized on sale

  

$

 3 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 3 

  

$

 5 

Cash flows

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Cash proceeds from receivables sold

  

$

 531 

  

$

 615 

  

$

 733 

  

$

 696 

Collection fees received

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

Return received on retained interests

  

$

 1 

  

$

 3 

  

$

 2 

  

$

 3 

  

  

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

Duke Energy Indiana

  

  

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Sales

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Receivables sold

  

$

 1,618 

  

$

 1,832 

  

$

 2,118 

  

$

 2,009 

Loss recognized on sale

  

$

 10 

  

$

 16 

  

$

 9 

  

$

 13 

Cash flows

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Cash proceeds from receivables sold

  

$

 1,651 

  

$

 1,952 

  

$

 2,130 

  

$

 2,051 

Collection fees received

  

$

 1 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 1 

Return received on retained interests

  

$

 4 

  

$

 10 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 10 

Cash flows from the sale of receivables are reflected within Operating Activities on Duke Energy Ohio’s and Duke Energy Indiana’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

Collection fees received in connection with the servicing of transferred accounts receivable are included in Operation, Maintenance and Other on Duke Energy Ohio’s and Duke Energy Indiana’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.Operations and Comprehensive Income. The loss recognized on the sale of receivables is calculated monthly by multiplying the receivables sold during the month by the required discount which is derived monthly utilizing a three year weighted average formula that considers charge-off history, late charge history, and turnover history on the sold receivables, as well as a component for the time value of money. The discount rate, or component for the time value of money, is calculated monthly by summing the prior month-end LIBOR plus a fixed rate of 1.00% as of September 30, 2012, as compared to prior month-end LIBOR plus 2.39% as of September 30, 2011.1.00 percent.

 

68


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

12. Earnings Per Common ShareEARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE (EPS)

Basic Earnings Per Share (EPS) is computed by dividing net income attributable to Duke Energy common shareholders, adjusted for distributed and undistributed earnings allocated to participating securities, by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS is computed by dividing net income attributable to Duke Energy common shareholders, as adjusted for distributed and undistributed earnings allocated to participating securities, by the diluted weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS reflects the potential dilution that could occur if securities or other agreements to issue common stock, such as stock options, phantom shares and stock-based performance unit awards were exercised or settled.

On July 2, 2012, just prior to the close of the merger with Progress Energy, Duke Energy executed a one-for-three reverse stock split. All earnings per share amounts included in this Form 10-Q are presented as if the one-for-three reverse stock split had been effective January 1, 2011.2012. The following table which includes the effects of the reverse stock split, illustratespresents Duke Energy’s basic and diluted EPS calculations and reconciles the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding to the diluted weighted-average number of common shares outstanding:

outstanding.

  

  

  

  

  

Average

  

  

  

(in millions, except per-share amounts)

Income

  

Shares

  

  

EPS

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Income from continuing operations attributable to Duke Energy common shareholders, as adjusted for participating securities — basic and diluted

$

589 

  

  

 699 

  

$

 0.84 

Three Months Ended September 30, 2011

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Income from continuing operations attributable to Duke Energy common shareholders, as adjusted for participating securities — basic and diluted

$

471 

  

  

 444 

  

$

 1.06 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(In millions, except per-share amounts)

Income

 

Average

Shares

 

EPS

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Income from continuing operations attributable to Duke Energy common shareholders, as adjusted for participating securities — basic and diluted

$

 629 

 

 

 705 

 

$

 0.89 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Income from continuing operations attributable to Duke Energy common shareholders, as adjusted for participating securities — basic and diluted

$

 292 

 

 

 446 

 

$

 0.65 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

  

  

  

Average

  

  

  

(In millions, except per-share amounts)

Income

  

Shares

  

EPS

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Income from continuing operations attributable to Duke Energy common shareholders, as adjusted for participating securities — basic and diluted

$

 1,326 

  

  

 531 

  

$

 2.50 

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Income from continuing operations attributable to Duke Energy common shareholders, as adjusted for participating securities — basic and diluted

$

 1,415 

  

  

 444 

  

$

 3.19 

As of September 30,March 31, 2013, and 2012, and 2011, 1 million and 4 million, respectively, of stock options and performance and unvested stock awards were not included in the “effect of dilutive securities”securities calculation in the above table because either the option exercise prices were greater than the average market price of the common shares during those periods, or performance measures related to the awards had not yet been met.

 

13. Stock-Based CompensationSTOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

For employee awards, equity classified stock-based compensation cost is measured at the service inception date or the grant date, based on the estimated achievement of certain performance metrics or the fair value of the award, and is recognized as expense or capitalized as a component of property, plant and equipment over the requisite service period.

In connection with the acquisition of Progress Energy in July 2012, Duke Energy assumed Progress Energy’s 1997 Equity Incentive Plan (EIP), which was continued under the 2002 and 2007 EIPs, as amended and restated from time to time.  Stock-based awards granted under the Progress Energy EIPs and held by Progress Energy employees were generally converted into outstanding Duke Energy stock-based compensation awards with the estimated fair value of the awards allocated to purchase price determined to be $62 million.  Refer to 2 – Acquisitions and Sales of Other Assets for further information regarding the merger transaction.

Duke Energy recorded pre-tax stock-based compensation expense foras shown in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 as follows:following table.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Stock Options

$

 2 

 

$

 2 

Restricted Stock Unit Awards

 

 13 

 

 

 8 

Performance Awards

 

 11 

 

 

 (2) 

Total

$

 26 

 

$

 8 

Tax benefit associated with stock-based compensation expense

$

 10 

 

$

 3 

Stock-based compensation costs capitalized

 

 1 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

   

Three Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

  

   

September 30,

  

September 30,

(in millions)  

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Stock Options  

$

 ― 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 2 

  

$

 2 

Restricted Stock Unit Awards  

  

 16 

  

  

 6 

  

  

 30 

  

  

 20 

Performance Awards  

  

 16 

  

  

 6 

  

  

 19 

  

  

 17 

Total(a)(b)(c)(d)

$

 32 

  

$

 12 

  

$

 51 

  

$

 39 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Excludes stock-based compensation cost capitalized of an insignificant amount and $1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.

(b)

Excludes stock-based compensation cost capitalized of $1 million and $3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

(c)

The tax benefit associated with the recorded expense was $13 million and $5 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

(d)

The tax benefit associated with the recorded expense was $20 million and $16 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

14. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS

DEFINED BENEFIT RETIREMENT PLANS

Duke Energy and its subsidiaries (including legacy Progress Energy and Cinergy businesses) maintain, and the Subsidiary Registrants participate in, qualified, non-contributory defined benefit retirement plans. Duke Energy also maintains, and the Subsidiary Registrants participate in, non-qualified, non-contributory defined benefit retirement plans, which cover certain executives.

6993

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

14. Employee Benefit Obligations

Net periodic benefit costs disclosed in the tables below for the qualified pension, non-qualified pension and other post-retirement benefit plans represent the cost of the respective benefit plan to the Duke Energy Registrants for the periods presented. However, portions of the net periodic benefit costs disclosed in the tables below have been capitalized as a component of property, plant and equipment.

Each ofAmounts presented in the tables below for the Subsidiary Registrants participate in qualifiedrepresent the amounts of pension plans, non-qualified pension plans and other post-retirement benefit plans sponsoredcost allocated by Duke Energy. The net periodic benefit costs shown in the tables below represent the allocated costEnergy for employees of the respective benefit plan for the periods presented.Subsidiary Registrants. Additionally, the Subsidiary Registrants are allocated their proportionate share of pension and other post-retirement benefit cost for employees of Duke Energy’s shared services affiliate that provide support to the respective Subsidiary Registrant.Registrants. These allocated amounts are included in the governance and shared servicesservice costs for each Subsidiary Registrant discussed in Note 17.

QUALIFIED PENSION PLANS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following tables include the components of net periodic pension costs for qualified pension plans.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

 

(in millions)

Duke Energy

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy Florida

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

Service cost

$

 42 

 

$

 12 

 

$

 15 

 

$

 5 

 

$

 8 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 3 

 

Interest cost on project benefit obligation

 

 80 

 

 

 20 

 

 

 29 

 

 

 13 

 

 

 13 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 7 

 

Expected return on plan assets

 

 (137) 

 

 

 (37) 

 

 

 (50) 

 

 

 (23) 

 

 

 (22) 

 

 

 (8) 

 

 

 (11) 

 

Amortization of prior service credit

 

 (3) 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

Amortization of actuarial loss

 

 61 

 

 

 15 

 

 

 25 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 12 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 6 

 

Other

 

 2 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

Net periodic pension costs(a)(b)

$

 45 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 19 

 

$

 6 

 

$

 11 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 5 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

 

(in millions)

Duke Energy

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy Florida

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

Service cost

$

 23 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 15 

 

$

 6 

 

$

 7 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 2 

 

Interest cost on project benefit obligation

 

 61 

 

 

 23 

 

 

 31 

 

 

 14 

 

 

 13 

 

 

 8 

 

 

 8 

 

Expected return on plan assets

 

 (94) 

 

 

 (36) 

 

 

 (46) 

 

 

 (24) 

 

 

 (20) 

 

 

 (11) 

 

 

 (12) 

 

Amortization of prior service cost

 

 1 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 1 

 

Amortization of actuarial loss

 

 24 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 22 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 3 

 

Other

 

 1 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

Net periodic pension costs(a)(b)

$

 16 

 

$

 7 

 

$

 24 

 

$

 7 

 

$

 11 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 2 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Duke Energy amounts exclude $3 million for each of the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, of regulatory asset amortization resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy.

 

(b)

Duke Energy Ohio amounts exclude $2 million for each of the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, of regulatory asset amortization resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NON-QUALIFIED PENSION PLANS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The net periodic pension costs for non-qualified pension plans were not material for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and March 31, 2012.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Duke EnergyOTHER POST-RETIREMENT BENEFIT PLANS

Duke Energy and most of its subsidiaries provide, and the Subsidiary Registrants participate in, some health care and life insurance benefits for retired employees on a contributory and non-contributory basis. Employees are eligible for these benefits if they have met age and service requirements at retirement, as defined in the plans. The health care benefits include medical coverage, dental coverage, and prescription drug coverage and are subject to certain limitations, such as deductibles and co-payments.

The following table showstables include the components of the net periodic benefit costs for the Duke Energy U.S. qualified pension, non-qualified pension  and other post-retirement benefit plans.

costs

  

Three Months Ended  

  

Three Months Ended  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

September 30, 2012  

  

September 30, 2011  

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

(in millions)

(in millions)

Qualified Pension Plans(a)

Non-Qualified Pension Plans

  

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans(b)

  

Qualified Pension Plans(a)

  

Non-Qualified Pension Plans

  

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans(b)

(in millions)

Duke Energy

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy Florida

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

Service cost

Service cost

$

 39  

$

 ― 

  

$

 7  

  

$

 24  

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 1  

Service cost

$

 7 

 

$

 1 

 

 

 6 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 2 

 

$

 - 

 

$

 - 

Interest cost on projected benefit obligation

  

 94  

  

 5 

  

 19  

  

 58  

  

 2 

  

 8  

Interest cost on accumulated post-retirement benefit obligation

Interest cost on accumulated post-retirement benefit obligation

 

 18 

 

 3 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 6 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 1 

Expected return on plan assets

Expected return on plan assets

  

 (142)  

  

 ― 

  

 (4)  

  

 (96)  

  

 ― 

  

 (3)  

Expected return on plan assets

 

 (3) 

 

 (3) 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

Amortization of prior service cost (credit)

  

 3  

  

 ― 

  

 (2)  

  

 1  

  

 ― 

  

 (2)  

Amortization of prior service credit

Amortization of prior service credit

 

 (3) 

 

 (2) 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

Amortization of actuarial loss (gain)

Amortization of actuarial loss (gain)

 

 13 

 

 1 

 

 14 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 (1) 

Net periodic costs(a)(b)

Net periodic costs(a)(b)

$

 32 

 

$

 - 

 

$

 31 

 

$

 18 

 

$

 10 

 

$

 - 

 

$

 - 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

(in millions)

(in millions)

Duke Energy

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy Florida

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

Service cost

Service cost

$

 2 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 - 

 

$

 - 

Interest cost on accumulated post-retirement benefit obligation

Interest cost on accumulated post-retirement benefit obligation

 

 8 

 

 4 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 2 

Expected return on plan assets

Expected return on plan assets

 

 (4) 

 

 (3) 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

Amortization of prior service credit

Amortization of prior service credit

 

 (2) 

 

 (1) 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

Amortization of net transition liability

Amortization of net transition liability

  

 ―  

  

 ― 

  

 3  

  

 ―  

  

 ― 

  

 2  

Amortization of net transition liability

 

 2 

 

 1 

 

 1 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

Amortization of loss

  

 47  

  

 1 

  

 8  

  

 20  

  

 1 

  

 ―  

Special termination charge

  

 ―  

  

 ― 

  

 9  

  

 ―  

  

 ― 

  

 ―  

Other

  

 2  

  

 ― 

  

 ―  

  

 4  

  

 ― 

  

 ―  

Net periodic costs

$

 43  

$

 6 

  

$

 40  

  

$

 11  

  

$

 3 

  

$

 6  

Amortization of actuarial (gain) loss

Amortization of actuarial (gain) loss

 

 (2) 

 

 1 

 

 6 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 - 

Net periodic costs(a)(b)

Net periodic costs(a)(b)

$

 4 

 

$

 3 

 

$

 20 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 9 

 

$

 - 

 

$

 2 

  

  

   

  

  

  

   

  

   

  

  

  

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Excludes regulatory asset amortization of $3 million and $4 million for each of the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy in April 2006.  

Duke Energy amounts exclude $2 million for each of the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, of regulatory asset amortization resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy.

(b)

Excludes regulatory asset amortization of $3 million and $2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy in April 2006.  

Duke Energy Ohio amounts exclude $1 million for each of the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, of regulatory asset amortization resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

Nine Months Ended  

  

Nine Months Ended  

  

  

September 30, 2012  

  

September 30, 2011  

(in millions)

Qualified Pension Plans(a)

  

Non-Qualified Pension Plans

  

Other Post-Retirements Benefit Plans(b)

  

Qualified Pension Plans(a)

Non-Qualified Pension Plans

  

Other Post-Retirements Benefit Plans(b)

Service cost

$

 84  

  

$

 1 

  

$

 10  

  

$

 72  

$

 1 

  

$

 5  

Interest cost on projected benefit obligation

  

 214  

  

  

 8 

  

  

 36  

  

  

 174  

  

 6 

  

  

 26  

Expected return on plan assets

  

 (330)  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (12)  

  

  

 (288)  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (11)  

Amortization of prior service cost (credit)

  

 6  

  

  

 1 

  

  

 (6)  

  

  

 4  

  

 1 

  

  

 (6)  

Amortization of net transition liability

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 7  

  

  

 ―  

  

 ― 

  

  

 7  

Amortization of loss (gain)

  

 96  

  

  

 2 

  

  

 5  

  

  

 58  

  

 1 

  

  

 (2)  

Special termination charge

  

 ―  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 9  

  

  

 ―  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ―  

Other

  

 4  

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ―  

  

  

 13  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ―  

Net periodic costs

$

 74  

  

$

 12 

  

$

 49  

  

$

 33  

$

 9 

  

$

 19  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

   

(a)

Excludes regulatory asset amortization of $10 million and $11 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy in April 2006.  

(b)

Excludes regulatory asset amortization of $7 million and $6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy in April 2006.  

7194

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

Duke Energy Carolinas  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Three Months Ended

  

Three Months Ended

  

   

September 30, 2012

  

September 30, 2011

(in millions)  

  

Qualified Pension Plans

  

  

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans

  

  

Qualified Pension Plans

  

  

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans

Service cost  

$

 9 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 9 

  

$

 ― 

Interest cost on projected benefit obligation  

  

 23 

  

  

 4 

  

  

 21 

  

  

 4 

Expected return on plan assets  

  

 (36) 

  

  

 (3) 

  

  

 (37) 

  

  

 (2) 

Amortization of prior service (credit) cost   

  

 ― 

  

  

 (2) 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 (1) 

Amortization of net transition liability  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

Amortization of loss   

  

 11 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 9 

  

  

 1 

Special termination charge  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Other  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

Net periodic costs(a)

$

  

$

  

$

  

$

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Components of net periodic costs for Duke Energy Carolinas' non-qualified pension plans were an insignificant amount for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.

  

   

Nine Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

  

   

September 30, 2012

  

September 30, 2011

(in millions)  

  

Qualified Pension Plans

  

  

Non-Qualified Pension Plans

  

  

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans

  

  

Qualified Pension Plans

  

  

Non-Qualified Pension Plans

  

  

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans

Service cost  

$

 26 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 2 

  

$

 28 

  

$

 ― 

  

$

 1 

Interest cost on projected benefit obligation  

  

 68 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 12 

  

  

 64 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 12 

Expected return on plan assets  

  

 (109) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (8) 

  

  

 (112) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (7) 

Amortization of prior service cost (credit)  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (4) 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (4) 

Amortization of net transition liability  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 7 

Amortization of loss  

  

 34 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 27 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

Special termination charge  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Other  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Net periodic costs  

$

21 

  

$

  

$

10 

  

$

13 

  

$

  

$

11 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy Ohio

Three Months Ended

Three Months Ended

September 30, 2012

September 30, 2011

(in millions)

Qualified Pension Plans(a)

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans(b)

Qualified Pension Plans(a)

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans(b)

Service cost

$

 2 

$

 1 

$

 2 

$

 1 

Interest cost on projected benefit obligation

 7 

 1 

 8 

 1 

Expected return on plan assets

 (11)

 (1) 

 (11)

 ―

Amortization of prior service credit

 ―

 ― 

 ―

 (1)

Amortization of loss (gain)

 2 

 (1) 

 2 

 (1)

Other

 ―

 ― 

 1 

 ―

Net periodic costs(c)

$

 ― 

$

 ―

$

 2 

$

 ―

(a)

Excludes regulatory asset amortization of $2 million for each of the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy in April 2006.

(b)

Excludes regulatory asset amortization of an insignificant amount and $1 million for each of the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy in April 2006.

(c)

Components of net periodic costs for Duke Energy Ohio's other post-retirement benefit plans and non-qualified pension plans were an insignificant amount for each of the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.

72


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)(Unaudited)

 

Nine Months Ended

Nine Months Ended

September 30, 2012

September 30, 2011

(in millions)

Qualified Pension Plans(a)

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans(b)

Qualified Pension Plans(a)

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans(b)

Service cost

$

 5 

$

 1 

$

 5 

$

 1 

Interest cost on projected benefit obligation

 23 

 2 

 24 

 2 

Expected return on plan assets

 (33)

 (1) 

 (33)

 ―

Amortization of prior service credit

 ―

 ― 

 ―

 (1)

Amortization of loss (gain)

 7 

 (2) 

 6 

 (2)

Other

 ―

 ― 

 2 

 ―

Net periodic costs(c)

$

$

 ― 

$

$

 ―

(a)

Excludes regulatory asset amortization of $5 million for each of the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy in April 2006.

(b)

Excludes regulatory asset amortization of $1 million and $2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, resulting from purchase accounting adjustments associated with Duke Energy’s merger with Cinergy in April 2006.

(c)

Components of net periodic costs for Duke Energy Ohio's non-qualified pension plans were an insignificant amount for each of the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.

Duke Energy Indiana  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Three Months Ended

  

Three Months Ended

  

   

September 30, 2012

  

September 30, 2011

(in millions)  

  

Qualified Pension Plans

  

  

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans

  

  

Qualified Pension Plans

  

  

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans

Service cost  

$

 2 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 3 

  

$

 1 

Interest cost on projected benefit obligation  

  

 8 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 1 

Expected return on plan assets  

  

 (12) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (12) 

  

  

 ― 

Amortization of prior service cost  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Amortization of loss   

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 ― 

Other

   

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

Net periodic costs(a)

$

  

$

  

$

  

$

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Components of net periodic costs for Duke Energy Indiana's non-qualified pension plans were an insignificant amount for each of the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.

  

   

Nine Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

  

   

September 30, 2012

  

September 30, 2011

(in millions)  

  

Qualified Pension Plans

  

  

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans

  

  

Qualified Pension Plans

  

  

Other Post-Retirement Benefit Plans

Service cost  

$

 7 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 8 

  

$

 1 

Interest cost on projected benefit obligation  

  

 23 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 23 

  

  

 5 

Expected return on plan assets  

  

 (35) 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 (34) 

  

  

 (1) 

Amortization of prior service cost  

  

 2 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

Amortization of loss (gain)  

  

 10 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 10 

  

  

 1 

Other  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 ― 

Net periodic costs(a)

$

  

$

  

$

10 

  

$

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Components of net periodic costs for Duke Energy Indiana's non-qualified pension plans were an insignificant amount for each of the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.

Employee Savings PlanEMPLOYEE SAVINGS PLANS

Duke Energy sponsorsand Progress Energy sponsor, and the Subsidiary Registrants participate in, employee savings plans that cover substantially all U.S. employees. Most employees participate in a matching contribution formula where Duke Energy made pre-tax employerprovides a matching contribution generally equal to 100 percent of employee before-tax and Roth 401(k) contributions, and, as applicable, after-tax contributions, of $30 million and $18 million for  the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.up to 6 percent of eligible pay per pay period. Dividends on Duke Energy made pre-tax employer contributionsshares held by the savings plans are charged to retained earnings when declared and shares held in the plans are considered outstanding in the calculation of $77 millionbasic and $68 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.diluted EPS.

The Subsidiary Registrants participate in Duke Energy sponsored employee savings plans. The following table shows the respective Subsidiary Registrants’ expense related to its proportionate share ofincludes pre-tax employer contributions.matching contributions made by Duke Energy and expensed by the Subsidiary Registrants.

73


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC - DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

  

  

Three Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

  

  

September 30,

  

September 30,

(in millions)

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

  

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

Duke Energy Carolinas

$

 8 

  

$

 8 

  

$

 28 

  

$

 28 

Duke Energy Ohio

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 3 

Duke Energy Indiana

  

 2 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 6 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

Duke Energy

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

Progress Energy

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy Florida

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

For the three months ended March 31,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2013 

$

 41 

 

$

 14 

 

$

 12 

 

$

 6 

 

$

 4 

 

$

 1 

 

$

 2 

 

2012 

 

 28 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 12 

 

 

 6 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

15. SeveranceSEVERANCE

2011 Severance Plan.In conjunction with the merger with Progress Energy, in November 2011 Duke Energy and Progress Energy offered a voluntary severance plan to certain eligible employees. As this was a voluntary severance plan, all severance benefits offered under this plan are considered special termination benefits under U.S. GAAP. Special termination benefits are measured upon employee acceptance and recorded immediately absent any significant retention period. If a significant retention period exists, the cost of the special termination benefits are recorded ratably over the retention period. Approximately 1,100 employees from Duke Energy and Progress Energy accepted the termination benefitsrequested severance during the voluntary window, period, which closed on November 30, 2011. The estimated amount of future severance paymentsexpense associated with this voluntary plan and other severance benefits through 2014, excluding amounts incurred through September 30, 2012, areMarch 31, 2013, is expected to range from $80 million to $110be approximately $20 million and most of the costs will be charged to Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress Energy Carolinas and ProgressDuke Energy Florida.

Additionally, in the third quarter of 2012, a voluntary severance plan was offered to certain Unionunionized employees of Duke Energy Ohio. The plan was offered to approximately 330Approximately 75 employees andaccepted the termination benefits during the voluntary window, which closed on October 8, 2012. The expense associated with this plan iswas not material.

In conjunction with the retirement of the Crystal River Unit 3, severance benefits will be made available to certain eligible impacted unionized and non-unionized employees, to the extent that those employees do not find job opportunities at other locations. Approximately 600

95


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

employees work at Crystal River Unit 3. In the first quarter of 2013, Duke Energy Florida deferred $16 million of severance costs as a regulatory asset. Future severance expense expected to be material.incurred at Duke Energy Florida is currently not estimable as the total number of employees impacted and job classifications and functions have not yet been determined. Refer to Note 4 for further discussion regarding Crystal River Unit 3.

Amounts included in the table below represent direct and allocated severance and related expense recorded by the Duke Energy Registrants, and are recorded in Operation, maintenance, and other within Operating Expenses on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.Operations. The Duke Energy Registrants recorded insignificant amounts forno severance expense during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.

March 31, 2012.

(in millions)

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012(a)

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012(a)

Duke Energy(a)

$

146 

$

146 

Duke Energy Carolinas

$

48 

$

48 

Duke Energy Ohio

$

15 

$

15 

Duke Energy Indiana

$

13 

$

13 

(a)

Includes $16 million of COBRA and healthcare reimbursement expenses and $14 million of accelerated stock award expense.

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

Three Months Ended

March 31, 2013

Duke Energy(a)

$

 16 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

 5 

Progress Energy

 

 7 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 5 

Duke Energy Florida

 

 2 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 1 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 2 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Includes $5 million of accelerated stock award expense.

 

 

 

 

Amounts included in the table below represent the severance liability for past and ongoing severance plans. Amounts for Subsidiary Registrants do not include allocated expense or associated cash payments. Amounts for Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana are not material.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

Balance at

December 31, 2012

 

Provision /

Adjustments

 

Cash

Reductions

 

Balance at

March 31, 2013

Duke Energy(a)

 

$

 135 

 

$

 31 

 

$

 (67) 

 

$

 99 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

 

 12 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 (9) 

 

 

 4 

Progress Energy(a)

 

 

 43 

 

 

 21 

 

 

 (18) 

 

 

 46 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 

 23 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 (10) 

 

 

 14 

Duke Energy Florida(a)

 

 

 6 

 

 

 16 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 20 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Provision / Adjustments includes $16 million of severance costs deferred related to Crystal River Unit 3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                

Amounts included in the table below represent the severance liability for Duke Energy and Duke Energy Carolina’s past and on-going severance plans. Amounts for Duke Energy Carolinas do not include allocated expense or cash payments. Amounts for Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana are not material.

(in millions)

  

Balance at December 31, 2011

  

Provision / Adjustments(a)

  

Cash Reductions

  

Balance at September 30, 2012

Duke Energy

  

$

 32 

  

$

 118  

  

$

 (39) 

  

$

 111 

Duke Energy Carolinas

  

  

 1 

  

  

 14  

  

  

 (5) 

  

  

 10 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Balance for Duke Energy includes a $12 million severance liability acquired in the merger with Progress Energy.

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

                As part of Duke Energy Carolinas’ 2011 rate case, the NCUC approved the recovery of $101 million of previously recorded expenses related to a prior year Voluntary Opportunity Plan. This amount was recorded as a reduction to Operation, maintenance, and other within Operating Expenses on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and recognized as a Regulatory Asset on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in 2012.

 

16. Income Taxes and Other TaxesINCOME TAXES AND OTHER TAXES

Income Taxes. INCOME TAXES

Duke Energy and its subsidiaries file income tax returns in the U.S. with federal and various state governmental authorities, and in certain foreign jurisdictions. The taxable income of Duke Energy and its subsidiaries is reflected in Duke Energy’s U.S. federal and state income tax returns. These subsidiaries have a tax sharing agreement with Duke Energy where the separate return method is used to allocate tax expenses and benefits to the subsidiaries whose investments or results of operations provide these tax expenses and benefits. The accounting for income taxes essentially represents the income taxes that each of these subsidiaries would incur if it were a separate company filing its own tax return as a C-Corporation.

The effective tax rates for each of the Duke Energy Registrants are as follows:included in the following table.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

 

 

2013 

 

2012 

 

Duke Energy

 

 34.2 

%

 25.8 

%

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

 37.1 

%

 36.3 

%

Progress Energy

 

 39.6 

%

 35.1 

%

Duke Energy Progress

 

 38.1 

%

 32.0 

%

Duke Energy Florida

 

 39.1 

%

 36.6 

%

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 37.1 

%

 37.0 

%

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 37.5 

%

 41.0 

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7496

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

  

  

  

Three Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

  

  

  

September 30,

  

September 30,

  

  

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

Duke Energy

  

29.4 

%

  

30.7 

%

  

29.6 

%

  

30.8 

%

Duke Energy Carolinas

  

34.2 

%

  

37.0 

%

  

35.8 

%

  

36.1 

%

Duke Energy Ohio

  

45.2 

%

  

47.3 

%

  

38.9 

%

  

36.9 

%

Duke Energy Indiana

  

55.1 

%

  

37.2 

%

  

47.7 

%

  

30.8 

%

For nine months ended September 30, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio’sThe increase in the effective tax rate increasedfor Duke Energy is primarily due to a $10 million reduction of deferred tax liabilities as a result of an election related to the transfer of certain gas-fired generation assets to its wholly owned subsidiary DECAMlower pre-tax income in the second quarter of 2011. Duke Energy Indiana reflected an increase in its effective tax rate primarily2012 due to an increase in pretax loss related to the Edwardsport IGCC project impairment, charges. See Note 4Progress Energy results of operations included in 2013, impact of lower AFUDC equity in 2013, and a reduction of foreign deferred taxes in 2012 due to changes in foreign tax rates.

The increase in the effective tax rate for further details onProgress Energy is primarily due to the impairment charges.impact of lower AFUDC equity in 2013 and the ESOP dividend deduction being recorded at Duke Energy in 2013 as a result of the merger.

The increase in the effective tax rate for Duke Energy Progress and Duke Energy Florida is primarily due to the favorable prior-year tax benefit related to the manufacturing deduction and the impact of lower AFUDC equity in 2013.

Excise Taxes.EXCISE TAXES

Certain excise taxes levied by state or local governments are collected by the Duke Energy Registrants from itstheir customers. These taxes, which are required to be paid regardless of the Duke Energy Registrants’ ability to collect from the customer, are accounted for on a gross basis. When each of the Duke Energy Registrants act as an agent, and the tax is not required to be remitted if it is not collected from the customer, the taxes are accounted for on a net basis. Excise taxes for eachThe Duke Energy Registrant areRegistrants’ excise taxes accounted for on a gross basis and recorded as operating revenues and other tax expense in the respective Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations were as follows:

  

  

Three Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

  

September 30,

  

September 30,

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

(in millions)

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

2012 

  

2011 

(in millions)

 

 

2013 

 

2012 

Duke Energy

Duke Energy

  

$

 178 

  

$

 81 

  

$

 325 

  

$

 228 

Duke Energy

 

$

 149 

$

 77 

Duke Energy Carolinas

Duke Energy Carolinas

  

  

 47 

  

 45 

  

  

 125 

  

 118 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

 

 42 

 

 39 

Progress Energy

Progress Energy

 

 

 67 

 

 69 

Duke Energy Progress

Duke Energy Progress

 

 

 28 

 

 26 

Duke Energy Florida

Duke Energy Florida

 

 

 39 

 

 43 

Duke Energy Ohio

Duke Energy Ohio

  

  

 26 

  

 27 

  

  

 79 

  

 86 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 

 31 

 

 30 

Duke Energy Indiana

Duke Energy Indiana

  

  

 9 

  

 9 

  

  

 25 

  

 24 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 

 9 

 

 8 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17. Related Party TransactionsRELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

The Subsidiary Registrants engage in related party transactions, which are generally performed at cost and in accordance with the applicable state and federal commission regulations. Refer to the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets of Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy, Duke Energy Progress, Duke Energy Florida, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana for balances due to or due from related parties. Amounts related to transactions with related parties included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income are presented in the following table.

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

  

   

Three Months Ended

  

Nine Months Ended

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

(in millions)

September 30,

  

September 30,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Duke Energy Carolinas

Duke Energy Carolinas

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

  

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

 

 

 

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

$

 309 

  

$

 265 

  

$

 798 

  

$

 769 

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

$

 243 

 

$

 235 

Indemnification coverages(b)

Indemnification coverages(b)

$

 5 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 16 

  

$

 15 

Indemnification coverages(b)

 

 5 

 

 

 5 

Joint dispatch agreement (JDA) revenue(c)

$

 8 

  

 ― 

  

$

 8 

  

 ― 

Joint dispatch agreement (JDA) expense(d)

$

 37 

  

 ― 

  

$

 37 

  

 ― 

Joint Dispatch Agreement (JDA) revenue(c)

Joint Dispatch Agreement (JDA) revenue(c)

 

 53 

 

 

 ― 

JDA expense(c)

JDA expense(c)

 

 10 

 

 

 ― 

Progress Energy

Progress Energy

 

 

 

Corporate governance and shared services provided by Duke Energy(a)

Corporate governance and shared services provided by Duke Energy(a)

$

 80 

 

$

 ― 

Corporate governance and shared services provided to Duke Energy(d)

Corporate governance and shared services provided to Duke Energy(d)

 

 28 

 

 

 ― 

Indemnification coverages(b)

Indemnification coverages(b)

 

 8 

 

 

 ― 

JDA revenue(c)

JDA revenue(c)

 

 10 

 

 

 ― 

JDA expense(c)

JDA expense(c)

 

 53 

 

 

 ― 

Duke Energy Progress

Duke Energy Progress

 

 

 

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

$

 48 

 

$

 52 

Indemnification coverages(b)

Indemnification coverages(b)

 

 5 

 

 

 ― 

JDA revenue(c)

JDA revenue(c)

 

 10 

 

 

 ― 

JDA expense(c)

JDA expense(c)

 

 53 

 

 

 ― 

Duke Energy Florida

Duke Energy Florida

 

 

 

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

$

 32 

 

$

 39 

Indemnification coverages(b)

Indemnification coverages(b)

 

 3 

 

 

 ― 

Duke Energy Ohio

Duke Energy Ohio

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy Ohio

 

 

 

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

$

 103 

  

$

 104 

  

$

 279 

  

$

 290 

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

$

 87 

 

$

 90 

Indemnification coverages(b)

Indemnification coverages(b)

$

 4 

  

$

 5 

  

$

 11 

  

$

 13 

Indemnification coverages(b)

 

 4 

 

 

 4 

Duke Energy Indiana

Duke Energy Indiana

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 

 

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

$

 118 

  

$

 100 

  

$

 317 

  

$

 306 

Corporate governance and shared service expenses(a)

$

 99 

 

$

 101 

Indemnification coverages(b)

Indemnification coverages(b)

$

 2 

  

$

 1 

  

$

 6 

  

$

 5 

Indemnification coverages(b)

 

 2 

 

 

 2 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

The Subsidiary Registrants are charged their proportionate share of corporate governance and other costs by an unconsolidated affiliate that is a consolidated affiliate of Duke Energy. Corporate governance and other shared services costs are primarily related to human resources, employee benefits, legal and accounting fees, as well as other third party costs. These amounts are recorded in Operation, maintenance and other within Operating Expenses on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

The Subsidiary Registrants are charged their proportionate share of corporate governance and other costs by unconsolidated affiliates that are consolidated affiliates of Duke Energy and Progress Energy. Corporate governance and other shared services costs are primarily related to human resources, employee benefits, legal and accounting fees, as well as other third party costs. These amounts are recorded in Operation, maintenance and other on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

(b)

The Subsidiary Registrants incur expenses related to certain indemnification coverages through Bison, Duke Energy’s wholly owned captive insurance subsidiary. These expenses are recorded in Operation, maintenance and other within Operating Expenses on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

The Subsidiary Registrants incur expenses related to certain indemnification coverages through Bison, Duke Energy’s wholly owned captive insurance subsidiary. These expenses are recorded in Operation, maintenance and other on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

(c)

Effective with the consummation of the merger, Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas began to participate in a JDA which allowed the collective dispatch of power plants between the service territories to reduce customers' rates.  The revenues from the sale of power to Progress Energy Carolinas are recorded in Regulated electric within Operating Revenue on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Effective with the consummation of the merger between Duke Energy and Progress Energy, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress began to participate in a JDA which allowed the collective dispatch of power plants between the service territories to reduce customer rates. Revenues from the sale of power under the JDA are recorded in Operating Revenues on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. Expenses from the purchase of power under the JDA are recorded in Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

(d)

Effective with the consummation of the merger, Duke Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Carolinas began to participate in a JDA which allowed the collective dispatch of power plants between the service territories to reduce customers' rates. The expenses from the purchase of power from Progress Energy Carolinas are recorded in Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power - regulated within Operating Expenses on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Progress Energy charges a proportionate share of corporate governance and other costs to unconsolidated affiliates that are consolidated affiliates of Duke Energy. Corporate governance and other shared costs are primarily related to human resources, employee benefits, legal and accounting fees, as well as other third-party costs. These charges are recorded as an offset to Operation, maintenance and other in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

 

 

 

 

 

7597

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

In addition to the amounts presented above, the Subsidiary Registrants record income associated with the rental of office space to consolidated affiliates of Duke Energy, as well as their proportionate share of certain charged expenses from affiliates of Duke Energy. The Duke Energy registrants participate in a money pool arrangement with Duke Energy and certain of its subsidiaries. See Note 6 for more information regarding money pool. As discussed in Note 11, certain trade receivables have been sold by Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana to CRC, an unconsolidated entity formed by a subsidiary of Duke Energy. The proceeds obtained from the sales of receivables are largely cash but do include a subordinated note from CRC for a portion of the purchase price. Rental income, interest income and interest expense on these transactions were not material for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and 2011.2012.

In January 2012, Duke Energy Ohio recorded a non-cash after tax equity transfer of $28 million related to the sale of Vermilion to Duke Energy Indiana. Duke Energy Indiana recorded a non-cash equity after tax equity transfer of $26 million for the purchase of Vermillion from Duke Energy Ohio. See note 2 for further discussion.

DECAMDuke Energy Commercial Asset Management (DECAM) is a non-regulated, direct subsidiary of Duke Energy Ohio. DECAM conducts business activities, including the execution of commodity transactions, and executing third party vendor and supply contracts as well asand service contracts, for certain of Duke Energy’s non-regulated entities. The commodity contracts that DECAM enters either do not qualify as hedges or are accounted for as undersignedundesignated contracts, thus the mark-to-market impacts of these contracts are reflected in Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income. In addition, equal and offsetting mark-to-market impacts of intercompany contracts with non regulatednon-regulated entities are reflected in Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income representing the pass through of the economics of the original contracts to non-regulated entities in accordance with contractual arrangements between Duke Energy Ohio and non-regulated entities. See Note 8 for additional information. Because it is not a rated entity, DECAM receives its credit support from Duke Energy or its non-regulated subsidiaries and not the regulated utility operations of Duke Energy Ohio. DECAM meets its funding needs through an intercompany loan agreement from a subsidiary of Duke Energy. The intercompany loan agreement was executed in February 2011. An additional intercompany loan agreement was executed in October 2011 so that DECAM can also has the ability to loan money to the subsidiary of Duke Energy. DECAM had no intercompany loan receivable with the subsidiary of Duke Energy as of September 30, 2012. DECAM had a $90 million intercompany loan receivable with the subsidiary of Duke Energy as of December 31, 2011. This amount is recorded in Notes receivable from affiliated companies on Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. DECAM had an outstanding intercompany loan payable with the subsidiary of Duke Energy of approximately $84$99 million and $79 million as of September 30, 2012. This amount isMarch 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. These amounts are recorded in Notes payable to affiliated companies on Duke Energy Ohio’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. DECAM had no intercompany loan receivable with the subsidiary of Duke Energy as of September 30, 2012. As discussed in Note 6, in August 2012, Duke Energy issued $1.2 billion of senior unsecured notes. Proceeds from the issuances were used in part to repay outstanding notes of $500 million to DECAM, and such funds were ultimately used to repay at maturity Duke Energy Ohio’s $500 million debentures due September 15, 2012. In conjunction with the generation asset transfer discussed in Note 4, Duke Energy Ohio’s capital structure is being restructured to reflect appropriate debt and equity ratios for its regulated Franchised Electric and Gas operations.March 31, 2013.

 

18. Guarantees and IndemnificationsACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

Duke Energy and its subsidiaries have various financial and performance guarantees and indemnifications which are issued in the normal course of business. As discussed below, these contracts include performance guarantees, stand-by letters of credit, debt guarantees, surety bonds and indemnifications. Duke Energy and its subsidiaries enter into these arrangements to facilitate commercial transactions with third parties by enhancing the value of the transaction to the third party.

On January 2, 2007, Duke Energy completed the spin-off of its natural gas businesses to shareholders. Guarantees that were issued by Duke Energy or its affiliates, or were assigned to Duke Energy prior to the spin-off remained with Duke Energy subsequent to the spin-off. Guarantees issued by Spectra Energy Capital, LLC (Spectra Capital) or its affiliates prior to the spin-off remained with Spectra Capital subsequent to the spin-off, except for certain guarantees that are in the process of being assigned to Duke Energy. During this assignment period, Duke Energy has indemnified Spectra Capital against any losses incurred under these guarantee obligations. The maximum potential amount of future payments associated with the guarantees issued by Spectra Capital at September 30, 2012 is $206 million.

Duke Energy has issued performance guarantees to customers and other third parties that guarantee the payment and performance of other parties, including certain non-wholly-owned entities, as well as guarantees of debt of certain non-consolidated entities and less than wholly-owned consolidated entities. If such entities were to default on payments or performance, Duke Energy would be required under the guarantees to make payments on the obligations of the less than wholly-owned entity. The maximum potential amount of future payments Duke Energy could have been required to make under these guarantees as of September 30, 2012 was $283 million. Of this amount, $62 million relates to guarantees issued on behalf of less than wholly-owned consolidated entities, with the remainder related to guarantees issued on behalf of third parties and unconsolidated affiliates of Duke Energy.

Of the guarantees noted above, $350 million of the guarantees expire between 2012 and 2028, with the remaining performance guarantees having no contractual expiration.

Progress Energy has issued guarantees and indemnifications of and for certain asset performance, legal, tax and environmental matters to third parties, including indemnifications made in connection with sales of businesses. The estimated maximum exposure for these guarantees and indemnifications for which a maximum exposure is determinable was $219 million. Related to the sales of businesses, the latest specified notice period extends until 2013 for the majority of legal, tax and environmental matters provided for in the indemnification provisions. Indemnifications for the performance of assets extend to 2016. For certain matters for which Progress Energy receives timely notice, indemnity obligations may extend beyond the notice period. Certain indemnifications related to discontinued operations have no limitations as to time or maximum potential future payments.

In addition, Progress Energy has issued $300 million in guarantees for certain payments of two wholly-owned indirect subsidiaries, FPC Capital I Trust and Florida Progress Funding Corporation. See Note 11 for additional information.

DUKE ENERGY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents changes in AOCI by component for Duke Energy. All amounts are net of tax.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

 

 

Foreign

Currency

Translation

Adjustments

 

Net  Gains

(Losses) on

Cash Flow

Hedges

 

Net  Gains

(Losses) on

Available for Sale

Securities

 

Pension and

OPEB Related

Adjustments

Total

Balance at December 31, 2011

 

$

 (45) 

 

$

 (71) 

 

$

 (9) 

 

$

 (109) 

 

$

 (234) 

OCI before reclassifications

 

 

 44 

 

 

 13 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 62 

Amounts reclassified from AOCI

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (2) 

Total other comprehensive income

 

 

 44 

 

 

 12 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 60 

Balance at March 31, 2012

 

$

 (1) 

 

$

 (59) 

 

$

 (9) 

 

$

 (105) 

 

$

 (174) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at December 31, 2012

 

$

 (116) 

 

$

 (100) 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 (90) 

 

$

 (306) 

OCI before reclassifications

 

 

 4 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 17 

Total other comprehensive income

 

 

 4 

 

 

 10 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 17 

Balance at March 31, 2013

 

$

 (112) 

 

$

 (90) 

 

$

 ― 

 

$

 (87) 

 

$

 (289) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7698

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION - DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC -– PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. -

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes To Unauditedto Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

Duke Energy has entered into various indemnification agreements related to purchase

For the three months ended March 31, 2013 and sale agreements and other typesMarch 31, 2012 reclassifications out of contractual agreements with vendors and other third parties. These agreements typically cover environmental, tax, litigation and other matters, as well as breaches of representations, warranties and covenants. Typically, claims may be made by third parties for various periods of time, depending on the nature of the claim. Duke Energy’s potential exposure under these indemnification agreements can range from a specified amount, such as the purchase price, to an unlimited dollar amount, depending on the nature of the claim and the particular transaction. Duke Energy is unable to estimate the total potential amount of future payments under these indemnification agreements due to several factors, such as the unlimited exposure under certain guarantees.

At September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the amounts recorded on the Consolidated Balance SheetsAOCI for the guarantees and indemnifications mentioned above is $47 million $19 million, respectively. This amount is primarily recordedSubsidiary Registrants were not material. Changes in Other within Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities onAOCI for the Subsidiary Registrants are presented in their respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.Statements of Equity.

 

19. New Accounting StandardsNEW ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

The following new accounting standards were adopted by the Duke Energy Registrants subsequent to September 30, 2011March 31, 2012, and the impact of such adoption, if applicable, has been presented in the respectiveaccompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements of the Duke Energy Registrants:Statements:

ASC 220 — Comprehensive Income. In June 2011, the FASB amended the existing requirements for presenting comprehensive income in financial statements primarily to increase the prominence of items reported in other comprehensive income (OCI) and to facilitate the convergence of U.S. GAAP and IFRS. Specifically, the revised guidance eliminates the option previously provided to present components of OCI as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. Accordingly, all non-owner changes in stockholders’ equity are required to be presented either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive financial statements. For the Duke Energy Registrants, this revised guidance was effective on a retrospective basis for interim and annual periods beginning January 1, 2012. The adoption of this standard changed the presentation of the Duke Energy Registrants’ financial statements but did not affect the calculation of net income, comprehensive income or earnings per share.

ASC 820 — Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures. In May 2011, the FASB amended existing requirements for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements. This revised guidance results in a consistent definition of fair value, as well as common requirements for measurement and disclosure of fair value information between U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). In addition, the amendments set forth enhanced disclosure requirements with respect to recurring Level 3 measurements, nonfinancial assets measured or disclosed at fair value, transfers between levels in the fair value hierarchy, and assets and liabilities disclosed but not recorded at fair value. For the Duke Energy Registrants, the revised fair value measurement guidance was effective on a prospective basis for interim and annual periods beginning January 1, 2012. The adoption of this new guidance did not have a significant impact on the Duke Energy Registrants disclosures or their consolidated results of operations, cash flows, or financial position.

The following new Accounting Standards Update (ASU) has been issued, but have not yet been adopted by Duke Energy, as of September 30, 2012.Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 210 — Balance Sheet

ASC 210—Balance Sheet. In December 2011,January 2013, the FASB issued revised accounting guidance to amend the existing disclosure requirements for offsetting financial assets and liabilities to enhance current disclosures, as well as to improve comparability of balance sheets prepared under U.S. GAAP and IFRS. The revised disclosure guidance affects all companies that have financial instruments and derivative instruments that are either offset in the balance sheet (i.e., presented on a net basis) or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement and/or similar agreement. The revised guidance requires that certain enhanced quantitative and qualitative disclosures be made with respect to a company’s netting arrangements and/or rights of setoff associated with its financial instruments and/or derivative instruments including associated collateral. For the Duke Energy Registrants, the revised disclosure guidance iswas effective on a retrospective basis for interim and annual periods beginning January 1, 2013. Other than additional disclosures, this revised guidance does not impact the consolidatedDuke Energy Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows or financial positionposition.

ASC 220 — Comprehensive Income

In February 2013, the FASB amended the existing requirements for presenting comprehensive income in financial statements to improve the reporting of reclassifications out of AOCI. The amendments in this Update seek to attain that objective by requiring an entity to report the effect of significant reclassifications out of AOCI on the respective line items in net income if the amount being reclassified is required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in its entirety to net income. For other amounts that are not required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in their entirety to net income in the same reporting period, an entity is required to cross-reference other disclosures required under U.S. GAAP that provide additional detail about those amounts. This would be the case when a portion of the amount reclassified out of AOCI is reclassified to a balance sheet account (for example, property, plant and equipment) instead of directly to income or expense in the same reporting period. For the Duke Energy.  Energy Registrants, this revised guidance was effective on a prospective basis for interim and annual periods beginning January 1, 2013. Other than additional disclosures or a change in the presentation on the statement of comprehensive income, this revised guidance does not impact the Duke Energy Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

The following new Accounting Standards Update (ASU) has been issued, but has not yet been adopted by Duke Energy, as of March 31, 2013

ASC 830—Foreign Currency Matters. In March 2013, the FASB issued revised accounting guidance to resolve the diversity in practice about the release of the cumulative translation adjustment into net income when a parent either sells a part or all of its investment in a foreign entity or no longer holds a controlling financial interest in a subsidiary or group of assets that is a business (other than a sale of in substance real estate) within a foreign entity. In addition, the amendments resolve the diversity in practice for the release of the cumulative translation adjustment involving business combinations achieved in stages by either a Duke investor or a third party acquirer. For the Duke Energy Registrants, the revised accounting guidance is effective on a prospective basis for interim and annual periods beginning January 1, 2014. The revised guidance will impact the timing of the recognition of the cumulative translation adjustment for certain future transactions and therefore, could impact the Duke Energy Registrants’ results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

20. Subsequent EventsSUBSEQUENT EVENTS

For information on subsequent events related to acquisitions, dispositions and sales of other assets, regulatory matters, commitments and contingencies and debt and credit facilities, see Notes 2, 4, 5 and 6, respectively.

7799

 


 

PART I

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.

INTRODUCTIONOPERATIONS

Duke EnergyDUKE ENERGY

Duke Energy Corporation (collectively with its subsidiaries, Duke Energy) is an energy company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Duke Energy operates in the United States (U.S.) and Latin America primarily through its direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries. Duke Energy’s wholly owned subsidiaries included Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy Carolinas), Duke Energy Progress, Inc. (Duke Energy Progress) (formerly Carolina Power & Light Company d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas), Duke Energy Florida, Inc. (Duke Energy Florida) (formerly Florida Power Corporation d/b/a Progress Energy Florida, Inc.), Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. (Duke Energy Ohio), and Duke Energy Indiana, Inc. (Duke Energy Indiana) prior to, as well as in Latin America through International Energy.

When discussing Duke Energy’s consolidated financial information, it necessarily includes the merger withresults of its six separate subsidiary registrants, Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy, IncInc. (Progress Energy). , Duke Energy Progress, Duke Energy Florida, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana (collectively referred to as the Subsidiary Registrants), which, along with Duke Energy, are collectively referred to as the Duke Energy Registrants.

On July 2, 2012, Duke Energy merged with Progress Energy, with Duke Energy continuing as the surviving corporation, and Progress Energy becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy. Carolina Power & Light Company d/b/aDuke Energy Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (Progress Energy Carolinas) and Florida Power Corporation d/b/a ProgressDuke Energy Florida, Inc. (Progress Energy Florida), Progress Energy’s regulated utility subsidiaries, are now indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Duke Energy. Duke Energy’s consolidated financial statementsCondensed Consolidated Financial Statements include Progress Energy, Duke Energy Progress Energy Carolinas and ProgressDuke Energy Florida activity frombeginning July 2, 2012 through September 30, 2012.

Immediately preceding the merger, Duke Energy completed a one-for-three reverse stock split with respect to the issued and outstanding shares of Duke Energy common stock. All share and per share amounts presented herein reflect the impact of the one-for-three reverse stock split. Progress Energy’s shareholders received 0.87083 shares of Duke Energy common stock in exchange for each share of Progress Energy common stock outstanding as of July 2, 2012. Generally, all outstanding Progress Energy equity-based compensation awards were converted into Duke Energy equity-based compensation awards using the same ratio. See Note 2 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, Acquisitions“Acquisitions, Dispositions and Sales of Other Assets, for additional information regardingrelated to the merger.

Progress Energy, Progress Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Florida (collectively referred to as the Progress Energy Registrants) continue to maintain reporting requirements as SEC registrants. The information presented in the Progress Energy Registrants’ separately filed Form 10-Q represents the results of operations of the Progress Energy Registrants for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 and the financial position as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, presented on a comparable basis. In accordancemerger with SEC regulations, the Progress Energy Registrants did not reflect the impacts of acquisition accounting, whereby the adjustments of assets and liabilities to fair value and the resultant goodwill would be shown on the financial statements of the Progress Energy Registrants. These adjustments were recorded by Duke Energy.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis includes financial information prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) in the U.S., as well as certain non-GAAP financial measures such as adjusted earnings and adjusted earnings per share (EPS), discussed below. Generally, a non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of financial performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes (or includes) amounts that are included in (or excluded from) the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. The non-GAAP financial measures should be viewed as a supplement to, and not a substitute for, financial measures presented in accordance with GAAP. Non-GAAP measures as presented herein may not be comparable to similarly titled measures used by other companies.

When discussing Duke Energy’s condensed consolidated financial information, it necessarily includes the results of its six separate subsidiary registrants, Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy, Progress Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy Florida, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana (collectively referred to as the Subsidiary Registrants), which, along with Duke Energy, are collectively referred to as the Duke Energy Registrants. The following combined Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations is separately filed by Duke Energy, Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana. However, none of the registrants makes any representation as to information related solely to Duke Energy or the Subsidiary Registrants of Duke Energy other than itself.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes.

MergerNotes and in conjunction with Progress Energy

On July 2, 2012, Duke Energy completed the merger contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of Merger (Merger Agreement), among Diamond Acquisition Corporation, a North Carolina corporation and Duke Energy’s wholly owned subsidiary (Merger Sub) and Progress Energy, Inc. (Progress Energy), a North Carolina corporation engaged inAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the regulated utility business of generation, transmission and distribution and sale of electricity in portions of North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida. As a result of the merger, Merger Sub was merged into Progress Energy and Progress Energy became a wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy.

Immediately preceding the merger, Duke Energy completed a one-for-three reverse stock split with respect to the issued and outstanding shares of Duke Energy common stock. The shareholders of Duke Energy approved the reverse stock split at Duke Energy’s special meeting of shareholders held on August 23, 2011. All share and per share amounts presented herein reflect the impact of the one-for-three reverse stock split.

Progress Energy’s shareholders received 0.87083 shares of Duke Energy common stock in exchange for each share of Progress Energy common stock outstanding as of July 2,year ended December 31, 2012. Generally, all outstanding Progress Energy equity-based compensation awards were converted into Duke Energy equity-based compensation awards using the same ratio. The merger was structured as a tax-free exchange of shares.

See Note 2 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, Acquisitions and Sales of Other Assets, for information related to the merger with Progress Energy, including accounting charges recognized.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

In this section, Duke Energy provides analysis and discussion of earnings and factors affecting earnings on a both a GAAP and non-GAAP basis.

Management evaluates financial performance in part based on the non-GAAP financial measure, adjustedmeasures, Adjusted earnings and adjustedAdjusted diluted EPS, which are measured as income from continuing operations after deducting income attributable to noncontrolling interests, adjusted for the dollar and per-shareper share impact of special items and the mark-to-market impacts of economic hedges in the Commercial Power segment. Special items represent certain charges and credits, which management believes will not be recurring on a regular basis, although it is reasonably possible such charges and credits could recur. Mark-to-market adjustments reflect the mark-to-market impact of derivative contracts, which is recognized in GAAP earnings immediately as such derivative contracts do not qualify for hedge accounting or regulatory accounting treatment,are used in Duke Energy’s hedging of a portion of economic value of its generation assets in the Commercial Power segment. The mark-to-market impact of the derivative contracts is recognized in GAAP earnings immediately as such derivative contracts do not qualify for hedge accounting or regulatory treatment. The economic value of the generation assets is subject to fluctuations in fair value due to market price volatility of the input and output commodities (e.g., coal, power)power, gas) and as such the economic hedging involves both purchases and sales of those input and output commodities related to the generation assets. Because the operations of the generation assets are accounted for under the accrual method, management believes that excluding the impactimpacts of mark-to-market changes of the economic hedge contracts from operating earnings until settlement better matches the financial impacts of the hedge contract with the portion of economic value of the underlying hedged asset. Management believes that the presentation of adjustedAdjusted earnings and adjustedAdjusted diluted EPS provideprovides useful information to investors, as it provides them an additional relevant comparison of Duke Energy’s performance across periods. Management uses these non-GAAP financial measures for planning and forecasting and for reporting results to the Board of Directors, employees, shareholders, analysts and investors concerning Duke Energy’s financial

78


PART I

performance. The most directly comparable GAAP measures for adjustedAdjusted earnings and adjustedAdjusted diluted EPS are net incomeNet Income and dilutedDiluted EPS attributable to Duke Energy common shareholders, which include the dollar and per-shareper share impact of special items, the mark-to-market impacts of economic hedges in the Commercial Power segment and discontinued operations.

Executive Overview

The following tables reconcile adjustedtable reconciles Adjusted earnings to GAAP net incomeNet Income attributable to Duke Energy and adjustedAdjusted diluted EPS to GAAP diluted EPS attributable to Duke Energy:Energy (amounts are net of tax).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

 

 

2013 

 

2012 

(in millions, except per share amounts)

Amount

 

Per diluted share

 

Amount

 

Per diluted share

Adjusted earnings

$

 716 

 

$

 1.02 

 

$

 506 

 

$

 1.13 

Economic hedges (mark-to-market)

 

 (48) 

 

 

 (0.08) 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 - 

Costs to achieve Progress Energy merger

 

 (34) 

 

 

 (0.05) 

 

 

 (6) 

 

 

 (0.01) 

Edwardsport charges

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 (268) 

 

 

 (0.60) 

Voluntary Opportunity Plan deferral

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 60 

 

 

 0.13 

Income from discontinued operations

 

 - 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 0.01 

Net income attributable to Duke Energy

$

 634 

 

$

 0.89 

 

$

 295 

 

$

 0.66 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100

 


  

  

Three Months Ended September 30,

  

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

(in millions, except per-share amounts)

  

Amount

  

  

EPS

  

  

Amount

  

  

EPS

Total Adjusted Earnings

$

 1,025 

  

$

 1.47 

  

$

 666 

  

$

 1.50 

Costs to Achieve Progress Energy Merger, net of tax

  

 (293) 

  

  

 (0.42) 

  

  

 (10) 

  

  

 (0.02) 

Democratic National Convention Host Committee Support, net of tax

  

 (6) 

  

  

 (0.01) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Economic Hedges (Mark-to-Market), net of tax

  

 (19) 

  

  

 (0.03) 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

Edwardsport Impairment, net of tax

  

 (117) 

  

  

 (0.17) 

  

  

 (135) 

  

  

 (0.30) 

Emission Allowance Impairment, net of tax

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (51) 

  

  

 (0.12) 

Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax

  

 4 

  

  

 0.01 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

Net Income Attributable to Duke Energy

$

 594 

  

$

 0.85 

  

$

 472 

  

$

 1.06 

PART I

 

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

The variance asin adjusted earnings for the three months ended March 31, 2013, compared to the priorsame period in 2012, was primarily due to:

·          The inclusion of Progress Energy results beginning July 2, 2012;

·Favorable weather in July 2012,2013 compared to 2012; and

·          Increased retail pricing and riders primarily resulting from theThe implementation of revised customer rates for Duke Energy Carolinas in North Carolina and South Carolina.February 2012.

Partially offset by:

·          Lower non-regulated Midwest coal generation results in Latin America due to lower sales volumes, higher purchased power costs and unfavorable foreign exchange rates;

·          Unfavorable weather,Lower results in the nonregulated generation businesses due to lower PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM) capacity prices; and

·          Incremental shares issued to complete the Progress Energy merger (impacts Adjusted EPSper diluted share amounts only).

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

  

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

(in millions, except per-share amounts)

  

Amount

  

  

EPS

  

  

Amount

  

  

EPS

Total Adjusted Earnings

$

 1,987 

  

$

 3.74 

  

$

 1,628 

  

$

 3.67 

Costs to Achieve Progress Energy Merger, net of tax

  

 (306) 

  

  

 (0.58) 

  

  

 (23) 

  

  

 (0.05) 

Democratic National Convention Host Committee Support, net of tax

  

 (6) 

  

  

 (0.01) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Economic Hedges (Mark-to-Market), net of tax

  

 (22) 

  

  

 (0.04) 

  

  

 (2) 

  

  

 (0.01) 

Edwardsport Impairment, net of tax

  

 (385) 

  

  

 (0.72) 

  

  

 (135) 

  

  

 (0.30) 

Emission Allowance Impairment, net of tax

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (51) 

  

  

 (0.12) 

Voluntary Opportunity Plan Deferral, net of tax

  

 60 

  

  

 0.11 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax

  

 5 

  

  

 0.01 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

Net Income Attributable to Duke Energy

$

 1,333 

  

$

 2.51 

  

$

 1,418 

  

$

 3.19 

The variance as compared to the prior period is primarily due to:

·The inclusion of Progress Energy results beginning in July 2012,

·Increased retail pricing and riders primarily resulting from the implementation of revised rates in North Carolina and South Carolina, and

·Lower operation and maintenance and governance expenses.

Partially offset by:

·Unfavorable weather,

·Lower non-regulated Midwest coal generation results,

·Higher depreciation and amortization expense, and

·Incremental shares issued to complete the Progress Energy merger (impacts Adjusted EPS only).

79


PART I

Segment Results

Effective with the first quarter of 2012, management began evaluatingManagement evaluates segment performance based on segment income. Segment Incomeincome is defined as income from continuing operations net of income attributable to noncontrolling interests. Segment Income,income, as discussed below, includes intercompany revenues and expenses that are eliminated in the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. In conjunctionManagement also uses adjusted segment income as a measure of historical and anticipated future segment and Other performance. Adjusted segment income is a non-GAAP financial measure, as it is based upon segment income adjusted for special items and the mark-to-market impact of economic hedges in the Commercial Power segment. Management believes that the presentation of adjusted segment income provides useful information to investors, as it provides them with management’s usean additional relevant comparison of a segment’s performance across periods. The most directly comparable GAAP measure for adjusted segment income is reported segment income, which represents segment income from continuing operations, including any special items and the new reporting measure, certain governance costs that were previously unallocated have now been allocated to eachmark-to-market impact of economic hedges in the segments. In addition, direct interest expense and income taxes are included in segment income. Prior year financial information has been recast to conform to the current year presentation. None of these changes impacts the reportable operating segments or the Duke Energy Registrants’ previously reported consolidated revenues, net income or EPS.Commercial Power segment.

See Note 3 to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Business Segments,” for a discussion of Duke Energy’s segment structure.

Duke Energy’s Segment Incomesegment income and adjusted segment income may not be comparable to a similarly titled measuremeasures of another company because other entities may not calculate segment income or adjusted segment income in the same manner. Segment Income is summarized in theThe following table,tables reconcile adjusted segment income to segment income, and detailed discussions follow.follow (amounts are net of tax).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013

(in millions, except per share amounts)

USFE&G

Commercial

Power

International

Energy

Total Reportable

Segments

Other

Duke Energy

Adjusted segment income

$

 656 

$

 6 

$

 97 

$

 759 

$

 (43) 

$

 716 

Mark-to-market impact of economic hedges

 

 - 

 

 (48) 

 

 - 

 

 (48) 

 

 - 

 

 (48) 

Costs to achieve Progress Energy merger

 

 - 

 

 - 

 

 - 

 

 - 

 

 (34) 

 

 (34) 

Segment income

$

 656 

$

 (42) 

$

 97 

$

 711 

$

 (77) 

$

 634 

Income from discontinued operations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 - 

Net income attributable to Duke Energy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

 634 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31, 2012

(in millions, except per share amounts)

USFE&G

Commercial

Power

International

Energy

Total Reportable

Segments

Other

Duke Energy

Adjusted segment income

$

 344 

$

 30 

$

 142 

$

 516 

$

 (10) 

$

 506 

Edwardsport impairment

 

 (268) 

 

 - 

 

 - 

 

 (268) 

 

 - 

 

 (268) 

Costs to achieve Progress Energy merger

 

 - 

 

 - 

 

 - 

 

 - 

 

 (6) 

 

 (6) 

Mark-to-market impact of economic hedges

 

 - 

 

 1 

 

 - 

 

 1 

 

 - 

 

 1 

Voluntary Opportunity Plan deferral

 

 60 

 

 - 

 

 - 

 

 60 

 

 - 

 

 60 

Segment income

$

 136 

$

 31 

$

 142 

$

 309 

$

 (16) 

$

 293 

Income from discontinued operations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 2 

Net income attributable to Duke Energy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

 295 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

101

 


Segment Income by Business Segment

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Three Months Ended September 30,

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

  

2012 

  

2011 

USFE&G

  

$

 790 

  

$

 337 

  

$

 1,263 

  

$

 975 

Commercial Power

  

  

 12 

  

  

 24 

  

  

 71 

  

  

 103 

International Energy

  

  

 103 

  

  

 115 

  

  

 350 

  

  

 370 

Total reportable segment net income

  

  

 905 

  

  

 476 

  

  

 1,684 

  

  

 1,448 

Other

  

  

 (315) 

  

  

 (5) 

  

  

 (356) 

  

  

 (31) 

Discontinued Operations

  

  

 4 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 1 

Net Income Attributable to Duke Energy

  

$

 594 

  

$

 472 

  

$

 1,333 

  

$

 1,418 

              

PART I

 

USFE&G  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

USFE&G includes the regulated operations of Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy Florida, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana. Progress Energy Carolinas and Progress Energy Florida's results are included beginning in July 2012.

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Three Months Ended September 30,

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions, except where noted)  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

Operating revenues   

$

 5,842 

  

$

 2,926 

  

$

 2,916 

  

$

 11,207 

  

$

 8,158 

  

$

 3,049 

Operating expenses   

  

 4,433 

  

  

 2,323 

  

  

 2,110 

  

  

 8,914 

  

  

 6,446 

  

  

 2,468 

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net  

  

 6 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 13 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 11 

Operating income  

  

 1,415 

  

  

 604 

  

  

 811 

  

  

 2,306 

  

  

 1,714 

  

  

 592 

Other income and expenses, net   

  

 103 

  

  

 72 

  

  

 31 

  

  

 227 

  

  

 201 

  

  

 26 

Interest expense  

  

 257 

  

  

 145 

  

  

 112 

  

  

 546 

  

  

 419 

  

  

 127 

Income before income taxes  

  

 1,261 

  

  

 531 

  

  

 730 

  

  

 1,987 

  

  

 1,496 

  

  

 491 

Income tax expense  

  

 470 

  

  

 194 

  

  

 276 

  

  

 723 

  

  

 521 

  

  

 202 

Less: Income attributable to noncontrolling interest  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

Segment Income  

$

 790 

  

$

 337 

  

$

 453 

  

$

 1,263 

  

$

 975 

  

$

 288 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Duke Energy Carolinas’ GWh sales(a)(b)

  

 22,780 

  

  

 22,832 

  

  

 (52) 

  

  

 61,815 

  

  

 63,626 

  

  

 (1,811) 

Progress Energy Carolinas’ GWh sales(a)(c)

  

 16,754 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 16,754 

  

  

 16,754 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 16,754 

Progress Energy Florida GWh sales(a)

  

 11,466 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 11,466 

  

  

 11,466 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 11,466 

Duke Energy Ohio GWh sales(a)

  

 6,804 

  

  

 7,056 

  

  

 (252) 

  

  

 18,600 

  

  

 19,315 

  

  

 (715) 

Duke Energy Indiana GWh sales(a)

  

 8,923 

  

  

 9,071 

  

  

 (148) 

  

  

 25,684 

  

  

 25,501 

  

  

 183 

Net proportional MW capacity in operation(d)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 47,450 

  

  

 26,907 

  

  

 20,543 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

(a)

Gigawatt-hours (GWh).

(b)

Includes 318 GWh associated with mitigation sales, which are not included in the operating results in the table above, for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012.

(c)

Includes 577 GWh associated with mitigation sales, which are not included in the operating results in the table above, for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012.

(d)

Megawatt (MW).

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION – DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC – PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. –

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC. – DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. – DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. – DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

Combined Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued)

(Unaudited)

 

The remaining information presented through this discussion of results of operations is presented on a GAAP basis.

U.S. FRANCHISED ELECTRIC AND GAS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

Variance

Operating Revenues

$

 5,060 

 

$

 2,668 

 

$

 2,392 

Operating Expenses

 

 3,840 

 

 

 2,382 

 

 

 1,458 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 2 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 (2) 

Operating Income

 

 1,222 

 

 

 290 

 

 

 932 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 61 

 

 

 62 

 

 

 (1) 

Interest Expense

 

 236 

 

 

 146 

 

 

 90 

Income Before Income Taxes

 

 1,047 

 

 

 206 

 

 

 841 

Income Tax Expense

 

 391 

 

 

 70 

 

 

 321 

Segment Income

$

 656 

 

$

 136 

 

$

 520 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Carolinas GWh sales(a)(b)

 

 22,246 

 

 

 19,461 

 

 

 2,785 

Duke Energy Progress GWh sales(a)(c)

 

 14,701 

 

 

 13,168 

 

 

 1,533 

Duke Energy Florida GWh sales(a)(d)

 

 8,017 

 

 

 8,412 

 

 

 (395) 

Duke Energy Ohio GWh sales(a)

 

 6,178 

 

 

 5,854 

 

 

 324 

Duke Energy Indiana GWh sales(a)

 

 8,505 

 

 

 8,469 

 

 

 36 

Total USFE&G GWh sales

 

 59,647 

 

 

 55,364 

 

 

 4,283 

Net proportional MW capacity in operation(e)

 

 49,641 

 

 

 27,471 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Gigawatt-hours (GWh).

(b)

Includes 184 GWh sales associated with interim firm power sale agreements (Interim FERC Mitigation) entered into as part of FERC's approval of the merger with Progress Energy, which are not included in the operating results in the table above, for the three months ended March 31, 2013. See Note 2 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, "Acquisitions, Dispositions and Sales of Other Assets," for a discussion of the Interim FERC Mitigation.

(c)

All of Duke Energy Progress' GWh sales for the three months ended March, 31 2012 occurred prior to the merger between Duke Energy and Progress Energy.

(d)

All of Duke Energy Florida's GWh sales for the three months ended March 31, 2012 occurred prior to the merger between Duke Energy and Progress Energy.

(e)

Megawatt (MW).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 as Compared to September 30, 2011March 31, 2012

Operating Revenues. The increasevariance was driven primarily by:

·       A $2,741$2,117 million increase in operating revenues due to the inclusion of Progress Energy operating revenues beginning in July 2012;2012,

·       A $117$120 million increase in fuel revenues (including emission allowances) driven primarily by increased demand from electric retail customers in 2013 compared to the same period in 2012 mainly due to favorable weather conditions, partially offset by lower fuel rates for electric retail customers in all jurisdictions, and lower revenues for purchases of power in Indiana and in the Carolinas. Fuel revenues represent sales to retail and wholesale customers,

·A $105 million increase in electric and gas sales (net of fuel revenue) to retail customers due to favorable weather conditions in 2013 compared to 2012. For the Carolinas, heating degree days for the first quarter of 2013 were 6 percent above normal as compared to 25 percent below normal during the same period in 2012. For Indiana and Ohio, heating degree days for the first quarter of 2013 were 7 percent above normal as compared to 28 percent below normal during the same period in 2012,

·A $32 million net increase in retail rates and rate riders primarily due to updates to the riders, and in retail pricing primarily due to revised retail rates resulting from the 2011 North Carolina and South Carolina rate cases implemented in the first quarter ofFebruary 2012, and revenues recognized for energy efficiency programs; and

80


PART I

·An $88 million increase in fuel revenues (including emission allowances) driven primarily by higher fuel rates for electric retail customers in all regions and higher revenues in Ohio for purchases of power as a result of the new Ohio Electric Security Plan (ESP) which became effective January 1, 2012, and higher revenues for purchases of power in Indiana and the Carolinas, partially offset by decreased demand from electric retail customers mainly due to less favorable weather conditions.

Partially offsetting these increases was:

·       A $67$19 million decreasenet increase in electric sales (netwholesale power revenues, net of fuel) to retail customerssharing, primarily due to overall less favorable weather conditions in 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. For the Carolinas, cooling degree daysa new customer, additional volumes and charges for the third quarter of 2012 were 1% below normal as compared to 17% above normal during the same period in 2011. For the Midwest, cooling degree dayscapacity for the third quarter of 2012 were 20% above normal as compared to 29% above normal during the same period in 2011.customers served under long-term contracts.

Operating Expenses. The increasevariance was driven primarily by:

·    A $2,054$1,650 million increase in operating expenses due to the inclusion of Progress Energy operating expenses beginning in July 2012;2012,

·    A $98$133 million increase in fuel expense (including purchased power and natural gas purchases for resale) primarily related to (i) higher purchasesvolumes of powercoal used in Ohio as a result of the new Ohio ESP,electric generation primarily due to increased generation due to favorable weather conditions, (ii) higher volumes of natural gas used in electric generation higher coal prices, higher purchased power costs in Indiana and the Carolinas, partially offset by lower volume of coal used in electric generation resulting from less favorable weather conditions and lower coal-fired generation due primarily to low natural gas prices, and lower prices for natural gas used in electric generation; and

·A $25 million increase in depreciation and amortization primarily due to increases in depreciation as a result of additional plantgenerating capacity placed in service, and amortization of regulatory assets.

Partially offsetting these increases was:

·A $42 million decrease due to impairment charges of $180 million in 2012, compared to $220 million in 2011, related to the Edwardsport integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant that is currently under construction. See Note 4 to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, "Regulatory Matters,"(iii) higher prices for additional information.

Other Incomecoal and expenses, net. The increase was driven primarily by the inclusion of Progress Energy other income and expense beginning in July 2012.

Interest expense. The increase was driven primarily by the inclusion of Progress Energy interest expense beginning in July 2012.

Income tax expense. The increase is primarily due to an increase in pretax income. The effective tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 was 37.2% and 36.6%, respectively.

Segment IncomeThe increase resulted primarily from the inclusion of Progress Energy results beginning in July 2012 and higher net retail pricing and rate riders. These positive impacts were partially offset by higher income tax expense, higher interest expense, less favorable weather, and increased depreciation and amortization.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 as Compared to September 30, 2011

Operating Revenues.The increase was driven primarily by:

·A $2,741 million increase due to the inclusion of Progress Energy operating revenues beginning in July 2012;

·A $305 million net increase in retail rates and rate riders primarily due to revised retail rates resulting from the 2011 North Carolina and South Carolina rate cases implemented in the first quarter of 2012, and revenues recognized for the energy efficiency programs; and

·A $151 million increase in fuel revenues (including emission allowances) driven primarily by higher revenues in Ohio for purchases of power as a result of the new Ohio ESP, higher fuel rates for electric retail customers in all jurisdictions, and higher revenues for purchases of power in Indiana and the Carolinas, partially offset by decreased demand from electric retail customers in 2012 compared to the same period in 2011 mainly due to less favorable weather conditions, and lower demand and fuel rates in Ohio and Kentucky from natural gas retail customers . Fuel revenues represent sales to retail and wholesale customers.

Partially offsetting these increases was:

·A $186 million decrease in electric and gas sales (net of fuel) to retail customers due to less favorable weather conditions in 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. For the Carolinas, weather statistics for cooling degree days in 2012 were less favorable compared to the same period in 2011, while cooling degree days in the Midwest were favorable in 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. For the Carolinas and Midwest, weather statistics for heating degree days in 2012 were unfavorable compared to the same period in 2011.

Operating Expenses.The increase was driven primarily by:

·A $2,054 million increase due to the inclusion of Progress Energy operating expenses beginning in July 2012;

·A $378 million increase due to impairment and other charges recorded in 2012 related to the Edwardsport IGCC plant that is currently under construction of $600 million, partially offset by a 2011 Edwardsport IGCC impairment charge of $222 million. See Note 4 to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, "Regulatory Matters," for additional information;

·A $142 million increase in fuel expense (including purchased power and natural gas purchases for resale) primarily related to higher purchases of power in Ohio as a result of the new Ohio ESP, higher volumes of natural gas used in electric generation, higher coal prices, higherpartially offset by lower purchased power costs in (a) Indiana, reflective of market conditions, and (b) the Carolinas, partially offset by lower volume of coal used in electric generation resulting from less favorable weather conditions and lower coal-fired generationprimarily due to low natural gas prices, lower prices for natural gas used in electric generation,additional generating capacity placed in-service late 2012 and lower gas volumes and prices to full-service retail gas customers; andalso reflective of market conditions.

·    A $74$101 million increase in depreciation and amortization primarily due to increases in depreciation as a result of additional plant in service and amortization of regulatory assets.

Partially offsetting these increases was:

81


PART I

·A $148 million decrease in operating and maintenance expense primarily due to the establishment of regulatory assets in the first quarter of 2012, pursuant to regulatory orders, for future recovery of certain employee severance costs related to the 2010 voluntary severance plan and other costs, and lower storm costs, partially offset by increased costs associated with energy efficiency programs. costs.

Gains on sales of other assets102


PART I

Partially offsetting these increases was:

·A $420 million decrease due to a 2012 impairment and other net. The increase was driven primarily by higher net gains on sales of emission allowances, andcharges related to the inclusion of Progress Energy transactions beginning in July 2012.

Other Income and expenses, net. The increase was driven primarily byEdwardsport IGCC plant. See Note 4 to the inclusion of Progress Energy other income and expense beginning in July 2012.Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, "Regulatory Matters," for additional information.

Interest Expense. The increasevariance was primarily driven by the inclusion of Progress Energy interest expense beginning in July 2012, and higher debt balances in 2012.

Income tax expense. Tax Expense.The increase isvariance was primarily due to an increase in pretaxpre-tax income. The effective tax rate for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012 was 37.3 percent and 201134.2 percent, respectively. The increase in the effective tax rate was 36.4%primarily due to an increase in pre-tax income and 34.8%, respectively.a reduction in AFUDC equity.

Segment IncomeThe increasevariance resulted primarily from the inclusion of Progress Energy results beginning in July 2012, higher net retail pricing and rate riders, and decrease in operating and maintenance expenses. These positive impacts were partially offset by the additional2012 impairment and other charges related to the Edwardsport IGCC plant, less favorable weather, higher net rate riders and retail pricing, and the net increase in wholesale power revenues. These positive impacts were partially offset by higher income tax expense and higher interest expenseoperating and increased depreciation and amortization.maintenance expenses.

Matters Impacting Future USFE&G Results

ResultsOn December 27, 2012, the IURC approved a settlement agreement between Duke Energy Indiana and certain intervenors to cap the construction costs recoverable in retail rates for the Edwardsport Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)plant. The Edwardsport IGCC plant is scheduled to begin commercial operation in mid-2013. USFE&G’s financial condition, results of USFE&G areoperations and cash flows could be adversely impacted by additional delays in the completioncommencement of its major generation fleet modernization projects.operations which may result in increased costs. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for a discussionadditional information.

USFE&G currently has pending rate cases in North Carolina and South Carolina. These rate cases are needed to recover the costs of the significant increaseplant modernization and other capital investments in the estimated cost of the 618 MW IGCC plant at Duke Energy Indiana’s Edwardsport Generating Station (Edwardsport IGCC). On April 30, 2012, Duke Energy Indiana entered intogeneration, transmission, and distribution systems, as well as increased expenditures for nuclear plants and personnel, vegetation management and other operating costs. USFE&G has a settlement agreement with certain intervenors to cap the construction cost recoverable in retail rates which resulted in the recognition of a $420 million pre-tax charge to earnings in the first quarter of 2012. The settlement agreement is subject to approval by the IURC, a final order is expected by the end of 2012. An additional pre-tax impairment charge of $180 million was recorded in the third quarter of 2012 due to an increase in the estimated cost to complete the project. Duke Energy Indiana is unable to predict the ultimate outcome of the various regulatory proceedings related to one rate case in North Carolina before the Edwardsport project. In the event the IURC disallows a portion of the remaining plant costs, including financing costs, or if cost estimates for the plant increase, additional charges to expense, which could be material, could occur.

The decision related to repairing or retiring Crystal River Unit 3 is complex and subject to a number of unknown factors, including but not limited to, the cost of repair and the likelihood of obtaining NRC approval to restart the reactor after repair. In addition, the scope and estimated costs of necessary repairs of the delamination of Crystal River Unit 3 could prove more extensive than is currently identified, such repairs could prove not to be feasible resulting in the retirement of the unit, the costs of repair and/or replacement power could exceed estimates and insurance coverage or may not be recoverable through the regulatory process; the occurrence of any of which could adversely affectNCUC. USFE&G’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Duke Energy Carolinas plans to file rate cases in North Carolina and South Carolina during 2013. Progress Energy Carolinas filed a rate case in North Carolina in October 2012. Duke Energy Ohio filed electric and gas distribution rate cases in July 2012. These planned rates cases are needed to recover investments in Duke Energy’s ongoing infrastructure modernization projects and operating costs. USFE&G’s earningsflows could be adversely impacted if these rate cases or settlement agreements are denied or delayed by anythe NCUC or PSCSC. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

On May 1, 2013, the PUCO approved a settlement agreement related to Duke Energy Ohio’s electric and gas distribution rate cases. The settlement agreement provides for a net annualized increase in electric distribution revenues of $49 million and no increase in base rates for gas customers subject to the unresolved litigation over remediation costs associated with MGP sites. A separate hearing for recovery of remediation costs associated with MGP sites was held on April 29, 2013. Revised electric rates will be effective in May 2013. Duke Energy Ohio’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be adversely impacted if the PUCO issues an unfavorable ruling on the MGP proceeding. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

On April 12, 2013, the North Carolina Supreme Court (NCSC) issued an order requiring the NCUC to make an independent determination regarding the proper return on equity included in Duke Energy Carolinas’ rate increase approved on January 27, 2012. The NCSC indicated the determination should be based upon appropriate findings of fact that balance all the available evidence, including the impact of changing economic conditions on customers. On April 29, 2013, the NCAG filed a motion with the NCUC requesting a stay of the state regulatory commissions.rate increase approved by the NCUC and implemented in 2012. USFE&G’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be adversely impacted if the NCUC determines the return of equity should be adjusted or issues a stay of the rate increase. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

The abilityFPSC will review the prudence of the retirement decision and the mediated resolution of insurance claims with NEIL related to integrate ProgressDuke Energy businessesFlorida’s Crystal River Unit 3. A procedural schedule has been established providing for hearings in October 2013. USFE&G’s financial condition, results of operations and realize cost savings and any other synergies expected from the merger with Progress Energycash flows could be different from what USFE&G expects and may have a significant impact on USFE&G’s results of operations.

Commercial Power   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Three Months Ended September 30,

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions, except where noted)  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

Operating revenues   

$

 525 

  

$

 687 

  

$

 (162) 

  

$

 1,607 

  

$

 1,926 

  

$

 (319) 

Operating expenses   

  

 522 

  

  

 627 

  

  

 (105) 

  

  

 1,512 

  

  

 1,741 

  

  

 (229) 

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net  

  

 10 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 11 

  

  

 15 

  

  

 (4) 

Operating income  

  

 13 

  

  

 62 

  

  

 (49) 

  

  

 106 

  

  

 200 

  

  

 (94) 

Other income and expenses, net   

  

 1 

  

  

 4 

  

  

 (3) 

  

  

 26 

  

  

 21 

  

  

 5 

Interest expense  

  

 14 

  

  

 21 

  

  

 (7) 

  

  

 55 

  

  

 67 

  

  

 (12) 

Income before income taxes  

  

 ― 

  

  

 45 

  

  

 (45) 

  

  

 77 

  

  

 154 

  

  

 (77) 

Income tax expense  

  

 (13) 

  

  

 20 

  

  

 (33) 

  

  

 5 

  

  

 43 

  

  

 (38) 

Less: Income attributable to noncontrolling interests  

  

 1 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 1 

  

  

 8 

  

  

 (7) 

Segment Income  

$

 12 

  

$

 24 

  

$

 (12) 

  

$

 71 

  

$

 103 

  

$

 (32) 

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Actual coal-fired plant production, GWh  

  

 5,054 

  

  

 5,013 

  

  

 41 

  

  

 12,421 

  

  

 13,420 

  

  

 (999) 

Actual gas-fired plant production, GWh  

  

 4,387 

  

  

 3,255 

  

  

 1,132 

  

  

 13,483 

  

  

 8,476 

  

  

 5,007 

Actual renewable plant production, GWh  

  

 615 

  

  

 545 

  

  

 70 

  

  

 2,399 

  

  

 2,286 

  

  

 113 

Total plant production, GWh  

  

 10,056 

  

  

 8,813 

  

  

 1,243 

  

  

 28,303 

  

  

 24,182 

  

  

 4,121 

Net proportional MW capacity in operation  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 7,760 

  

  

 8,300 

  

  

 (540) 

adversely impacted if the FPSC issues an unfavorable ruling. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 as Compared to September 30, 2011COMMERCIAL POWER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

Variance

Operating Revenues

$

 452 

 

$

 580 

 

$

 (128) 

Operating Expenses

 

 533 

 

 

 530 

 

 

 3 

Operating (Loss) Income

 

 (81) 

 

 

 50 

 

 

 (131) 

Other Income and Expense, net

 

 11 

 

 

 8 

 

 

 3 

Interest Expense

 

 15 

 

 

 19 

 

 

 (4) 

(Loss) Income Before Income Taxes

 

 (85) 

 

 

 39 

 

 

 (124) 

Income Tax (Benefit) Expense

 

 (43) 

 

 

 8 

 

 

 (51) 

Segment (Loss) Income

$

 (42) 

 

$

 31 

 

$

 (73) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coal-fired plant production, GWh

 

 4,549 

 

 

 4,068 

 

 

 481 

Gas-fired plant production, GWh

 

 3,897 

 

 

 4,583 

 

 

 (686) 

Renewable plant production, GWh

 

 1,405 

 

 

 998 

 

 

 407 

Total Commercial Power production, GWh

 

 9,851 

 

 

 9,649 

 

 

 202 

Net proportional MW capacity in operation

 

 8,094 

 

 

 7,691 

 

 

 403 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

82103

 


 

PART I

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013 as Compared to March 31, 2012

Operating Revenues.The decreasevariance was driven primarily by:

·          A $92 million decrease in electric revenues from the coal-fired generation assets driven primarily by the expiration of the 2009-2011 ESP which dedicated Commercial Power’s coal-fired generation to Duke Energy Ohio’s retail customers, net of stability charge revenues, partially offset by the coal-fired generation assets participating in the PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM) wholesale energy market in 2012;

·A $31$71 million decrease in net mark-to-market revenues on non-qualifying power and capacity hedge contracts, consisting of mark-to-market losses of $29$68 million in 20122013 compared to gains of $2$3 million in 2011;2012,

·A $61 million decrease in PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM) capacity revenues related to lower average cleared capacity auction pricing in 2013 compared to 2012, and

·          A $24 million decrease in electric revenues from the gas-fired generation assets driven primarily by lower power prices, partially offset by increased volumes;

·A $23 million decrease in PJM capacity revenues primarily from lower average cleared auction pricing in 2012 compared to 2011, net of an increase from the move of coal-fired generation assets from MISO to PJM in 2012; and

·An $18 million decrease in electric revenues from Duke Energy Retail Sales, LLC (Duke Energy Retail) resulting from lower volumes and unfavorable pricing.

Partially offsetting these decreases were:

·A $16 million increase from participation in competitive retail load auctions; and

·A $5 million increase in electric revenues from higher production in the renewables portfolio.

Operating Expenses.The decrease was driven primarily by:

·A $79 million decrease from the 2011 impairment of excess emission allowances as a result of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) issuance of the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR);

·A $29 million decrease in fuel expenses from the gas-fired generation assets driven by lower natural gas costs; and

·An $18 million decrease in operating and maintenance expenses resulting primarily from lower 2012 transmission costs, lower expenses at the generating stations, and 2011 regulatory asset amortization expenses.

Partially offsetting these decreases was:

·A $14 million increase in purchase power to serve competitive retail auctions.

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net.The increase in 2012 as compared to 2011 is attributable to 2012 gains on the sale of a 50% interest in certain renewable portfolio assets.

Interest Expenses.The decrease in 2012 as compared to 2011 is primarily due to higher capitalized interest on wind construction projects.

Income Tax Expense. The decrease is primarily due to a decrease in pretax income. The effective tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was significantly impacted by the decrease in pre-tax income and tax credits on certain renewable energy projects. The effective tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2011 was 44.7%.

Segment Income. The decrease is primarily attributable to lower revenues driven by the expiration of the 2009-2011 ESP and the impact of competitive market dispatch for the Duke Energy Ohio coal-fired assets, unfavorable earnings from the gas-fired generation assets, unfavorable net mark-to-market results on non-qualifying commodity hedge contracts, and lower Duke Energy Retail earnings. These negative impacts were partially offset by lower operating expenses and the recognition of investment tax credits for certain renewable assets.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 as Compared to September 30, 2011

Operating Revenues.The decrease was driven primarily by:

·A $223 million decrease in electric revenues from the coal-fired generation assets driven primarily by the expiration of the 2009-2011 ESP which dedicated Commercial Power’s coal-fired generation to Duke Energy Ohio’s retail customers, net of stability charge revenues, partially offset by the coal-fired generation assets participating in the PJM wholesale energy market in 2012;

·A $93 million decrease in electric revenues from Duke Energy Retail resulting from lower volumes and unfavorable pricing;

·A $33 million decrease in net mark-to-market revenues on non-qualifying power and capacity hedge contracts, consisting of mark-to-market losses of $33 million in 2012 compared to no gains or losses in 2011;

·A $23 million decrease in electric revenues from Duke Energy Generation Services, Inc. (DEGS), excluding renewables, due primarily to the terminationsale of certain operations atnon-core business operations.

Partially offsetting these decreases were:

·A $15 million increase in electric revenues from higher production in the end of the first quarter of 2011 and a reduction of coal sales volumes as a result of lower natural gas prices;renewables portfolio, and

·          A $13$9 million decreaseincrease in electric revenues from the gas-fired generation assets driven primarily by lowerhigher power prices, partially offset by increaseddecreased volumes.

Partially offsetting these decreases were:

·A $51 million increase from participation in competitive retail load auctions;

·A $10 million increase in electric revenues from higher production in the renewables portfolio; and

·A $5 million increase primarily due to PJM capacity revenues associated with the move of the coal-fired generation assets from MISO to PJM in 2012, net of a decrease related to lower average cleared capacity auction pricing in 2012 compared to 2011 for the gas-fired generation assets.

Operating Expenses.The decreasevariance was driven primarily by:

·          An $88$18 million decrease primarily from the 2011 impairment of excess emission allowances as a result of the EPA’s issuance of the CSAPR.

83


PART I

·A $72 million decrease in operating and maintenance expenses resulting primarily from higher transmission costs, prior year station outages, and 2011 regulatory asset amortization expenses;

·A $60 million decreaseincrease in fuel expenses from the gas-fired generation assets driven by lowerhigher natural gas costs, partially offset by higher volumes;lower natural gas volumes, and

·          A $21$7 million increase in depreciation expense driven primarily by additional renewable assets in operation.

Partially offsetting these increases were:

·An $11 million decrease in DEGS, excluding renewables, fuel used due primarily to the terminationsale of certainnon-core business operations, at the end of the first quarter of 2011 and from lower natural gas prices;

·A $15 million decrease due to the receipt of funds in 2012 related to a previously written off receivable associated with the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy;

·          A $10 million decrease in purchased power to serve Duke Energy Retail customers; and

·A $9 million decrease in fuel used forexpenses from the coal-fired generation assets driven primarily by lower generation volumes.

Partially offsetting these decreases was:

·A $44 million increase in purchase power to serve competitive retail load auctions.cost of coal.

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net.The decrease in 2012 as compared to 2011 is primarily attributable to 2011 gains on sales of certain assets resulting from a contract termination and a reduction in gains related to emission allowance sales, partially offset by 2012 gains on the sale of a 50% interest in certain renewable portfolio assets.

Other Income and Expenses, net.The increase in 2012 as compared to 2011 is primarily due to equity earnings from the renewables portfolio.

Interest Expenses.The decrease in 2012 as compared to 2011 is primarily due to higher capitalized interest on wind construction projects.

Income Tax (Benefit) Expense. The decrease isvariance was primarily due to a decrease in pretax income.pre-tax income and higher production tax credits in 2013 for the Renewables portfolio. The effective tax rate for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012 was 50.8 percent and 2011 was 6.3% and 28.2%,19.3 percent, respectively. The decreaseincrease in the effective tax rate isfor the period was primarily due to the decreasea pre-tax loss in pretax2013 compared to pre-tax income and tax credits on certain renewable energy projects.in 2012.

Segment IncomeIncome.The decrease is primarily attributable to lower revenues driven by the expiration of the 2009-2011 ESP and the impact of competitive market dispatch for the Duke Energy Ohio coal-fired assets, lower Duke Energy Retail earnings, and unfavorable net mark-to-market results on non-qualifying commodity hedge contracts.contracts and lower PJM capacity revenues. These negative impacts were partially offset by lower impairment charges, lower operating expenses, and higher PJM capacity revenues.income tax benefits.

Matters Impacting Future Commercial Power Results

Changes or variability in assumptions used in calculating the fair value of the renewables reporting unit for goodwill testing purposes including but not limited to, legislative actions related to tax credit extensions, and long-term growth rates and discount rates, could significantly impact the estimated fair value of the renewables reporting unit. In the event of a significant decline in the estimated fair value of the renewables reporting unit, goodwill and other asset impairment charges could be recorded. The carrying value of goodwill, and intangible assets associated with proposed renewable projects within Commercial Power’s renewables reporting unit was approximately $120$110 million at September 30, 2012.March 31, 2013.

International Energy

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Three Months Ended September 30,

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions, except where noted)

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

Operating revenues

  

$

 382 

  

$

 360 

  

$

 22 

  

$

 1,181 

  

$

 1,114 

  

$

 67 

Operating expenses

  

  

 266 

  

  

 239 

  

  

 27 

  

  

 768 

  

  

 715 

  

  

 53 

Operating income

  

  

 116 

  

  

 121 

  

  

 (5) 

  

  

 413 

  

  

 399 

  

  

 14 

Other income and expenses, net

  

  

 46 

  

  

 52 

  

  

 (6) 

  

  

 136 

  

  

 166 

  

  

 (30) 

Interest expense

  

  

 23 

  

  

 4 

  

  

 19 

  

  

 60 

  

  

 31 

  

  

 29 

Income before income taxes

  

  

 139 

  

  

 169 

  

  

 (30) 

  

  

 489 

  

  

 534 

  

  

 (45) 

Income tax expense

  

  

 34 

  

  

 51 

  

  

 (17) 

  

  

 129 

  

  

 154 

  

  

 (25) 

Less: Income attributable to noncontrolling interest

  

  

 2 

  

  

 3 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 10 

  

  

 10 

  

  

 ― 

Segment Income

  

$

 103 

  

$

 115 

  

$

 (12) 

  

$

 350 

  

$

 370 

  

$

 (20) 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Sales, GWh

  

  

 5,308 

  

  

 4,565 

  

  

 743 

  

  

 15,264 

  

  

 13,868 

  

  

 1,396 

Proportional MW capacity in operation

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

 4,465 

  

  

 4,190 

  

  

 275 

The current low energy price projections, as well as recently issued and proposed environmental regulations pertaining to coal and coal-fired generating facilities, could impact future cash flows and market valuations of Commercial Power’s coal-fired generation assets which could lead to impairment charges.

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 as Compared to September 30, 2011INTERNATIONAL ENERGY

Operating Revenues.The increase was driven primarily by:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

Variance

Operating Revenues

$

 392 

 

$

 402 

 

$

 (10) 

Operating Expenses

 

 263 

 

 

 245 

 

 

 18 

Operating Income

 

 129 

 

 

 157 

 

 

 (28) 

Other Income and Expense, net

 

 33 

 

 

 54 

 

 

 (21) 

Interest Expense

 

 21 

 

 

 16 

 

 

 5 

Income Before Income Taxes

 

 141 

 

 

 195 

 

 

 (54) 

Income Tax Expense

 

 42 

 

 

 49 

 

 

 (7) 

Less: Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests

 

 2 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 (2) 

Segment Income

$

 97 

 

$

 142 

 

$

 (45) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sales, GWh

 

 4,756 

 

 

 5,074 

 

 

 (318) 

Net proportional MW capacity in operation

 

 4,584 

 

 

 4,231 

 

 

 353 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·104 A $25 million increase in Central America due to higher sales volumes as a result of Las Palmas II commercial operations and favorable weather;

·A $12 million increase in Peru as a result of higher average energy prices.

Partially offsetting these increases was:

·An $18 million decrease in Brazil due to exchange rates, offset by higher average prices and volumes.

Operating Expenses.The increase was driven primarily by:

84

 


 

PART I

·Three Months Ended March 31, 2013 as Compared to March 31, 2012

A $28 million increase in Central AmericaOperating Revenues. The variance was driven primarily due to higher fuel consumption as a result of increased generation and Las Palmas II commercial operations; andby:

·An $11 million increase in Peru as a result of higher fuel consumption and gas royalty costs.

Partially offsetting this increase was:

·A $12$24 million decrease in Brazil due to a delay in the rainy season and unfavorable exchange rates.rates, partially offset by higher average prices.

Partially offsetting this decrease was:

       A $7 million increase in Chile as a result of asset acquisitions in the prior year, and

Interest Expense.The       A $6 million increase was primarily due to lower capitalized interest in Central America and Brazil.as a result of higher energy sales volumes partially offset by lower average prices.

Income Tax Expense.Operating Expenses. The decrease is primarily due to a decrease in pretax income. The effective tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 was 24.9% and 30.4%, respectively.

Segment Income. The decrease was primarily due to unfavorable exchange rates in Brazil.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 as Compared to September 30, 2011

Operating Revenues.The increasevariance was driven primarily by:

·•       A $31$6 million increase in PeruChile due to higher average energy prices;asset acquisitions in the prior year;

·•       A $22$5 million increase in Central America due to higher sales volumesEcuador as a result of Las Palmas II commercial operations partially offset by lower average prices;

·An $11 million increase in Argentina as a result of higher sales volumes due to favorable hydrology;planned maintenance costs, and

·•       A $6$3 million increase in Brazil due to higher average prices and sales volumes,purchased power costs, partially offset by unfavorablefavorable exchange rates.

Operating Expenses.Other Income and Expense, net.The increasevariance was primarily driven primarily by:

·A $57 million increaseby a net remeasurement loss, lower interest income in Central America primarily due to higher fuel consumption, purchased powerBrazil, and Las Palmas II commercial operations; and

·A $12 million increase in Perulower equity earnings at National Methanol Company (NMC) as a result of higher fuellower methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) prices and variable costs, offset byvolumes, net of lower purchased power.

Partially offsetting this increase was:

·A $17 million decrease in Brazil due to favorable exchange rates, offset by higher variablebutane costs.

Other Income and Expenses, net.Segment Income.The decrease was primarily driven by the absence of prior year Peru arbitration.

Interest Expense.The increasevariance was primarily due to lower capitalized interestresults in Central AmericaBrazil, planned maintenance costs in Ecuador and Brazil.lower equity earnings at NMC.

Income Tax Expense.OTHER The decrease is primarily due to a decrease in pretax income. The effective tax rate for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 was 26.5% and 28.9%, respectively.

Segment Income. The decrease was primarily due to unfavorable exchange rates offset by higher average prices and volumes in Brazil and absence of Peru arbitration award.

Other  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

   

Three Months Ended September 30,

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

Operating revenues   

$

 20 

  

$

 14 

  

$

 6 

  

$

 51 

  

$

 34 

  

$

 17 

Operating expenses   

  

 484 

  

  

 26 

  

  

 458 

  

  

 514 

  

  

 79 

  

  

 435 

Losses on sales of other assets and other, net  

  

 (2) 

  

  

 (8) 

  

  

 6 

  

  

 (3) 

  

  

 (8) 

  

  

 5 

Operating loss  

  

 (466) 

  

  

 (20) 

  

  

 (446) 

  

  

 (466) 

  

  

 (53) 

  

  

 (413) 

Other income and expenses, net   

  

 15 

  

  

 (5) 

  

  

 20 

  

  

 14 

  

  

 43 

  

  

 (29) 

Interest expense  

  

 107 

  

  

 43 

  

  

 64 

  

  

 196 

  

  

 118 

  

  

 78 

Loss before income taxes  

  

 (558) 

  

  

 (68) 

  

  

 (490) 

  

  

 (648) 

  

  

 (128) 

  

  

 (520) 

Income tax benefit  

  

 (243) 

  

  

 (57) 

  

  

 (186) 

  

  

 (292) 

  

  

 (85) 

  

  

 (207) 

Less: Loss attributable to noncontrolling interest  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (6) 

  

  

 6 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (12) 

  

  

 12 

Net Expense  

$

 (315) 

  

$

 (5) 

  

$

 (310) 

  

$

 (356) 

  

$

 (31) 

  

$

 (325) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

Variance 2013 vs. 2012

Operating Revenues

$

 35 

 

$

 15 

 

$

 20 

Operating Expenses

 

 90 

 

 

 16 

 

 

 74 

Losses on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 - 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 1 

Operating Loss

 

 (55) 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (53) 

Other Income and Expense, net

 

 11 

 

 

 5 

 

 

 6 

Interest Expense

 

 95 

 

 

 43 

 

 

 52 

Loss Before Income Taxes

 

 (139) 

 

 

 (40) 

 

 

 (99) 

Income Tax Benefit

 

 (60) 

 

 

 (24) 

 

 

 (36) 

Less: Loss Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests

 

 (2) 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 (2) 

Net Expense

$

 (77) 

 

$

 (16) 

 

$

 (61) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 as Compared to September 30, 2011March 31, 2012

Operating Revenues.The increasevariance was driven primarily by mark-to-market activity of mitigation sales related to the Progress Energy merger and higher premiums earned at Bison Insurance Company Limited (Bison) as a result of the addition of Progress Energy. These positive impacts were partially offset by mark-to-market activity at Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, LLC (DETM).

Operating Expenses.The increasevariance was driven primarily by charges related to the Progress Energy merger, (see Note 2), includingincreased severance costs, higher current year donations,charges and unfavorable loss experience at Bison. These negative impacts were partially offset

Other Income and Expense, net. The variance was driven primarily by higher JV costs related to Duke Energy Tradingimpairments and Marketing LLC, (DETM)gains on sales of investments in the prior year.

Other Income and Expenses, netThe increase was driven primarily by higher returns on investments that support benefit obligations in 2012 compared to 2011.

Interest Expense. The increase was due primarily to higher debt balances as a result of debt issuances and inclusion of Progress Energy interest expense beginning in July 2012.

85


PART I

Income Tax Benefit. The increase is primarily due to an increase in pretax loss. The effective tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 was 43.5% and 84.5%, respectively.

Net Expense. The increase was due primarily to charges related to the Progress Energy merger, increased severance costs, and higher interest expense. These negative impacts were partially offset by higher income tax benefit due to increased net expense and higher returns on investments that support benefit obligations.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 as Compared to September 30, 2011

Operating Revenues.The increase was driven primarily by mark-to-market activity at DETM and higher premiums earned at Bison as a result of the addition of Progress Energy.

Operating Expenses.The increase was driven primarily by charges related to the Progress Energy merger, including severance costs, and higher current year donations. These negative impacts were partially offset by higher JV costs related to DETM in the prior year, and favorable loss experience at Bison.

Other Income and Expenses, netThe decrease was driven primarily by current year impairments and prior year gains on sales of investments, higher interest income recorded in 2011 following the resolution of certain income tax matters related to prior years, reversal of reserves related to certain guarantees Duke Energy had issued on behalf of Crescent in 2011. These negative impacts were partially offset by higher returns on investments that support benefit obligations in 2012 compared to 2011.

Interest Expense. The increasevariance was due primarily to higher debt balances as a result of debt issuances and the inclusion of Progress Energy interest expense beginning in July 2012.

Income Tax Benefit. The increase isvariance was primarily due to an increase in pretaxpre-tax loss. The effective tax rate for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012 was 42.5 percent and 2011 was 45.1% and 67.0%,59.9 percent, respectively.

Net Expense. The increasevariance was due primarily to higher interest expense, charges related to the Progress Energy merger, increased severance costs,charges, and higher interest expense.unfavorable loss experience at Bison. These negative impacts were partially offset by higher income tax benefit due to increased net expenseloss before income taxes, mark-to-market activity of mitigation sales related to the Progress Energy merger, and higher returns on investments that support benefit obligations.premiums earned at Bison.

Matters Impacting Future Other Results

Duke Energy previously held an effective 50%50 percent interest in Crescent Resources LLC (Crescent), which was a real estate joint venture formed by Duke Energy in 2006 that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in June 2009. On June 9, 2010, Crescent restructured and emerged from bankruptcy and Duke Energy forfeited its entire 50%50 percent ownership interest to Crescent debt holders. This forfeiture caused Duke Energy to recognize a loss, for tax purposes, on its interest in the second quarter of 2010. Although Crescent has reorganized and emerged from bankruptcy with creditors owning all Crescent interest, there remains uncertainty as to the tax treatment associated with the restructuring. Based on this uncertainty, it is possible that Duke Energy could incur a future tax liability related to the tax losses associated with its partnership interest in Crescent and the resolution of issues associated with Crescent’s emergence from bankruptcy.

105

 


PART I

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS

INTRODUCTION

Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with Duke Energy Carolinas’s Unauditedthe accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Duke Energy Carolinas is a wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy. Duke Energy Carolinas is an electric utility company that generates, transmits, distributesStatements and sells electricity in North CarolinaNotes for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and South Carolina.

BASIS OF PRESENTATION2012.

The results of operations and variance discussion for Duke Energy Carolinas is presented in a reduced disclosure format in accordance with General Instruction H(2) of Form 10-Q.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

  

   

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

Operating revenues  

$

 5,056 

  

$

 5,027 

  

$

 29 

Operating expenses  

  

 3,764 

  

  

 3,794 

  

  

 (30) 

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net  

  

 9 

  

  

 2 

  

  

 7 

Operating income  

  

 1,301 

  

  

 1,235 

  

  

 66 

Other income and expenses, net  

  

 130 

  

  

 139 

  

  

 (9) 

Interest expense  

  

 285 

  

  

 264 

  

  

 21 

Income before income taxes  

  

 1,146 

  

  

 1,110 

  

  

 36 

Income tax expense  

  

 411 

  

  

 401 

  

  

 10 

Net Income  

$

 735 

  

$

 709 

  

$

 26 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

Variance

Operating Revenues

$

 1,729 

 

$

 1,501 

 

$

 228 

Operating Expenses

 

 1,297 

 

 

 1,029 

 

 

 268 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 2 

 

 

 3 

 

 

 (1) 

Operating Income

 

 434 

 

 

 475 

 

 

 (41) 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 36 

 

 

 39 

 

 

 (3) 

Interest Expense

 

 82 

 

 

 97 

 

 

 (15) 

Income Before Income Taxes

 

 388 

 

 

 417 

 

 

 (29) 

Income Tax Expense

 

 144 

 

 

 151 

 

 

 (7) 

Net Income and Comprehensive Income

$

 244 

 

$

 266 

 

$

 (22) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the percentage change in GWh sales and average number of customers for Duke Energy Carolinas. Except as otherwise noted, the below percentages represent billed sales only for the periods presented and are not weather normalized.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) over prior year

2013 

 

Residential sales(a)

 9.6 

%

 

General service sales(a)

 2.1 

%

 

Industrial sales(a)

 (1.4) 

%

 

Wholesale power sales

 147.3 

%

 

Total sales(b)

 14.3 

%

 

Average number of customers

 0.7 

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Major components of retail sales.

 

(b)

Consists of all components of sales, including all billed and unbilled retail sales, and wholesale sales to incorporated municipalities and to public and private utilities and power marketers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

             

The following table shows the percent changes in GWh sales and average number of customers for the current

nine month period compared to the same period in the prior year. Except as otherwise noted, the below percentages represent billed sales only and are not weather normalized.

Increase (decrease) over prior year

Nine Months Ended September 30,Three Months Ended March 31, 2013 as Compared to March 31, 2012

Residential sales(a)

(9.5)

%

General service sales(a)

(0.8)

%

Industrial sales(a)

0.7 

%

Wholesale power sales

(10.2)

%

Total Duke Energy Carolinas sales(b)

(2.8)

%

Average number of customers

0.6 

%

(a)

Major components of Duke Energy Carolinas’ retail sales.

(b)

Consists of all components of Duke Energy Carolinas’ sales, including all billed and unbilled retail sales, and wholesale sales to incorporated municipalities and to public and private utilities and power marketers.

86


PART I

The increase in Duke Energy Carolinas’ net income for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 compared to September 30, 2011 was primarily due to the following factors:

Operating Revenues. The increasevariance was primarily due to:

·          A $305$127 million increase in net retail pricing and rate riders primarily due to revised retail base rates implemented in North Carolina and South Carolina in the first quarter of 2012, and revenues recognized for energy efficiency programs;

·A $37 million increase due to higher unbilled revenues in 2011, as compared to 2012; and

·A $24 million increase in weather adjusted sales volumes to customers primarily due to an extra day of revenues due to 2012 being a leap year.

Partially offsetting these increases were:

·A $168 million decrease in fuel revenues driven primarily by decreasedan increased demand from retail customers mainly due to overall unfavorablefavorable weather conditions, partially offset by highera decrease in fuel rates in both North Carolina and South Carolina. Fuel revenues represent sales to retail and wholesale customers; andcustomers,

·          A $164$68 million (net of fuel) decreasefuel revenue) increase in GWh sales to retail customers due to overall unfavorablefavorable weather conditions. The number of heating degree days for 20122013 was 25% below6 percent above normal as compared to essentially flat to25 percent below normal in 2011. Cooling degree days for2012. The first quarter of 2012 were 3% above normal comparedwas the mildest on record (dating back to 22% above normal in 2011.1961),

Operating Expenses. The decrease was primarily due to:  

·          A $159$16 million decreaseincrease in net retail pricing and rate riders primarily due to the year over year impact of new retail rates implemented in February 2012, partially offset by lower energy efficiency program revenues, primarily due to a favorable revenue adjustment in 2012 following a South Carolina rate order, and

·A $14 million increase in wholesale power revenues, net of sharing, primarily due to a new customer in 2013, increased capacity charges, and additional volumes for customers served under long-term contracts.

Operating Expenses. The variance was primarily due to:

·A $138 million dollar increase in fuel expense (including purchased power) primarily related to lower volumehigher volumes of coal and natural gas from increased generation due to favorable weather conditions and increased prices of coal and natural gas used in electric generation, partially offset by decreased purchased power due to lower demand from retail customers based on overall unfavorable weather conditionsadditional generating capacity placed in service late 2012 and lowerincreased coal-fired generation due to lowhigher natural gas prices; and,

·          A $7$126 million decreaseincrease in operating and maintenance expenses primarily due to the establishment of regulatory assets in the first quarter of 2012, pursuant to regulatory orders for future recovery of certain employee severance costs related to the 2010 voluntary severance plan and other costs, decreased storm costshigher non-outage and lower nuclear station outage costs partially offset byat generation plants, Duke Energy Carolinas’ portion of the costs associated

106


PART I

with the Progress Energy merger, includingand increased storm costs, partially offset by 2012 donations severance,required by rate cases, lower customer service and certain otherenergy efficiency program costs, and required donations resulting from the most recent North Carolinalower corporate and South Carolina rate cases.

Partially offsetting these decreases were:

·A $85 million increase in depreciation and amortization primarily due to increases in depreciation as a result of additional plant in service and amortization of certain regulatory assets;

·A $31 million increase in impairment charges related to the merger with Progress Energy. These charges relate to planned transmission project costs for which no recovery is expected, and certain costs associated with mitigation sales pursuant to merger settlement agreements with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC); and

·A $20 million increase in general taxes primarily due to higher revenue related taxes in 2012, a favorable prior year resolution of a property tax issue related to pollution control equipment exemptions and a sales and use tax refund in 2011 with no comparable refund in 2012.employee benefit costs.

Other Income and Expenses, net. Interest Expense.The decrease is primarily due to a lower equity componenthigher deferred interest on the costs of AFUDC and lower interest incomemajor projects recently placed in 2012 related to the current year resolution of certain prior year income  tax matters;service but not yet reflected in customer rates, partially offset by higher deferred returns.

Interest Expense. The increase is primarily due to lower debt return on deferred projects anda lower debt component of AFUDC.allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC).

Income Tax Expense. The increase isvariance in income tax expense was primarily due to an increasea decrease in pretaxpre-tax income. The effective tax rate for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012 was 37.1 percent and 2011 was 35.8% and 36.1%,36.3 percent, respectively.

Matters Impacting Future Duke Energy Carolinas Results

Duke Energy Carolinas plans to filehas pending rate cases in North Carolina and South Carolina during 2013.Carolina. These planned rates cases are needed to recover investments in Duke Energy Carolinas’ ongoing infrastructure modernization projects and operating costs. Duke Energy Carolinas’ earnings could be adversely impacted if these rate cases are denied or delayed by either of the state regulatory commissions. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

The abilityOn April 12, 2013, the NCSC issued an order requiring the NCUC to integrate with Progress Energy businesses and realize cost savings and any other synergies expected frommake an independent determination regarding the merger with Progress Energy could be different from what Duke Energy Carolinas expects and may have a significant impactproper return on equity included in Duke Energy Carolinas’ rate increase approved on January 27, 2012. The NCSC indicated the determination should be based upon appropriate findings of fact that balance all the available evidence, including the impact of changing economic conditions on customers. On April 29, 2013, the NCAG filed a motion with the NCUC requesting a stay of the rate increase approved by the NCUC and implemented in 2012. Duke Energy Carolinas’ financial condition, results of operations.operations and cash flows could be adversely impacted if the NCUC determines the return of equity should be adjusted or issues a stay of the rate case. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

PROGRESS ENERGY

Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012.

The results of operations and variance discussion for Progress Energy is presented in a reduced disclosure format in accordance with General Instruction H(2) of Form 10-Q.

DUKE ENERGY OHIORESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

Variance

Operating Revenues

$

 2,186 

 

$

 2,102 

 

$

 84 

Operating Expenses

 

 1,756 

 

 

 1,740 

 

 

 16 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 - 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 (1) 

Operating Income

 

 430 

 

 

 363 

 

 

 67 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 23 

 

 

 39 

 

 

 (16) 

Interest Expense

 

 198 

 

 

 185 

 

 

 13 

Income From Continuing Operations Before Taxes

 

 255 

 

 

 217 

 

 

 38 

Income Tax Expense From Continuing Operations

 

 101 

 

 

 76 

 

 

 25 

Income From Continuing Operations

 

 154 

 

 

 141 

 

 

 13 

Income From Discontinued Operations, net of tax

 

 - 

 

 

 11 

 

 

 (11) 

Net Income

 

 154 

 

 

 152 

 

 

 2 

Less: Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling Interest

 

 1 

 

 

 2 

 

 

 (1) 

Net Income Attributable to Parent

$

 153 

 

$

 150 

 

$

 3 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTIONThree Months Ended March 31, 2013 as Compared to March 31, 2012

Operating Revenues. The variance was primarily due to:

·A $56 million increase in sales (excluding fuel revenues) to wholesale customers primarily due to a new contract with a major wholesale customer that began in January 2013 and an amended capacity contract with a major customer that began in May 2012 and favorable weather conditions at Duke Energy Progress,

·A $43 million increase primarily due to a retail base rate increase effective January 1, 2013 at Duke Energy Florida

·A $38 million increase (net of fuel revenue) in GWh sales to retail customers primarily due to favorable weather at Duke Energy Progress net of unfavorable weather at Duke Energy Florida. The weather statistics for heating degree days in 2013 were favorable compared to the same period in 2012, and

·A $19 million increase in capacity clause revenues at Duke Energy Florida primarily due to an increase in recovery of costs related to the proposed Levy Nuclear Station effective January 1, 2013, partially offset by lower sales volume.

Partially offsetting these increases was:

·An $83 million decrease in fuel revenues primarily due to the impact of lower residential fuel rates at Duke Energy Florida and a decrease in GWh retail sales due to weather.

87107

 


 

PART I

Operating Expenses. The variance was primarily due to:

·A $28 million increase in Depreciation and amortization primarily due to higher nuclear cost-recovery amortization related to the Levy nuclear station project at Duke Energy Florida, and

·A $26 million increase in Operation, maintenance and other expense primarily due to Duke Energy Florida’s 2012 settlement agreement, including the 2012 reversals and suspension of accruals related to Crystal River Unit 3, partially offset by lower nuclear plant outage costs at Duke Energy Progress resulting from one nuclear refueling outage in 2013 compared to two extended outages during the same period in 2012.

Partially offsetting these increases was:

·A $41 million decrease in Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power primarily due to generation mix at Duke Energy Progress as a result of retiring certain coal-fired plants and adding one new natural gas-fired generating plant, and one less nuclear outage in 2013 compared to 2012.

Other Income and Expenses, net. The variance was primarily due to the $8 million prior-year pre-tax unrealized gain to record the change in fair value of the contingent value obligations (CVOs) compared to no change in the fair value of the CVOs in 2013.

Interest Expense. The variance was primarily due to the $29 million charge to interest expense on the redemption of Progress Energy’s 7.10% Cumulative Quarterly Income Preferred Securities (QUIPS) in January 2013, partially offset by the $16 million capitalized interest, starting January 1, 2013, on the regulatory asset related to the retail portion of the retired Crystal River Unit 3 assets.

Income Tax Expense from Continuing Operations. The variance was primarily due to an increase in pre-tax income. The effective tax rates for 2013 and 2012 were 39.6 percent and 35.1 percent, respectively. The increase in the effective tax rate is primarily due to the impact of lower AFUDC equity and the employee stock ownership plan dividend deduction being recorded at Duke Energy in 2013 as a result of the merger.

Discontinued Operations, net of tax. The variance was primarily due to the prior-year reversal of certain environmental indemnification liabilities for which the indemnification period had expired.

Matters Impacting Future Progress Energy Results

The FPSC will review the prudence of the retirement decision and the mediated resolution of insurance claims with NEIL related to Duke Energy Florida’s Crystal River Unit 3. A procedural schedule related to these proceedings is pending before the FPSC. Progress Energy’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be adversely impacted if the FPSC issues an unfavorable ruling. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

Duke Energy Progress has a settlement agreement related to a rate case in North Carolina pending before the NCUC. The settlement agreement provides for a total $182 million increase in retail rates during a two year step-in period. Progress Energy’s earnings could be adversely impacted if the settlement agreement is denied or delayed by the NCUC. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS

Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with Duke Energy Ohio’s Unauditedthe accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.Statements and Notes for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012.

The results of operations and variance discussion for Duke Energy Progress is presented in a reduced disclosure format in accordance with General Instruction H(2) of Form 10-Q.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

Variance

Operating Revenues

$

 1,216 

 

$

 1,090 

 

$

 126 

Operating Expenses

 

 1,004 

 

 

 984 

 

 

 20 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 - 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 (1) 

Operating Income

 

 212 

 

 

 107 

 

 

 105 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 14 

 

 

 20 

 

 

 (6) 

Interest Expense

 

 48 

 

 

 51 

 

 

 (3) 

Income Before Income Taxes

 

 178 

 

 

 76 

 

 

 102 

Income Tax Expense

 

 68 

 

 

 24 

 

 

 44 

Net Income

 

 110 

 

 

 52 

 

 

 58 

Less: Preferred Stock Dividend Requirement

 

 - 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 (1) 

Net Income Available to Parent

$

 110 

 

$

 51 

 

$

 59 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the percentage change in GWh sales and average number of customers for Duke Energy Progress. Except as otherwise noted, the below percentages represent billed sales only for the periods presented and are not weather normalized.

 

 

 

 

Increase over prior period

2013 

Residential sales(a)

 11.8 

%

General service sales(a)

 1.0 

%

Industrial sales(a)

 0.6 

%

Wholesale power sales

 26.8 

%

Total sales(b)

 11.6 

%

Average number of customers

 0.8 

%

 

 

 

 

(a)

Major components of retail sales.

(b)

Consists of all components of sales, including all billed and unbilled retail sales, and wholesale sales to incorporated municipalities and to public and private utilities and power marketers.

 

 

 

 

            

108


PART I

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013 as Compared to March 31, 2012

Operating Revenues. The variance was primarily due to:

·A $56 million increase in sales (excluding fuel revenues) to wholesale customers primarily due to a new contract with a major wholesale customer that began in January 2013 and an amended capacity contract with a major wholesale customer that began in May 2012 and favorable weather conditions,

·A $48 million increase (net of fuel revenue) in GWh sales to retail customers due to favorable weather conditions. The number of heating degree days for the 3 months ended March 31, 2013 was 5 percent above normal compared to 29 percent below normal for the same period in 2012, and

·A $20 million increase in wholesale fuel revenue due to higher sales primarily due to favorable weather conditions.

Operating Expenses. The variance was primarily due to:

·A $35 million increase in Fuel expense (including purchased power) primarily from demand associated with favorable weather, partially offset by lower fuel expense due to generation mix as a result of retiring certain coal-fired plants and adding one new natural gas-fired generating plant, and one less nuclear outage in 2013 compared to 2012.

Partially offsetting this increase was:

·A $22 million decrease in Operation and maintenance expenses primarily due to lower nuclear plant outage costs, partially offset by higher costs to achieve the merger with Duke Energy. The lower nuclear plant outage costs are primarily due to one nuclear refueling outage in 2013 compared to two extended outages during the same period in 2012.

Income Tax Expense.The variance was primarily due to an increase in pre-tax income. The effective tax rates for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012 were 38.1 percent and 32.0 percent, respectively. The increase in the effective tax rate was primarily due to the favorable prior year tax benefit related to the manufacturing deduction and the impact of lower AFUDC equity in 2013.

Matters Impacting Future Duke Energy Progress Results

Duke Energy Ohio is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy.Progress has a settlement agreement related to a rate case in North Carolina pending before the NCUC. The settlement agreement provides for a total $182 million increase in retail rates during a two year step-in period. Duke Energy Ohio’s principal linesProgress’ earnings could be adversely impacted if the settlement agreement is denied or delayed by the NCUC. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA

Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012.

The results of business includeoperations and variance discussion for Duke Energy Florida is presented in a reduced disclosure format in accordance with General Instruction H(2) of Form 10-Q.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

Variance

Operating Revenues

$

 968 

 

$

 1,010 

 

$

 (42) 

Operating Expenses

 

 747 

 

 

 756 

 

 

 (9) 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 - 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 (1) 

Operating Income

 

 221 

 

 

 255 

 

 

 (34) 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 8 

 

 

 9 

 

 

 (1) 

Interest Expense

 

 49 

 

 

 63 

 

 

 (14) 

Income Before Income Taxes

 

 180 

 

 

 201 

 

 

 (21) 

Income Tax Expense

 

 70 

 

 

 73 

 

 

 (3) 

Net Income

 

 110 

 

 

 128 

 

 

 (18) 

Less: Preferred Stock Dividend Requirement

 

 - 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 (1) 

Net Income Available to Parent

$

 110 

 

$

 127 

 

$

 (17) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the percentage change in GWh sales and average number of customers for Duke Energy Florida. Except as otherwise noted, the below percentages represent billed sales only for the periods presented and are not weather normalized.

 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) over prior period

2013 

Residential sales(a)

 1.1 

%

General service sales(a)

 (2.6) 

%

Industrial sales(a)

 (0.3) 

%

Wholesale power sales

 (17.6) 

%

Total sales(b)

 (4.7) 

%

Average number of customers

 0.9 

%

 

 

 

 

(a)

Major components of retail sales.

(b)

Consists of all components of sales, including all billed and unbilled retail sales, and wholesale sales to incorporated municipalities and to public and private utilities and power marketers.

 

 

 

 

            

109


PART I

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013 as Compared to March 31, 2012

Operating Revenues. The variance was primarily due to:

·An $83 million decrease in fuel revenues primarily due to the impact of lower residential fuel rates and a decrease in GWh retail sales due to weather,

·A $10 million decrease in sales to retail customers due to unfavorable weather, and

·A $5 million decrease in weather-normal retail volumes primarily related to commercial, industrial, and governmental sectors, offset by favorable volumes in the residential sector.

Partially offsetting these decreases was:

·A $43 million increase primarily due to a retail base rate increase effective January 1, 2013, and

·A $19 million increase in capacity clause revenues primarily due to an increase in recovery of costs related to the proposed Levy Nuclear Station (Levy) effective January 1, 2013, partially offset by lower sales volume.

Operating Expenses. The variance was primarily due to:

·A $76 million decrease in Fuel used in electric generation transmission and distribution of electricity,purchased power primarily due to lower system requirements due to milder weather in the sale of and/or transportation ofcurrent year and lower natural gas prices.

Partially offsetting this decrease was:

·A $46 million increase in Operation and energy marketingmaintenance expenses primarily due to Duke Energy Florida's 2012 FPSC Settlement Agreement, including the 2012 reversals and suspension of accruals related to Crystal River Unit 3.

·A $25 million increase in parts of Ohio, IllinoisDepreciation and Pennsylvania.amortization primarily due to higher nuclear cost-recovery amortization related to the Levy project.

BASIS OF PRESENTATIONInterest Expense. The variance was primarily due to the $16 million capitalized interest, starting January 1, 2013, on the regulatory asset related to the retail portion of the retired Crystal River Unit 3 assets.

Matters Impacting Future Duke Energy Florida Results

The FPSC will review the prudence of the retirement decision and the mediated resolution of insurance claims with NEIL related to Duke Energy Florida’s Crystal River Unit 3. A procedural schedule has been established providing for hearings in October 2013. Duke Energy Florida’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be adversely impacted if the FPSC issues an unfavorable ruling. See Note 4, Regulatory Matters, to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

DUKE ENERGY OHIO

Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012.

The results of operations and variance discussion for Duke Energy Ohio is presented in a reduced disclosure format in accordance with General Instruction H(2) of Form 10-Q.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

  

   

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

Operating revenues  

$

 2,386 

  

$

 2,411 

  

$

 (25) 

Operating expenses  

  

 2,113 

  

  

 2,105 

  

  

 8 

Gains on sales of other assets and other, net  

  

 2 

  

  

 4 

  

  

 (2) 

Operating income  

  

 275 

  

  

 310 

  

  

 (35) 

Other income and expenses, net  

  

 13 

  

  

 17 

  

  

 (4) 

Interest expense  

  

 70 

  

  

 78 

  

  

 (8) 

Income before income taxes  

  

 218 

  

  

 249 

  

  

 (31) 

Income tax expense  

  

 85 

  

  

 92 

  

  

 (7) 

Net Income  

$

 133 

  

$

 157 

  

$

 (24) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

Variance

Operating Revenues

$

 747 

 

$

 912 

 

$

 (165) 

Operating Expenses

 

 764 

 

 

 775 

 

 

 (11) 

Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net

 

 - 

 

 

 1 

 

 

 (1) 

Operating (Loss) Income

 

 (17) 

 

 

 138 

 

 

 (155) 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 2 

 

 

 4 

 

 

 (2) 

Interest Expense

 

 18 

 

 

 24 

 

 

 (6) 

(Loss) Income Before Income Taxes

 

 (33) 

 

 

 118 

 

 

 (151) 

Income Tax (Benefit) Expense

 

 (12) 

 

 

 44 

 

 

 (56) 

Net (Loss) Income

$

 (21) 

 

$

 74 

 

$

 (95) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the percentage change in GWh sales and average number of customers for Duke Energy Ohio. Except as otherwise noted, the below percentages represent billed sales only for the periods presented and are not weather normalized.

 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) over prior year

2013 

Residential sales(a)

 11.2 

%

General service sales(a)

 3.4 

%

Industrial sales(a)

 (0.1) 

%

Wholesale power sales

 130.8 

%

Total sales(b)

 5.5 

%

Average number of customers

 0.2 

%

 

 

 

 

(a)

Major components of retail sales.

(b)

Consists of all components of sales, including all billed and unbilled retail sales, and wholesale sales to incorporated municipalities and to public and private utilities and power marketers.

 

 

 

 

            

The following table shows the percent changes in GWh sales and average number of customers for the current

nine month period compared to the same period in the prior year. Except as otherwise noted, the below percentages represent billed sales only and are not weather normalized.

Increase (decrease) over prior year

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012

Residential sales(a)

 (4.7) 

%

General service sales(a)

 (3.4) 

%

Industrial sales(a)

 (0.7) 

%

Wholesale power sales

 (53.0) 

%

Total Duke Energy Ohio sales(b)

 (3.7) 

%

Average number of customers

 0.5 

%

(a)

Major components of Duke Energy Ohio’s retail sales.

(b)

Consists of all components of Duke Energy Ohio’s sales, including all billed and unbilled retail sales, and wholesale sales to incorporated municipalities and to public and private utilities and power marketers.

The decrease in Duke Energy Ohio’s net income for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 compared to September 30, 2011 was primarily due to the following factors:

Operating Revenues. The decrease was primarily driven by:

·110 A $223 million decrease in electric revenues from the coal-fired generation assets driven primarily by the expiration of the 2009-2011 ESP, net of stability charge revenues, partially offset by the coal-fired generation assets participating in the PJM wholesale energy market in 2012; and

·A $14 million decrease in retail revenues related to unfavorable weather conditions in 2012 compared to 2011.

Partially offsetting these decreases were:

·A $218 million increase in regulated fuel revenues driven primarily by higher purchased power revenues collected under the new Ohio ESP which became effective January 1, 2012, partially offset by reduced gas sales volumes and lower natural gas costs.

Operating Expenses. The increase was primarily driven by:

·A $212 million increase in regulated fuel expense driven primarily by higher purchased power expense as a result of the new ESP, net of stability charge revenues, partially offset by reduced gas sales volumes and lower natural gas costs; and

·A $12 million increase in employee severance costs associated with the close of Duke Energy’s merger with Progress Energy.

Partially offsetting these increases were:

·An $88 million decrease in impairment charges primarily from the impairment taken in the third quarter 2011 to write down the carrying value of excess emission allowances held to fair value as a result of the EPA’s issuance of CSAPR;

·A $60 million decrease in fuel expense for the gas-fired generation assets driven by lower natural gas costs, partially offset by higher volumes;

·A $37 million decrease in operating and maintenance expenses resulting primarily from higher prior year station outages and regulatory asset amortization expense; and

·A $32 million decrease in property and other taxes driven primarily by an Ohio property tax settlement recorded in 2012.

88

 


 

PART I

Interest Expense. Three Months Ended March 31, 2013 as Compared to March 31, 2012

Operating Revenues. The variance was primarily driven by:

·A $124 million decrease in net mark-to-market revenues on non-qualifying power and capacity hedge contracts, consisting of mark-to-market losses of $90 million in 2013 compared to gains of $34 million in 2012; and

·A $61 million decrease in PJM capacity revenues related to lower average cleared capacity auction pricing in 2013 compared to 2012.

Partially offsetting these decreases were:

·A $17 million increase in retail revenues related to favorable weather conditions in 2013 compared to 2012.

Operating Expenses. The variance was primarily driven by:

·An $11 million decrease in operating and maintenance expenses primarily due to post in-service carrying charges related to new projects.lower station outage expenses.

Income Tax Expense.The decrease isvariance in tax expense was primarily due to a decrease in pretaxpre-tax income. The effective tax rate for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012 was 37.1 percent and 2011 was 38.9% and.36.9%,37.0 percent, respectively. The increase in the effective tax rate is primarily due to a $10 million reduction of deferred tax liabilities as a result of an election related to the transfer of certain gas fired generation assets to its wholly owned subsidiary Duke Energy Commercial Asset Management, LLC (DECAM) in the second quarter of 2011.

Matters Impacting Future Duke Energy Ohio Results

On May 1, 2013, the PUCO approved a settlement agreement related to Duke Energy Ohio filedOhio’s electric and gas distribution rate casescases. The settlement agreement provides for a net annualized increase in July 2012. These planned rate cases are neededelectric distribution revenues of $49 million and no increase in base rates for gas customers subject to recover capital investments and operating costs.the unresolved litigation over remediation costs associated with MGP sites. A separate hearing for recovery of remediation costs associated with MGP sites was held on April 29, 2013. Revised electric rates will be effective in May 2013. Duke Energy Ohio’s earningsfinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be adversely impacted if these rate cases are denied or delayed by the state regulatory commission.PUCO issues an unfavorable ruling on the MGP proceeding. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information.

The current low energy price projections, as well as recently issued and proposed environmental regulations pertaining to coal and coal-fired generating facilities, could impact future cash flows and market valuations of Duke Energy Ohio’s coal-fired generation assets which could lead to impairment charges.

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA

INTRODUCTION

Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with Duke Energy Indiana’s Unauditedthe accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Duke Energy Indiana is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy. Duke Energy Indiana is an electric utility company that generates, transmits, distributesStatements and sells electricity in north central, centralNotes for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and southern Indiana.

BASIS OF PRESENTATION2012.

The results of operations and variance discussion for Duke Energy Indiana is presented in a reduced disclosure format in accordance with General Instruction H(2) of Form 10-Q.

  

   

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)  

2012 

  

2011 

  

Variance

Operating revenues  

$

 2,091 

  

$

 1,997 

  

$

 94 

Operating expenses  

  

 2,259 

  

  

 1,800 

  

  

 459 

Operating income  

  

 (168) 

  

  

 197 

  

  

 (365) 

Other income and expenses, net  

  

 66 

  

  

 70 

  

  

 (4) 

Interest expense  

  

 105 

  

  

 104 

  

  

 1 

(Loss) income before income taxes  

  

 (207) 

  

  

 163 

  

  

 (370) 

Income tax (benefit) expense  

  

 (98) 

  

  

 50 

  

  

 (148) 

Net income  

$

 (109) 

  

$

 113 

  

$

 (222) 

The following table shows the percent changes in GWh sales and average number of customers for the current

nine month period compared to the same period in the prior year. Except as otherwise noted, the below percentages represent billed sales only and are not weather normalized.

Increase (decrease) over prior year

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012

Residential sales(a)

 (6.3) 

%

General service sales(a)

 (0.5) 

%

Industrial sales(a)

 2.5 

%

Wholesale power sales

 5.0 

%

Total Duke Energy Indiana sales(b)

 0.7 

%

Average number of customers

 0.6 

%

(a)

Major components of Duke Energy Indiana’s retail sales.

(b)

Consists of all components of Duke Energy Indiana’s sales, including all billed and unbilled retail sales, and wholesale sales to incorporated municipalities and to public and private utilities and power marketers.

The decrease in Duke Energy Indiana’s net income for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011 was primarily due to the following factors:

Operating Revenues. RESULTS OF OPERATIONSThe increase was primarily due to:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

 

Variance

Operating Revenues

$

 724 

 

$

 688 

 

$

 36 

Operating Expenses

 

 543 

 

 

 960 

 

 

 (417) 

Operating Income (Loss)

 

 181 

 

 

 (272) 

 

 

 453 

Other Income and Expenses, net

 

 4 

 

 

 23 

 

 

 (19) 

Interest Expense

 

 41 

 

 

 34 

 

 

 7 

Income (Loss) Before Income Taxes

 

 144 

 

 

 (283) 

 

 

 427 

Income Tax Expense (Benefit)

 

 54 

 

 

 (116) 

 

 

 170 

Net Income (Loss)

$

 90 

 

$

 (167) 

 

$

 257 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table presents the percentage change in GWh sales and average number of customers for Duke Energy Indiana. Except as otherwise noted, the below percentages represent billed sales only for the periods presented and are not weather normalized.

 

 

 

 

Increase (decrease) over prior year

2013 

Residential sales(a)

 12.8 

%

General service sales(a)

 3.6 

%

Industrial sales(a)

 (1.4) 

%

Wholesale power sales

 (14.7) 

%

Total sales(b)

 0.4 

%

Average number of customers

 0.8 

%

 

 

 

 

(a)

Major components of retail sales.

(b)

Consists of all components of sales, including all billed and unbilled retail sales, and wholesale sales to incorporated municipalities and to public and private utilities and power marketers.

 

 

 

 

            

·111 A $93 million net increase in fuel revenues (including emissions allowances) primarily due to increase in fuel rates as a result of higher fuel and purchased power costs; and

·A $10 million increase in rate pricing due to the positive impact on overall average prices of lower sales volumes.

Partially offsetting these increases were:

·An $8 million decrease in retail revenues related to less favorable weather conditions in 2012 compared to 2011.

Operating Expenses. The increase was primarily due to:

89

 


 

PART I

Three Months Ended March 31, 2013 as Compared to March 31, 2012

Operating Revenues. The variance was primarily due to:

·          A $378$22 million net increase in rate riders primarily related to higher recoveries under the Edwardsport IGCC rider; and

·A $20 million net increase in revenue due to favorable weather.

Partially offsetting these increases were:

·A $13 million decrease in overall average rate realization due primarily to the declining block rate structure for residential sales.

Operating Expenses. The variance was primarily due to:

·A $420 million decrease due to impairment and other charges recorded in 2012 related to the Edwardsport IGCC plant that is currently under construction of $600 million, partially offset by a 2011 Edwardsport IGCC impairment charge of $222 million.  See Note 4 to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information;construction.

Other Income and Expenses, net. The decrease was primarily due to:

·          A $105$19 million increasedecrease in fuel costsAFUDC Equity primarily due to higher purchasesthe implementation of power (reflective of favorable market prices); and increased generation cost at coal plants duenew rates related to higher generation levels.

·A $6 million increasethe IGCC rider in Bulk Power Marketing due to unfavorable price and unfavorable emissions costs over prior year, partially offset by favorable fuel and favorable volume variance compared to prior year.

Partially offsetting these increases were:

·A $37 million decrease in operation and maintenance primarily due to higher storm costs in the prior year, and lower generation and outage maintenance costs.January 2013.

Income Tax (Benefit) Expense. The decrease isvariance in income tax expense was primarily due to a decreasean increase in pretaxpre-tax income. The effective tax rates for the ninethree months ended September 30,March 31, 2013 and 2012 were 37.5 percent and 2011 were 47.7% and 30.8%,41.0 percent, respectively. The increasedecrease in the effective tax rate is primarily due to the decreasereduction in pretax incomeAFUDC equity, as well as Edwardsport IGCC impairments, which resulted in 2012 related to the Edwardsport impairment.a pre-tax loss in 2012.

Matters Impacting Future Duke Energy Indiana Results

On December 27, 2012, the IURC approved a settlement agreement between Duke Energy Indiana and certain intervenors to cap the construction costs recoverable in retail rates for the Edwardsport IGCC plant. The Edwardsport IGCC plant is scheduled to begin commercial operation in mid-2013. Duke Energy Indiana’s financial condition, results areof operations and cash flows could be adversely impacted by additional delays in the completioncommencement of its major generation fleet modernization projects.operations which may result in increased costs. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for a discussion of the significant increase in the estimated cost of the 618 MW IGCC plant at Duke Energy Indiana’s Edwardsport Generating Station (Edwardsport IGCC). On April 30, 2012, Duke Energy Indiana entered into a settlement agreement with certain intervenors to cap the construction cost recoverable in retail rates which resulted in the recognition of a $420 million pre-tax charge to earnings in the first quarter of 2012. The settlement agreement is subject to approval by the IURC, a final order is expected by the end of 2012. An additional pre-tax impairment charge of $180 million was recorded in the third quarter of 2012 due to an increase in the estimated cost to complete the project. Duke Energy Indiana is unable to predict the ultimate outcome of the various regulatory proceedings related to the Edwardsport project. In the event the IURC disallows a portion of the remaining plant costs, including financing costs, or if cost estimates for the plant increase, additional charges to expense, which could be material, could occur.information.

112

 


PART I

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

The following discussion of liquidity and capital resources is on a consolidated Duke Energy basis. Duke Energy’s significant cash requirements are largely due to the capital intensive nature of its operations, including capital expansion projects, fleet modernization and other expenditures for environmental compliance. Duke Energy relies upon its cash flows from operations, as well as its ability to access the long-term debt and equity capital markets for sources of domestic liquidity. Additionally, Duke Energy has access to an unsecured revolving credit facilities,facility, which areis not restricted upon general market conditions, as discussed further below.

Cash Flow Information

The following table summarizes Duke Energy’s cash flows.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Cash flows provided by (used in):

 

 

 

 

 

 

Operating activities

$

 1,091 

 

$

 872 

 

Investing activities

 

 (1,465) 

 

 

 (1,180) 

 

Financing activities

 

 246 

 

 

 (731) 

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents

 

 (128) 

 

 

 (1,039) 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

 

 1,424 

 

 

 2,110 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

 1,296 

 

$

 1,071 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OPERATING CASH FLOWS

The following table summarizes key components of Duke Energy’s operating cash flows:

  

The following table summarizes Duke Energy’s cash flows:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

Cash flows provided by (used in):

  

  

  

  

  

  

Operating activities

$

 3,979 

  

$

 3,027 

  

Investing activities

  

 (3,989) 

  

  

 (3,070) 

  

Financing activities

  

 (339) 

  

  

 405 

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents

  

 (349) 

  

  

 362 

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

  

 2,110 

  

  

 1,670 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

$

 1,761 

  

$

 2,032 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Net income

$

 634 

 

$

 299 

Non-cash adjustments to net income

 

 1,122 

 

 

 836 

Working capital

 

 (665) 

 

 

 (263) 

Net cash provided by operating activities

$

 1,091 

 

$

 872 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The increase in cash provided by operating activities in 2013 as compared to 2012 was driven primarily by:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An approximately $620 million increase in net income after non-cash adjustments, mainly due to the inclusion of Progress Energy's results, beginning July 2, 2012, the prior year impact of the 2011 Duke Energy Carolinas' rate cases and favorable weather.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This increase was partially offset by:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A $380 million decrease in traditional working capital, mainly due to an increase in the incentive pay-out and prior year over collection of the Carolinas' fuel costs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INVESTING CASH FLOWS

The following table summarizes key components of Duke Energy’s investing cash flows:

  

Operating Cash Flows. The following table summarizes key components of Duke Energy’s operating cash flows.

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

Net income

$

 1,345 

  

$

 1,424 

Non-cash adjustments to net income

  

 2,883 

  

  

 2,086 

Contributions to qualified pension plans

  

 (79) 

  

  

 ― 

Working capital

  

 (170) 

  

  

 (483) 

Net cash provided by operating activities

$

 3,979 

  

$

 3,027 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

The increase in cash provided by operating activities in 2012 as compared to 2011 was driven primarily by:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

An approximately $720 million increase in net income after non-cash adjustments (depreciation and amortizations, higher Edwardsport impairments, severance expense, and other Progress Energy merger related costs), resulting from the inclusion of Progress Energy's results beginning July 2, 2012 and the impact of the 2011 North Carolina and South Carolina rate cases, net of less favorable weather; and

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

An approximately $310 million increase in traditional working capital, mainly due to prior year refund of North Carolina overcollected fuel costs and current year overcollection of North Carolina and South Carolina fuel costs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Capital, investment and acquisition expenditures

$

 (1,410) 

 

$

 (1,043) 

Available for sale securities, net

 

 (76) 

 

 

 (127) 

Proceeds from sales of equity investments and other assets, and sales of and collections on notes receivable

 

 20 

 

 

 17 

Other investing items

 

 1 

 

 

 (27) 

Net cash used in investing activities

$

 (1,465) 

 

$

 (1,180) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The increase in cash used in investing activities in 2013 as compared to 2012 is primarily due to the following:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A $370 million increase in capital, investment and acquisition expenditures primarily due to the inclusion of Progress Energy's capital expenditures beginning July 2, 2012, net of lower spending on Duke Energy's renewable energy wind projects and ongoing infrastructure modernization program as these projects near completion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

90113

 


 

PART I

FINANCING CASH FLOWS

The following table summarizes key components of Duke Energy’s financing cash flows:

  

Investing Cash Flows. The following table summarizes key components of Duke Energy’s investing cash flows.

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

Capital, investment and acquisition expenditures

$

 (3,888) 

  

$

 (3,076) 

Available for sale securities, net

  

 (212) 

  

  

 (96) 

Proceeds from sales of equity investments and other assets, and sales of and collections on notes receivable

  

 29 

  

  

 115 

Other investing items

  

 82 

  

  

 (13) 

Net cash used in investing activities

$

 (3,989) 

  

$

 (3,070) 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

The increase in cash used in investing activities in 2012 as compared to 2011 was driven primarily by:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

An approximately $810 million increase in capital, investment and acquisition expenditures due to higher expenditures on renewable energy projects and the inclusion of Progress Energy capital expenditures beginning in July 2012 net of lower spending on Duke Energy's ongoing infrastructure modernization program as these projects near completion;

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

An approximately $120 million decrease in proceeds of available for sale securities, net of purchases; and

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

An approximately $90 million decrease primarily as a result of the prior year sale of Windstream Corp. stock received in conjunction with the sale of Q-Comm Corporation in December 2010.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Three Months Ended March 31,

(in millions)

2013 

 

2012 

Issuance of common stock related to employee benefit plans

$

 5 

 

$

 8 

Issuance of long-term debt, net

 

 262 

 

 

 (429) 

Notes payable and commercial paper

 

 627 

 

 

 28 

Dividends paid

 

 (542) 

 

 

 (335) 

Other financing items

 

 (106) 

 

 

 (3) 

Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities

$

 246 

 

$

 (731) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The increase in net cash provided by financing activities in 2013 as compared to cash used in 2012 was due primarily to the following:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A $690 million increase in net issuances of long-term debt, primarily due to the timing of issuances and redemptions across years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A $600 million increase in proceeds from net issuances of notes payable and commercial paper, primarily to fund the short-term working capital needs of the Duke Energy Registrants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These increases in cash provided were partially offset by:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A $200 million increase in quarterly dividends primarily due to an increase in common shares outstanding, resulting from the merger with Progress Energy and an increase in dividends per share from $0.75 to $0.765 beginning in the third quarter of 2012.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

Financing Cash Flows. The following table summarizes key components of Duke Energy’s financing cash flows.

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

Nine Months Ended September 30,

(in millions)

  

2012 

  

  

2011 

Issuance of common stock related to employee benefit plans

$

 16 

  

$

 13 

Issuances of long-term debt, net

  

 692 

  

  

 836 

Notes payable and commercial paper

  

 98 

  

  

 537 

Dividends paid

  

 (1,211) 

  

  

 (994) 

Other financing items

  

 66 

  

  

 13 

Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities

$

 (339) 

  

$

 405 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

The increase in cash used in financing activities in 2012 as compared to 2011 was driven primarily by:

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

An approximately $440 million decrease due to the paydown of commercial paper, net of an increase in PremierNotes outstanding;

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

An approximately $220 million increase in quarterly dividends primarily due to an increase in common shares outstanding, resulting from the merger with Progress Energy and an increase in dividends per share from $0.75 to $0.765; and

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

An approximately $140 million increase in payments for the redemption of long-term debt, net of proceeds from issuances, primarily due to the timing of redemptions and issuances between years.

Significant Notes Payable and Long-Term Debt Activities - 2012. – 2013

The following table summarizes the Duke Energy Registrants’ significant debt issuances since December 31, 2012 (in millions).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Issuance Date

Maturity Date

Interest Rate

 

Duke Energy (Parent)

 

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

 

Duke Energy

 

Unsecured Debt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

January 2013(a)

January 2073

 5.125 

%

 

$

 500 

 

 

$

 - 

 

 

$

 500 

 

Secured Debt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

February 2013(b) (c)

December 2030

 2.043 

%

 

 

 - 

 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 

 203 

 

February 2013(b)

June 2037

 4.740 

%

 

 

 - 

 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 

 220 

 

April 2013(d)

April 2026

 5.456 

%

 

 

 - 

 

 

 

 - 

 

 

 

 230 

 

First Mortgage Bonds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

March 2013(e)

March 2043

 4.100 

%

 

 

 - 

 

 

 

 500 

 

 

 

 500 

 

Total issuances

 

 

 

$

 500 

 

 

$

 500 

 

 

$

 1,653 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Callable after January 2018 at par. Proceeds from the issuance were used to redeem the $300 million 7.10% QUIPS. The securities were redeemed at par plus accrued and unpaid distributions, payable upon presentation on the redemption date. The remaining net proceeds were used to repay a portion of our commercial paper and for general corporate purposes. See Note 11 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, "Variable Interest Entities," for additional information about the QUIPS.

(b)

Represents the conversion of construction loans related to a renewable energy project issued in December 2012 to term loans. No cash proceeds were received in conjunction with the conversion. The term loans have varying maturity dates. The maturity date presented represents the latest date for all components of the respective loans.

(c)

The debt is floating rate. Duke Energy has entered into a pay fixed-receive floating interest rate swap for 95 percent of the loans.

(d)

Represents primarily the conversion of a $190 million bridge loan issued in conjunction with the acquisition of Iberoamericana de Energía Ibener, S.A. (Ibener) in December 2012. Duke Energy received incremental proceeds of $40 million upon conversion of the bridge loan. The debt is floating rate and is denominated in U.S. dollars. Duke Energy has entered into a pay fixed-received floating interest rate swap for 75 percent of the loan.

(e)

Proceeds from the issuance were used to repay notes payable to affiliated companies as well as for general corporate purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CURRENT MATURITIES OF LONG-TERM DEBT

The following table shows the significant components of Current maturities of long-term debt on the Duke Energy Registrants’ respective Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Duke Energy Registrants currently anticipate satisfying these obligations with proceeds from additional borrowings, unless otherwise noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

Maturity Date

Interest Rate

March 31, 2013

Unsecured Debt

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy (Parent)

June 2013

 5.650 

%

$

250 

Duke Energy Indiana

September 2013

 5.000 

%

 

400 

Duke Energy (Parent)

February 2014

 6.300 

%

 

750 

Progress Energy (Parent)

March 2014

 6.050 

%

 

300 

Secured Debt

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy(a)

June 2013

 1.009 

%

 

190 

First Mortgage Bonds

 

 

 

 

 

Duke Energy Ohio

June 2013

 2.100 

%

 

250 

Duke Energy Progress

September 2013

 5.125 

%

 

400 

Duke Energy Carolinas

November 2013

 5.750 

%

 

400 

Other

 

 

 

 

383 

Current maturities of long-term debt

 

 

 

$

3,323 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Notes were fully offset with cash collateral, which was presented within Current Assets on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. All collateral was returned after the six-month bridge loan was replaced with a $230 million nonrecourse secured credit facility issued in April 2013. See Note 2 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, "Acquisitions, Dispositions and Sales of Other Assets," for additional information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

114


PART I

Duke Energy issues unsecured senior notes, called InterNotes, due one year to 30 years from the date of issuance. The InterNotes are issued in the retail markets as direct, unsecured and unsubordinated obligations of Duke Energy Corporation. The net proceeds from the sale of InterNotes are used to fund capital expenditures in Duke Energy’s outstanding long-term debt, including current maturities as of September 30, 2012, includes approximately $17.2 billion related to Progress Energy. This amount includes $3.5 billion of fair value adjustments recorded in connection with purchase accounting for the Progress Energy merger, which are not part of future principal paymentsunregulated businesses and will amortize over the remaining life of the debt. See Note 2 for additional information related to the merger with Progress Energy.

In September 2012, Duke Energy Carolinas issued $650 million principal amount of first mortgage bonds, which carry a fixed interest rate of 4.00% and mature September 30, 2042.  Proceeds from the issuance will be used to repay at maturity the $420 million debentures due through November 2012, as well as for general corporate purposes, including the fundingpurposes. The balances as of capital expenditures. 

In AugustMarch 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 Duke Energy Corporation issued $1.2 billion of senior unsecuredwere $64 million and $35 million, respectively, with maturities ranging from 10 to14 years. The notes of which $700 million carry a fixed interest rate of 1.625% and mature August 15, 2017 and $500 million carry a fixed interest rate of 3.05% and mature August 15, 2022. Proceeds from the issuances were used to repay at maturity Duke Ohio’s $500 million debentures due September 15, 2012 as well as for general corporate purposes, including the repayment of commercial paper. 

In March 2012, Duke Energy Indiana issued $250 million principal amount of first mortgage bonds, which carry a fixed interest rate of 4.20% and mature March 15, 2042. Proceeds from the issuance were used to repay a portionreflect long-term debt obligations of Duke Energy Indiana’s outstanding short-term debt.and are reflected as Long-term debt on Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

In January 2012, Duke Energy Carolinas used proceeds from its December 2011 $1 billion issuance of principal amount of first mortgage bonds to repay $750 million 6.25% senior unsecured notes that matured January 15, 2012.

On April 4, 2011, Duke Energy filed a registration statement (Form S-3) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to sell up to $1 billion (maximum of $500 million of notes outstanding at any particular time) ofissues variable denomination floating rate demand notes, called PremierNotes. The notes are offered on a continuous basis and bear interest at a floating rate per annum determined by the Duke Energy PremierNotes Committee, or

91


PART I

its designee, on a weekly basis. The interest rate payable on notes held by an investor may vary based on the principal amount of the investment. The notes have no stated maturity date, but may be redeemed in whole or in part by Duke Energy at any time. The notes are non-transferable and may be redeemed in whole or in part at the investor’s option. Proceeds from the sale of the notes will be used for general corporate purposes. The balancebalances as of September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2011, is $2882012, were $506 million and $79$395 million, respectively. The notes reflect a short-term debt obligation of Duke Energy and will beare reflected as Notes Payable and Commercial Paper on Duke Energy’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Credit Facilities and Other Information

MASTER CREDIT FACILITY SUMMARY

Available Credit Facilities.In November 2011, Duke Energy entered intohas a $6 billion, five-year5-year master credit facility, expiring in November 2016, with $4 billion available at closing and the remaining $2 billion available following successful completion of the merger with Progress Energy.2016. In October 2012 the Duke Energy Registrants reached an agreement with banks representing $5.63 billion of commitments under the master credit facility to extend the expiration date by one year to November 2017. Through November 2016, the available credit under this facility remains $6 billion. The Duke Energy Registrants each have borrowing capacity under the master credit facility up to specified sublimits for each borrower. However, Duke Energy has the unilateral ability at any time to increase or decrease the borrowing sublimits of each borrower, subject to a maximum sublimit for each borrower. See the table below for the borrowing sublimits for each of the borrowers as of September 30, 2012.March 31, 2013. The amount available under the master credit facility is reduced, as indicated in the table below, by the use of the master credit facility to backstop the issuances of commercial paper, certain letters of credit and certainvariable rate demand tax-exempt bonds. Borrowing sub limitsbonds that may be put to the Duke Energy Registrants at the option of the holder. As indicated, borrowing sublimits for the Subsidiary Registrants are also reduced for amounts outstanding under the money pool arrangement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(in millions)

Duke Energy (Parent)

 

Duke Energy Carolinas

 

Duke Energy Progress

 

Duke Energy Florida

 

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy Indiana

 

 

Total Duke Energy

Facility size(a)

$

 1,750 

 

$

 1,250 

 

$

 750 

 

$

 750 

 

$

 750 

 

$

 750 

 

$

 6,000 

Reduction to backstop issuances

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notes payable and commercial paper(b)

 

 (486) 

 

 

 (300) 

 

 

 (26) 

 

 

 (162) 

 

 

 (163) 

 

 

 (169) 

 

 

 (1,306) 

 

Outstanding letters of credit

 

 (50) 

 

 

 (7) 

 

 

 (2) 

 

 

 (1) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (60) 

 

Tax-exempt bonds

 

 ― 

 

 

 (75) 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 ― 

 

 

 (84) 

 

 

 (81) 

 

 

 (240) 

Available capacity

$

 1,214 

 

$

 868 

 

$

 722 

 

$

 587 

 

$

 503 

 

$

 500 

 

$

 4,394 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Represents the sublimit of each borrower at March 31, 2013. The Duke Energy Ohio sublimit includes $100 million for Duke Energy Kentucky.

(b)

Duke Energy issued $450 million of commercial paper and loaned the proceeds through the money pool to Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Indiana. The balances are classified as long-term borrowings within Long-term Debt in Duke Energy Carolina’s and Duke Energy Indiana’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIRST MORTGAGE BOND RESTRICTIONS

  

September 30, 2012

(in millions)

Duke Energy (Parent)

  

Duke Energy Carolinas

  

Progress Energy Carolinas

  

Progress Energy Florida

  

Duke Energy Ohio

  

Duke Energy Indiana

  

Total Duke Energy

Facility Size

$

 1,750 

  

$

 1,250 

  

$

 750 

  

$

 750 

  

$

 750 

  

$

 750 

  

$

 6,000 

  

Notes Payable and Commercial Paper

  

 (57) 

  

  

 (300) 

  

  

 (134) 

  

  

 (121) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (150) 

  

  

 (762) 

  

Outstanding Letters of Credit

  

 (51) 

  

  

 (7) 

  

  

 (2) 

  

  

 (1) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

 (61) 

  

Tax-Exempt Bonds

  

 ― 

  

  

 (95) 

  

  

 ― 

  

  

  

  

  

 (84) 

  

  

 (81) 

  

  

 (260) 

Available Capacity

$

 1,642 

  

$

 848 

  

$

 614 

  

$

 628 

  

$

 666 

  

$

 519 

  

$

 4,917 

First Mortgage Bond Restrictions.The Subsidiary Registrants’ first mortgage bonds are secured under their respective mortgage indentures. Each mortgage constitutes a first lien on substantially all of the fixed properties of the respective company, subject to certain permitted encumbrances and exceptions. The lien of each mortgage also covers subsequently acquired property. Each mortgage allows the issuance of additional first mortgage bonds based on property additions, retirements of first mortgage bonds and the deposit of cash if certain conditions are satisfied. EachMost of the Subsidiary Registrant isRegistrants are required to pass a “net earnings” test in order to issue new first mortgage bonds, other than on the basis of retired bonds

115


PART I

under certain circumstances. The test requires that the issuer’s adjusted net earnings, which isare calculated based on results for 12 consecutive months within the prior 15 to 18 months, be at least twice the annual interest requirement for bonds currently outstanding and to be outstanding. Duke Energy Indiana’s ratioand Duke Energy Florida’s ratios of net earnings to the annual interest requirement for bonds outstanding washave at times in the past two years been below 2.0 times, during the twelve month periods ending in the quarter ended September 30, 2012.due to various charges to operating expenses. As discussed in Note 4 Regulatoryof the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters, Duke Energy Indiana’s net earnings were impacted by” these charges recorded related to the Edwardsport IGCC project. Until this ratio is above 2.0 times, Duke Energy Indiana’s capacity to issue first mortgage bonds is limited to a portion of its retired first mortgage bonds. Progress Energy Florida’s ratio of net earnings to the annual interest requirement for bonds outstanding was slightly above 2.0 times during certain twelve month periods ending in the quarter ended September 30, 2012, and thus Progress Energy Florida can currently issue first mortgage bonds. However, as discussed in Note 4, Regulatory Matters, Progress Energy Florida’s net earnings have been impacted byany future charges recorded for amounts to be refunded to customers under the terms of a February 2012 settlement agreement approved by the Florida Public Service Commission, which may impact future net earnings tests.tests and affect the ability of Duke Energy Indiana and Duke Energy Florida to issue first mortgage bonds. In the event Duke Energy Indiana’s or ProgressDuke Energy Florida’s long-term debt requirements exceed its first mortgage bond capacity, Duke Energy Indiana or ProgressDuke Energy Florida can access alternative sources of capital, including, but not limited to issuing unsecured debt, borrowing under the money pool, entering into bilateral direct loan arrangements, and, if necessary, utilizing available capacity under the master credit facility. All of the other DEC registrantsDuke Energy Registrants have earnings substantially in excess of the net earnings test requirement for issuing first mortgage bonds.

Restrictive Debt Covenants.RESTRICTIVE DEBT CONVENANTS

The Duke Energy Registrants’ debt and credit agreements contain various financial and other covenants. The master credit facility contains a covenant requiring the debt-to-total capitalization ratio to not exceed 65%65 percent for each borrower. Failure to meet those covenants beyond applicable grace periods could result in accelerated due dates and/or termination of the agreements. As of September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, each of the Duke Energy Registrants was in compliance with all covenants related to its significant debt agreements. In addition, some credit agreements may allow for acceleration of payments or termination of the agreements due to nonpayment, or the acceleration of other significant indebtedness of the borrower or some of its subsidiaries. None of the significant debt or credit agreements contain material adverse change clauses.

Credit Ratings.CREDIT RATINGS On July 25, 2012, Standard and Poor’s affirmed

Duke Energy and Progress Energy's short-termcertain subsidiaries each hold credit ratings of A-2.by Fitch Ratings (Fitch), Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s) and Standard and& Poor’s also affirmed its ratings on(S&P). Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy Florida, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Indiana’s first-mortgage bonds at A. However, Standard and Poor’s lowered its corporate credit rating for Duke Energy, Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Indiana, Duke Energy Ohio and Duke Energy Kentucky to BBB+ from A- with a negative outlook, citing lack of transparency and heightened regulatory risk around the CEO transition. Standard and Poor’s affirmed Progress Energy’s corporate credit rating and its subsidiaries ratings atissuer credit rating from Fitch, Moody’s and S&P, respectively, as of April 30, 2013 is BBB+ as well as its A-2 short-term rating. Standard, Baa2 and Poor’s negative outlook for Duke Energy and allBBB, respectively. As of its subsidiaries’ is based on concerns over increased regulatory risk in North Carolina and Florida and concerns over Duke Energy’s ability to successfully integrate Progress Energy.

On July 3, 2012, Moody’s affirmed their ratings for the newly merged Duke Energy and its subsidiaries with a stable outlook. On July 6, 2012, Fitch Ratings initiated coverage on Duke Energy and its subsidiaries.  These ratings are investment grade and are on stable outlook.  On June 22, Fitch Ratings affirmed their ratings for Progress Energy and its subsidiaries prior to the merger consummation.

A further downgrade belowApril 30, 2013, the Duke Energy Registrants’, including Progress have a stable outlook rating from Fitch and Moody’s, with the exception of Duke Energy and its subsidiaries, current investment grade ratings would likely result in an increase in the entities’ borrowing costs, perhaps significantly.Florida, which has a negative outlook at Fitch. In addition, the Duke Energy Registrants’, including Progress EnergyRegistrants have a negative outlook rating from S&P.

Duke Energy’s credit ratings are dependent on, among other factors, the ability to generate sufficient cash to fund capital and investment expenditures and pay dividends on its subsidiaries, potential poolcommon stock, while maintaining the strength of investors and funding sources would likely decrease. A downgrade below investment grade could also require theits current balance sheet. If, as a result of market conditions or other factors, Duke Energy Registrants, including Progress Energyis unable to maintain its current balance sheet strength, or if its earnings and its subsidiaries, to post additional collateral in the form of letters ofcash flow outlook materially deteriorates, Duke Energy’s credit or cash under various commodity contracts and credit agreements and trigger termination clauses in some interest rate derivative agreements, which would require cash

92


PART I

payments. All of these events would likely reduce the Duke Energy Registrants’, including Progress Energy and its subsidiaries, liquidity and profitability andratings could have a material adverse effect on the Duke Energy Registrants’, including Progress Energy and its subsidiaries, financial position, results of operations or cash flows.be negatively impacted.

Undistributed Foreign Earnings.Earnings

Undistributed earnings associated with Duke Energy’s foreign operations are considered indefinitely reinvested, thus no U.S. tax is recorded on such earnings. This assertion is based on management’s determination that the cash held in Duke Energy’s foreign jurisdictions is not needed to fund its U.S. operations and that Duke Energy either has invested or has intentions to reinvest such earnings. Duke Energy periodically evaluates the impact of repatriation of cash generated and held in foreign countries. While Duke Energy’s current intent is to indefinitely reinvest foreign earnings, circumstances could arise that may alter that view, including a future change in tax law governing U.S. taxation of foreign earnings or changes in Duke Energy’s U.S. cash flow requirements. If Duke Energy were to decide to repatriate foreign generated and held cash previously designated as undistributed earnings, recognition of material U.S. federal income tax liabilities would be required to be recognized in the period such determination is made. The cumulative undistributed earnings as of September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, on which Duke Energy has not provided deferred U.S. income taxes and foreign withholding taxes is $2.1$2.2 billion. The amount of unrecognized deferred tax liability related to these undistributed earnings is estimated to be between $175$275 million and $250$350 million.

OTHER ISSUES

Global Climate Change.Change

For information on global climate change and the potential impacts on Duke Energy, see “Other Issues” in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Duke Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.2012.

Nuclear Matters.Matters

Following the events at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station in Japan, Duke Energy conducted thorough inspections at each of its fourthree nuclear sites during 2011. Progress Energy also conducted inspections in 2011 at each of its threefour sites. The initial inspections havedid not identifiedidentify any significant vulnerabilities, however, Duke Energy ishas continued reviewing designs to evaluate safety margins to external events. Emergency-response capabilities, written procedures and engineering specifications were reviewed to verify each site’s ability to respond in the unlikely event of station blackout. In 2012, Duke Energy is working within the nuclear industry to improve the safety standards and margin using the three layers of safety approach used in the U.S.: protection, mitigation and emergency response. Emergency equipment is currently being added at each station to perform key safety functions in the event that backup power sources are lost permanently. These improvements are in addition to the numerous layers of safety measures and systems previously in place.

In March 2011, the NRCNuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) formed a task force to conduct a comprehensive review of processes and regulations to determine whether the agency should make additional improvements to the nuclear regulatory system. On July 13, 2011, the task force proposed a set of improvements designed to ensure protection, enhance accident mitigation, strengthen emergency preparedness and improve efficiency of NRC programs. The recommendations were further prioritized into three tiers based on the safety enhancement level. On March 12, 2012, the NRC issued three regulatory orders requiring safety enhancements related to mitigation strategies to respond to extreme natural events resulting in the loss of power at a plant, ensuring reliable hardened containment vents and enhancing spent fuel pool instrumentation.

116


PART I

In May 2012, the NRC endorsed guidance on re-evaluating emergency communications systems and staffing levels and performing seismic and flooding walkdowns. On July 13, 2012, the NRC outlined plans for implementing Tier 2 and Tier 3 recommendations. On August 30, 2012, the NRC issued implementation guidance to enable power plants to achieve compliance with the orders issued in March 2012. Plants are thenwere required to submit implementation plans to the NRC by February 28, 2013, and complete implementation of the safety enhancements within two refueling outages or by December 31, 2016, whichever comes first. Each plant is also required to reassess their seismic and flooding hazards using present-day methods and information, conduct inspections to ensure protection against hazards in the current design basis, and re-evaluate emergency communications systems and staffing levels. In May 2012, the NRC issued guidance on re-evaluating emergency communications systems and staffing levels and performing seismic and flooding walkdowns. The NRC is expected to issue guidance on performing seismic and flooding re-evaluations in November 2012. On July 13, 2012 the NRC outlined plans for implementing Tier 2 and Tier 3 recommendations.

Duke Energy is committed to compliance with all safety enhancements ordered by the NRC in connection with the March 12, 2012, regulatory orders noted above, the cost of which could be material. Until such time as the NRC mandated reassessment of flooding and seismic hazards is complete the exact scope and cost of compliance modifications to our four sites will not be known.

Duke Energy anticipates investing approximately $500 million in capital and approximately $100 million in operations and maintenance expenses to comply with Fukushima regulatory requirements from 2013-2015. These expenditures will focus on key areas such as coping with natural phenomena, the design of containment vents for boiling water reactor (BWR) units, instrumentation to accurately measure spent fuel pools, water levels and opportunities to augment emergency response. Amounts required to meet these requirements may vary, as the rules are more clearly defined.

On March 19, 2013, the NRC directed the NRC Staff to prepare a revision to its existing rules related to hardened containment vents requiring vents for all BWR Mark Is and IIs to be capable of remaining functional during severe accident conditions. The NRC directed the NRC Staff to issue the order no later than May 20, 2013. Duke Energy Progress’ Brunswick Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2 will be required to comply with these revised rules. Duke Energy cannot predict the financial impact of complying with these severe accident capability requirements and costs of these requirement are not included in the estimates discussed above.

With the NRC’s continuing review of the remaining recommendations, Duke Energy cannot predict to what extent the NRC will impose additional licensing and safety-related requirements, or the costs of complying with such requirements. The tight timeframetime frame required to complete the necessary safety enhancements by no later than 2016 could lead to even higher costs. Upon receipt of additional guidance from the NRC and a collaborative industry review, Duke Energy will be able to determine an implementation plan and associated costs. See Item 1A, “Risk Factors”, in the 2011 Form 10-KFactors,” for further discussion of applicable risk factors.

On February 20, 2013, Duke Energy Florida notified the NRC that Crystal River Unit 3 would be retired. The NRC granted Duke Energy Florida’s request for a six-month extension to file an integration plan related to the retirement.

In 2006, Duke Energy Progress selected a site at its existing Shearon Harris Nuclear Station (Harris) to evaluate for possible future nuclear expansion. On February 19, 2008, Duke Energy Progress filed its combined Construction and Operating License (COL) application with the NRC for two Westinghouse Electric AP1000 reactors at Harris, which the NRC docketed on April 17, 2008. On May 2, 2013, Duke Energy Progress filed a letter to the NRC requesting the NRC to suspend its review activities associated with the COL at the Harris site.

OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTSNew Accounting Standards

The followingSee Note 19 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “New Accounting Standards,” for a discussion of off balance sheet arrangements and contractual obligations is on a consolidated Duke Energy basis. the impact of new accounting standards.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

During the ninethree months ended September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, there were no material changes to Duke Energy’s off-balance sheet arrangements. For information on Duke Energy’s off-balance sheet arrangements, see “Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Duke Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.For information on Progress Energy’s off-balance sheet arrangements, see “Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Progress Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.2012.

CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONSContractual Obligations

Duke Energy enters into contracts that require payment of cash payment at certain specified periods, based on certain specified minimum quantities and prices. During the ninethree months ended September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, there were no material changes in Duke Energy’s contractual obligations. For an in-depth discussion of Duke Energy’s contractual obligations, see “Contractual Obligations” and “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Duke Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011. For an in-depth discussion of Progress Energy’s contractual obligations, see “Contractual Obligations” and “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Progress Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.

NEW ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

The following new Accounting Standards Update (ASU) has been issued, but has not yet been adopted by Duke Energy, as of September 30, 2012.

ASC 210—Balance Sheet. In December 2011, the FASB issued revised accounting guidance to amend the existing disclosure requirements for offsetting financial assets and liabilities to enhance current disclosures, as well as to improve comparability of balance sheets prepared under U.S. GAAP and IFRS. The revised disclosure guidance affects all companies that have financial instruments and derivative instruments that are either offset in the balance sheet (i.e., presented on a net basis) or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement and/or similar agreement. The revised

93

 


PART I

guidance requires that certain enhanced quantitative and qualitative disclosures be made with respect to a company’s netting arrangements and/or rights of setoff associated with its financial instruments and/or derivative instruments including associated collateral. For the Duke Energy Registrants, the revised disclosure guidance is effective on a retrospective basis for interim and annual periods beginning January 1, 2013. Other than additional disclosures, this revised guidance does not impact the consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial position of Duke Energy.  

SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

For information on subsequent events related to regulatory matters, commitments and contingencies and debt and credit facilities, see Notes 4, 5 and 6, respectively, to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

There have been no significant changes from the disclosures presented in Duke Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.2012. For an in-depth discussion of Duke Energy’s market risks, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” in Duke Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.  2012.

 

ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.PROCEDURES – DUKE ENERGY, DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, PROGRESS ENERGY, DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, DUKE ENERGY OHIO AND DUKE ENERGY INDIANA

DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURESDisclosure Controls and Procedures

Disclosure controls and procedures are controls and other procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Duke Energy Registrants in the reports they file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported, within the time periods specified by the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) rules and forms.

117


PART I

Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by the Duke Energy Registrants in the reports they file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Under the supervision and with the participation of management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, the Duke Energy Registrants have evaluated theirthe effectiveness of their disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(e)13a−15(e) and 15d-15(e)15d−15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of September 30, 2012,March 31, 2013, and, based upon this evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that these controls and procedures are effective in providing reasonable assurance of compliance.

CHANGES IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTINGChanges in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Under the supervision and with the participation of management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, the Duke Energy Registrants have evaluated changes in internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) that occurred during the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2012March 31, 2013 and have concluded no change has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, internal control over financial reporting.

On July 2, 2012, the previously announced merger between Duke Energy and Progress Energy closed. Duke Energy is currently in the process of integrating Progress Energy’s operations and will be conducting control reviews pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. See Note 2 of the “Notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements” in “Item 1 Financial Statements” for additional information relating to the merger.

94118

 


 

PART II – OTHER INFORMATIONI

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.PROCEEDINGS

Avian Mortalities

Duke Energy has been notified by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that it has initiated a preliminary investigation into the incidental deaths of golden eagles and other migratory birds resulting from turbine collisions at two of Duke Energy’s wind farms in Wyoming. Duke Energy undertakes adaptive management practices designed to avoid and minimize additional avian impacts, and is cooperating in the investigation and working with both the DOJ and the US Fish and Wildlife Service toward a constructive resolution.

For further information regarding legal proceedings, that became reportable events or in which there were material developments in the third quarter of 2012,including regulatory and environmental matters, see Note 4 to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters” and Note 5 to the Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, “Commitments and Contingencies” under the heading “Litigation.Contingencies — Litigation” and “Commitments and Contingencies — Environmental.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS.FACTORS

Please see below an update to risk factors affecting Duke Energy’s business in addition to those presented in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Part I, Item 1A, for the year ended December 31, 2011. Except for the update below, there have been no material changes in our assessment of our risk factors from those set forth in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.

The ability to fully utilize tax credits may be limited.

In accordance with the provisions of Internal Revenue Code Section 29/45K, tax credits have been generated based on the content and quantity of coal-based solid synthetic fuels produced and sold to unrelated parties. This tax credit program expired at the end of 2007. The timing of the utilization of the tax credits is dependent upon Duke Energy’s taxable income, which can be impacted by a number of factors. The timing of the utilization can also be impacted by certain substantial changes in ownership, including the merger between Duke Energy and Progress Energy on July 2, 2012. Additionally, in the normal course of business, tax returns are audited by the IRS. If tax credits were disallowed in whole or in part as a result of an IRS audit, there could be significant additional tax liabilities and associated interest for previously recognized tax credits, which could have a material adverse impact on earnings and cash flows. Although Duke Energy is unaware of any currently proposed legislation or new IRS regulations or interpretations impacting previously recorded synthetic fuels tax credits, the value of credits generated could be unfavorably impacted by such legislation or IRS regulations and interpretations.

The scope of necessary repairs of the delamination of Progress Energy Florida’s Crystal River Unit 3 could prove more extensive than is currently identified, such repairs could prove not to be feasible resulting in early retirement of the unit, the costs of repair and/or replacement power could exceed estimates and insurance coverage or may not be recoverable through the regulatory process; the occurrence of any of which could adversely affect Duke Energy’s and Progress Energy Florida’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In September 2009, Crystal River Unit 3 began an outage for normal refueling and maintenance as well as an uprate project to increase its generating capability and to replace two steam generators. During preparations to replace the steam generators, workers discovered a delamination (or separation) within the concrete at the periphery of the containment building, which resulted in an extension of the outage. After analysis, Progress Energy Florida determined that the concrete delamination was caused by redistribution of stresses in the containment wall that occurred when Progress Energy Florida engineers created an opening to accommodate the replacement of the unit’s steam generators.

In March 2011, the work to return the plant to service was suspended after monitoring equipment at the repair site identified a new delamination that occurred in a different section of the outer wall after the repair work was completed and during the late stages of retensioning the containment building. Subsequent to March 2011, monitoring equipment has detected additional changes and further damage in the partially tensioned containment building and additional cracking or delaminations could occur during the repair process. Crystal River Unit 3 has remained out of service while Progress Energy Florida conducted an engineering analysis and review of the new delamination and evaluated repair options.

In June 2011, Progress Energy Florida notified the NRC and the FPSC that it plans to repair the Crystal River Unit 3 containment structure and estimates the unit will return to service in 2014. The repair option selected entails systematically removing and replacing concrete in substantial portions of the containment structure walls. The preliminary estimate of $900 million to $1.3 billion, as filed with the FPSC on June 27, 2011, is currently under review and could change following completion of further detailed engineering studies, vendor negotiations and final risk assessments. These engineering studies and risk assessments include analyses by independent entities currently in progress. The risk assessment process includes analysis of events that, although currently deemed unlikely, could have a significant impact on the cost estimate or feasibility of repair. The cost range of the repair option, based on preliminary analysis, appears to be trending upward. Progress Energy Florida believes the actions taken and costs incurred in response to the Crystal River Unit 3 delamination have been prudent and, accordingly, believe that replacement power and repair costs not recoverable through insurance to be recoverable through Progress Energy Florida’s fuel cost-recovery clause or base rates.

Additionally, as of result of the potential repair challenges, the unit could be forced to be retired early. Early retirement could result in continued purchases of replacement power, additional capital and operating costs associated with construction of replacement capacity resources, and impairments of unrecoverable portions of the retired plant.

While the foregoing reflects Progress Energy Florida’s current intentions and estimates with respect to Crystal River Unit 3, the costs, timing and feasibility of additional repairs to Crystal River Unit 3, the cost of replacement power, and the degree of recoverability of these costs, are all subject to significant uncertainties. Additional developments with respect to the condition of the Crystal River Unit 3 structures, costs that are greater than anticipated, recoverability that is less than anticipated and/or the inability to return Crystal River Unit 3 to service all could adversely affect Duke Energy’s and Progress Energy Florida’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In addition to the other information set forth in this report, careful consideration should be given to the factors discussed in Part I, “Item 1A. Risk Factors” in Duke Energy’s,the Duke Energy Carolinas’, Duke Energy Ohio’s and Duke Energy Indiana’sRegistrants’ Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011,2012, which could materially affect the Duke Energy Registrants’ financial condition or future results.

ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS.PROCEEDS

ISSUERPURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES FOR THE THIRDFIRST QUARTER of 20122013

There were no issuer purchases of equity securities during the thirdfirst quarter of 2012.2013.

95119

 


 

PART III

ITEM 6. EXHIBITSExhibits filed herewithin are designed by an asterisk (*). All exhibits not so designated are incorporated by reference to a prior filing, as indicated. Items constituting management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements are designated by a double asterisk (**). The Company agrees to furnish upon request to the Commission a copy of any omitted schedules or exhibits upon request on all items designated by a triple asterisk (***).

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

Exhibits

Exhibits filed or furnished herewith are designated by an asterisk (*).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit

Number

 

Duke Energy

 

Duke Energy

Carolinas

 

Progress Energy

Duke Energy Progress

Duke Energy Florida

Duke Energy Ohio

 

Duke Energy

Indiana

*10.14.1 

AmendmentEighth Supplemental Indenture, dated as of January 14, 2013, to the Indenture, dated as of June 3, 2008, between the Company and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., as Trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2 to the Registration Statement on Form 8-A of the Company filed on January 14, 2013)

X

10.1**

10.1 Duke Energy Corporation Executive SavingsShort-Term Incentive Plan, as amended effective February 25, 2013 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Form 8-K of Duke Energy Corporation, File No. 1-32583 dated January 1, 2008May 7, 2013).

X

*12

Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

X

 

 

 

*31.131.1.1

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

*31.231.1.2

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*31.1.3

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*31.1.4

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*31.1.5

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*31.1.6

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*31.1.7

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*31.2.1

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

*31.3

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

X

 

 

 

 

*31.431.2.2

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

X

 

 

 

 

*31.5

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

X

 

*31.631.2.3

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

X

 

 

*31.7

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

 

 

X

*31.831.2.4

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

 

 

X

*32.131.2.5

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*31.2.6

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*31.2.7

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*32.1.1

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

*32.232.1.2

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*32.1.3

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*32.1.4

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*32.1.5

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*32.1.6

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*32.1.7

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*32.2.1

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

*32.332.2.2

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

X

 

 

 

 

*32.4

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

X

 

 

 

 

*32.532.2.3

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

X

 

 

*32.6

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

X

 

*32.732.2.4

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

 

 

X

*32.832.2.5

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

 

 

 

 

 

X

*32.2.6

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*32.2.7

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

X

*101.INS

XBRL Instance Document

X

X

X

X

 

X

 

X

 

X

*101.SCH

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document

X

 

X

 

X

 

X

X

X

X

*101.CAL

XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document

X

X

X

X

 

X

 

X

 

X

*101.LAB

XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document

X

 

X

 

X

 

X

X

X

X

*101.PRE

XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document

X

X

X

X

 

X

 

X

 

X

*101.DEF

XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase Document

X

 

X

 

X

 

X

X

X

X

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The total amount of securities of the registrant or its subsidiaries authorized under any instrument with respect to long-term debt

not filed as an exhibit does not exceed 10%10 percent of the total assets of the registrant and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. The

registrant agrees, upon request of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to furnish copies of any or all of such instruments to it.

96120

 


 

PART IIII. OTHER INFORMATION

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrants have duly caused this report to be signed on their behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

 

 

 

 

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION

DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC

PROGRESS ENERGY, INC.

DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC.

DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, INC.

DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC.

DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, INC.

 

 

Date: November 8, 2012May 9, 2013

/S/ LYNN J. GOOD

 

 

Lynn J. Good

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

 

 

Date: November 8, 2012May 9, 2013

/S/ STEVEN K. YOUNG

 

 

Steven K. Young

Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer, and Controller

97122