Use these links to rapidly review the document
Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No.           )

Filed by the Registrantý

Filed by a Party other than the Registranto

Check the appropriate box:

o

 

Preliminary Proxy Statement

o

 

Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))

ý

 

Definitive Proxy Statement

o

 

Definitive Additional Materials

o

 

Soliciting Material under §240.14a-12

 

Pinnacle West Capital Corporation

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

 

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

ý

 

No fee required.

o

 

Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.
  (1) Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:
         
  (2) Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:
         
  (3) Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):
         
  (4) Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:
         
  (5) Total fee paid:
         

o

 

Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

o

 

Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

 

 

(1)

 

Amount Previously Paid:
        
 
  (2) Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:
         
  (3) Filing Party:
         
  (4) Date Filed:
         

GRAPHICTable of Contents


GRAPHICLOGO Donald E. Brandt

Chairman of the Board, President
&and Chief Executive Officer

Dear Fellow Shareholder:To Our Shareholders:

On behalf of our Board of Directors, management and employees, I invite you to attendparticipate in our 20152018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

The meeting will be held at10:30 a.m. (MST),Wednesday, May 20, 2015,16, 2018. Details regarding how to attend the meeting and the business to be conducted are in the accompanying Notice of Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement.

Pinnacle West achieved another year of outstanding performance as we continued to focus on delivering on our commitments to the customers who depend on us, the communities we serve, our dedicated team members, and the shareholders who trust us with their investment. Operational performance at our primary subsidiary, Arizona Public Service Company ("APS"), an electric utility that serves approximately 1.2 million customers throughout Arizona and operates the Heard Museum, located at 2301 N. Central Avenuelargest nuclear power plant in Phoenix, Arizona.the United States, was strong in 2017. Included in the Proxy Statement Summary you will see a number of our shareholder value creation and operational accomplishments. It is an impressive list, and one that I and the senior management team are proud to share with you. Here are just a few of those achievements:

Total shareholder value (change in market capitalization plus dividends) increased $1.1 billion in 2017, $2.8 billion over the last three years, and $5.2 billion over the last five years;

Our total shareholder return (stock price appreciation/depreciation plus dividends) ("TSR") for 2017 was 12.7% and 41.2%, 38.4%, and 100.7%, for the 2, 3, and 5-year periods, respectively;

Our share price reached a new all-time closing high, and hit new 52-week intraday-highs on 29 trading days, including a new all-time intraday high;

Pinnacle West increased its dividend for the 6th straight year, by 6% in 2017;

We continued to focus on hiring diverse candidates as well as hiring from our veteran community, and at the end of 2017 over 44% of our workforce was diverse and more than 20% of our team members were veterans;

We achieved top-quartile distribution reliability and had our best summer reliability in five years; and

We achieved a positive and collaborative outcome of our first rate review in five years, which was an important milestone for us as it allows us to continue making efficient, cost-effective investments while providing safe, reliable service for our customers.

Additional highlighted accomplishments of our Company's 2017 performance are set forth in the Proxy Statement beginning on page 2.

Table of Contents

In 2014,addition to delivering exceptional financial performance, we continue to focus on our sustainability efforts, fostering diversity and supporting our communities. Our usage of reclaimed water is a prime example of a sustainable balance and exemplifies our focus on managing coststhe water-energy nexus. Thanks in large part to the Palo Verde Generating Station, reclaimed water accounted for 72% of the water used in our generating facilities in 2017.

Our Executive Diversity Council worked diligently in 2017 to continue improving our workforce diversity. Over 48% of candidates hired in 2017 were ethnically or gender diverse. As a Company we are committed to diversity, respect and creatinginclusion as core to our culture and essential to our success.

In 2017 we remained steadfast in our commitment to our communities. We contributed more than $9.8 million to our Arizona communities, with more than $1.4 million invested in science, technology, engineering and mathematics ("STEM") education. Our men and women pledged more than $2.4 million through our Company-sponsored charitable giving program, through which the Company provides a 50% match. This year our team members donated nearly 110,000 volunteer hours to a diverse and wide-range of organizations, including Habitat For Humanity, Treasures for Teachers, Phoenix Children's Hospital and St. Mary's Food Bank Alliance. These are only a few examples of how our men and women continuously demonstrate a commitment to excellence by living the values core to our culture. In addition, APS continued to partner with the Arizona Diamondbacks Foundation to build youth baseball fields in deserving neighborhoods. In 2017 we built our 35th field. We are proud to support efforts that unite our communities and help them thrive.

As you know, in 2016 the Board of Directors adopted a Director Retirement Policy to provide for an orderly transition of our Board members. This year the first retirement under that policy will take place. Roy Herberger will retire from the Board effective at the Annual Meeting. Over my years at Pinnacle West, I always valued Roy's counsel, wisdom and guidance. On behalf of all of us, I extend our appreciation and thanks to Roy for his many years of contributions and dedicated service to our Company and to our shareholders.

I am both privileged and proud to lead Pinnacle West. Our men and women are working to shape a better, sustainable energy future for Arizona enabled us to meet or exceed our financial goals, thus marking another successful yearcustomers and our communities, and in that process, they are also building a more valuable company for Pinnacle West and your investment in our Company. Among these accomplishments:

At this year's Annual Meeting, we will share additional updates with you on the Company's recent performance and operations. As explained in the attached Proxy Statement, we are asking you to: (1) elect ten Board of Director nominees; (2) consider and vote for an advisory resolution to approve executive compensation; (3) ratify the appointment of our independent public accounting firm for 2015; and (4) consider a shareholder proposal, if properly presented at the meeting.

Last, but not least, your vote is important to us. Whether or not you plan to attend the Annual Meeting in person, we encourage you to vote promptly. You may vote over the Internet; by telephone; by completing, signing, dating and returning a proxy card or voting instruction form; or by voting in person at the meeting.shareholders.

Thank you for the confidence you place in Pinnacle West through your investment. We look forward to seeing you at this year's Annual Meeting.

Sincerely,

GRAPHICGRAPHIC


Table of Contents

GRAPHIC

LOGO
Kathryn L. Munro
Lead Director

Dear Fellow Shareholders,

On behalf of the Board, I would like to thank you for your investment in Pinnacle West. As we approach our 2018 Annual Meeting, I would like to take this opportunity to provide you with an update on how your Board is approaching and addressing key areas of shareholder interest, particularly with respect to our governance and compensation practices.

Driving Shareholder Value Creation and Promoting a Sustainable Energy Future

As directors of Arizona's largest and longest-serving electric company, we view operational excellence as paramount to long-term value creation for our shareholders, and our long-term strategy reflects this focus. Our management team continues to drive outstanding operational execution while growing our business and leveraging technology to promote a long-term sustainable energy future. These efforts have resulted in strong returns for our shareholders: annualized total shareholder return of 18.8% since May 1, 2009, which was when Don Brandt took over as CEO. This exceeds the annualized returns of the S&P 1500 Electric Utilities Index of 11.8% and the S&P 500 Index of 16.2%. We also continue to be recognized for our safety and sustainability leadership:

2017 was another successful year with regard to safety, with APS remaining in the top decile for safety performance in the U.S. electric utilities industry; and

We earned a "Leadership" rating from CDP, a not-for-profit entity that reports on environmental performance, for climate change and water management — one of only two U.S. utilities to earn the highest rating in both categories.

Board-Driven Shareholder Engagement

Pinnacle West has an established shareholder engagement program, which was further augmented during 2017 in response to what the Board considered a disappointing level of shareholder support for our annual advisory vote on compensation. Shareholder input is very valuable to the Board's decision-making, and we wanted to ensure we had the opportunity to engage directly with our shareholders on our compensation, governance and broader Board practices. As Lead Director and member of the Human Resources Committee, I participated on behalf of the independent directors in a number of the shareholder discussions during the fall of 2017. These conversations were valuable to our Board, spurred important discussions, and have resulted in changes and disclosure enhancements that you will see detailed in this Proxy Statement.

Shareholder-Informed Compensation Program Changes

As a Board, we are committed to an executive compensation program that establishes strong pay for performance alignment and supports our ability to attract and retain a talented and proven leadership team. We seek to design compensation programs that support our long-term goals, reward achievement of long-term performance and align with the interests and feedback of our shareholders. To this end, our compensation programs have evolved with our business,


Table of Contents

including several changes made in 2016. Following shareholder discussions in 2017, we have made further changes to our program that we believe will create even greater alignment between our executives and the performance of our Company, and changes to our program and disclosures that reflect the feedback we have received from our shareholders. These changes are detailed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis of this Proxy Statement and include:

Increase in the proportion of performance shares in our CEO's and Executive Vice Presidents' 2018 long-term incentive awards from 60% to 70% (reducing the percent of restricted stock units from 40% to 30% as well);

Revised 2018 metrics in certain key business units to better align with our priorities and emphasize top-quartile or above performance;

Adoption of a formal clawback policy;

Enhanced CD&A disclosures;

Additional transparency into our metric setting practices;

Redesigned annual incentive disclosure; and

Additional detail on how we select our peer group.

These structural and disclosure enhancements are directly in response to feedback we received from our shareholders.

Thoughtful and Systematic Management Succession Planning Process

As you would expect for a company with a highly skilled and long-tenured management team, the Board is very engaged in succession planning to ensure we are building a sustainable leadership pipeline. CEO and senior leadership succession planning continues to be a focus for the Board, and we have been executing on a very deliberate succession and development plan. Our current management team, under the leadership of Don Brandt, has delivered very strong performance and the Board and its Committees are actively involved in our succession plans for our top talent to ensure we are providing development opportunities that will allow for smooth leadership transitions in the future.

Robust Board Refreshment and Succession Planning Practices

The Board has established strong practices to support regular Board evaluation and refreshment. In 2016, the Board adopted a Director Retirement Policy to facilitate an orderly transition of Board members and implemented a five-year plan to refresh the Board and its leadership. This five-year plan encompasses the following:

Development of a matrix of our Board members' current skills and experiences;

Evaluation of the skills and experience leaving our Board over the next five years;

Assessment of skills and experience needed to guide the company's future long-term plans;

Incoming committee chairs are identified one year in advance of assuming chair leadership to ensure proper transition — with Roy Herberger's retirement, Rick Fox will take over as the Chair of the Human Resources Committee effective at the Annual Meeting.

This process helps guide the Board in its recruitment efforts.


Table of Contents

On behalf of the Board, I want to thank our shareholders for their time and feedback. I am pleased to provide this additional window into the Board's activities in 2017 and express our commitment to running our business for the long-term value creation for our shareholders. We appreciate your support at our 2018 Annual Meeting.

Sincerely,

GRAPHIC


Table of Contents

LOGO

Notice of the 20152018
Annual Meeting of Shareholders

April 2, 2015March 29, 2018

The 20152018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the "Annual Meeting") of Pinnacle West Capital Corporation ("Pinnacle West", "PNW", or the "Company") will be held at the Heard Museum, 2301 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004, at 10:30 a.m., Mountain Standard Time, on Wednesday, May 20, 2015.16, 2018. The Annual Meeting may be accessed online at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/PNW. The purposes of the Annual Meeting are:

(1)
toTo elect ten directors to serve until the 20162019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (Proposal 1);
(2)
toTo hold an advisory vote to approve executive compensation (Proposal 2); and
(3)
toTo ratify the appointment of our independent accountants for the year ending December 31, 20152018 (Proposal 3);
(4)
to consider a shareholder proposal, if properly presented at the Annual Meeting (Proposal 4); and
(5)
to transact such other business as may properly come before the Annual Meeting and at any adjournments or postponements thereof..

All shareholders of record at the close of business on March 12, 20159, 2018 are entitled to notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting. Your vote is important. Whether or not you plan to attendparticipate in the Annual Meeting in person,or not, please promptly vote by telephone, over the Internet, by proxy card, or by voting instruction form.

By order of the Board of Directors,

GRAPHIC

GRAPHIC
DIANE WOOD
Corporate Secretary

PINNACLE WEST CAPITAL CORPORATION
Post Office Box 53999
Phoenix, Arizona 85072-3999


DIANE WOOD
Corporate Secretary

Executive Offices Address:
PINNACLE WEST CAPITAL CORPORATION
Post Office Box 53999
Phoenix, Arizona 85072-3999


Table of Contents

Table of Contents

PAGE


 

 

 
LETTER FROM DONALD E. BRANDT

LETTER FROM DON BRANDTKATHRYN L. MUNRO

 

 

NOTICE OF THE 20152018 ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

 

 

PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY

 

1

Annual Meeting of Shareholders


1
Voting Matters and Board of Directors ("Board") Recommendations1
Our Director Nominees2
2014 Executive Compensation3
Executive Compensation Program Highlights4
Performance Highlights5
Auditors5
Important Dates for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders5
Corporate Governance Highlights6

PROXY STATEMENT — GENERAL INFORMATION

 

78
��

Place,Time, Date and TimePlace

 

78
Notice of Internet Availability 78
Record Date; Shareholders Entitled to Vote 79
Voting 79
Quorum.Quorum 810
Vote Required 810
Attendance at the Annual MeetingBoard Recommendations 910
Delivery of Annual Reports and Proxy Statements to a Shared Address;Address and Obtaining a Copy of the Annual Report 911
Shareholder Proposals or Director Nominations for the 20162019 Annual Meeting 1011
Proxy Solicitation 1012

INFORMATION ABOUT OUR BOARD AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

 

1113

Director IndependenceBoard Meetings and Attendance

 

1113
Board Meetings and Attendance12
Board Committees 13
The Board's Leadership Structure 1519
Succession Planning and Board Evaluations20
The Board's Role in Risk Oversight 1521
Director Qualifications;Resignation Policies22
Director Retirement Policy22
Shareholder Engagement and Communications with the Board23
Codes of Ethics and APS Core Strategic Framework24
Director Qualifications and Selection of Nominees for the Board 16
Director Resignation Due to a Substantial Change in their Primary Business Position17
Communication with the Board17
Codes of Ethics and Strategic Framework1726

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF DIRECTORS


19

OWNERSHIP OF PINNACLE WEST STOCK


25
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC i

Table of Contents

PAGE





SECTION 16(a) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING COMPLIANCE


26

RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS


27

REPORT OF THE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE

 

28

Director Independence


38

STOCK MATTERS


40

Ownership of Pinnacle West Stock


40
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance41

RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS


42

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC i


Table of Contents

PAGE




HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE REPORT


43

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

 

2844

Compensation Discussion and Analysis ("CD&A")

 

2844
Named Executive Officers44
Executive Summary45
Our Philosophy and Objectives53
Executive Compensation Components53
Setting Executive Compensation68
Other Considerations72
Summary Compensation Table 5275
Grants of Plan-Based Awards 5577
Narrative Disclosure to Summary Compensation Table and Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table 5678
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End 5980
Option Exercises and Stock Vested 6282
Pension Benefits 6484
Discussion of Pension Benefits 6585
Nonqualified Deferred Compensation 6888
Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation 6989
Potential Payments upon Termination or Change of Control 7191
Pay Ratio98

HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE INTERLOCKS AND INSIDER PARTICIPATION

 

7699

DIRECTORS' COMPENSATION

 

77100

Discussion of Directors' Compensation

 

78101
Director Stock Ownership Policy 79102

PROPOSAL 2 — ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

 

80103

PROPOSAL 3 — RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP AS THE INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS FOR THE COMPANY

 

81104

ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING MATTERS

 

82105

The Independent Accountants

 

82105
Benefits of a Long-Tenured Independent Accountant105
Accountant's Independence Controls106
Pre-Approval Policies106
Audit Fees 82
Pre-Approval Policies82107

REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE

 

83108

PROPOSAL 4 — SHAREHOLDER PROPOSAL REGARDING A REPORT ON LOBBYINGHELPFUL RESOURCES

 

84109

iiGRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement

ii     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

Proxy Statement Summary

This summary highlights certain information contained elsewhere in this Proxy Statement. As it is only a summary, please read the complete Proxy Statement and 20142017 Annual Report before you vote. The Proxy Statement and form of proxy are first being made available to shareholders on or about March 29, 2018.

Annual Meeting of ShareholdersTime, Date and Voting Matters
 

GRAPHIC

Who We Are

Strategic Framework

TheCore Date:is our strategic framework. It sets forth the basis from which we operate by defining our vision, mission, critical areas of focus, and values. The framework affirms our corporate values of safety, integrity and trust, respect and inclusion, and accountability. This is the foundation from which our long term strategy is built.

For example, employees are an element of our Core and one of our greatest assets. The Core helps us focus on keeping them safe, fostering a healthy and balanced environment, supporting their development through training and mentoring and encouraging engagement. This culture not only benefits each individual employee, it also positions our Company for long-term sustainable success.

 May 20, 2015GRAPHIC

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 1


Table of Contents

Time:

10:30 a.m. Mountain Standard Time

Place:

Heard Museum
2301 North Central Avenue
Phoenix, Arizona 85004

Record Date:

March 12, 2015

Admission to the Meeting:

Proof of stock ownership will be required to attend the Annual Meeting. See page 9 of this Proxy Statement under the heading "Attendance at the Annual Meeting" for admission requirements.

Delivery of Materials:Summary

Proxy Statement and form of proxy are first being made available to shareholders on or about April 2, 2015.

Strategic Priorities

TheCore continues to serve as the foundation for all strategic and business initiatives. In turn, our performance metrics reinforce our highest priorities, including operational excellence, financial strength and leveraging economic growth, in a tangible, measurable way, and allow us to monitor and enhance our progress.

Building on that foundation, the APS Strategic Business Plan is anchored by four themes that align with industry trends shaping our future and the way we do business:

Consumer Engagement — Deliver value-added programs and services that derive from consumer insights and strengthen our brand for the future

Flexible Resources — Develop new initiatives and businesses that leverage our core capabilities

Employees — Adopt sustainable programs to invest in our people today and in the future

Innovation — Integrate new technologies to enhance performance, reliability and the overall experience of our customers and employees

Voting Matters2017 Highlights and Board of Directors ("Board") RecommendationsAchievements
 

Shareholder Value

Our management team has delivered superior performance:

GRAPHIC

Financial and Operating Highlights

üPNWincreased its dividend for the 6th consecutive year, by 6%;
üMaintainedstrong credit ratings from all three rating agencies;
üAPS spent$363 million with diverse suppliers;
üAPS continued successful operation of the Palo Verde Generating Station, a nuclear energy facility that is the largestclean-air generator in the United States; and
üAchievedtop quartile distribution reliability metrics for 2017, and had the best summer reliability in 5 years.

2GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Proxy Statement Summary

Achievements

üReceived theDistributech Renewable Integration Project of the Year award for the Solar Partner Program;
üObtained "Leadership" rating from CDP for climate change and water management – one of only two U.S. utilities that earned the highest rating in both categories;
üRecognized as theCorporate Advocate of the Year by the National Center for American Indian Enterprise Development; and
üRecognized as aBest Corporation for Veteran's Business Enterprises by the National Veteran-Owned Business Association.

Community Engagement

üContributed more than$9.8 million to our Arizona communities, with more than $1.4 million invested in STEM education;
üEmployees pledged more than$2.4 million through our Company-sponsored charitable giving program, through which the Company provides a 50% match;
üBuilt our 35th baseball field in one of our Arizona neighborhoods together with the Arizona Diamondbacks Foundation; and
üEmployees donated nearly110,000 volunteer hours to community organizations.

Sustainability

Our commitment to create a sustainable future for our Company and our customers will continue to light our way to success — not just today but for years to come. We continue to make progress on ourfive critical areas of sustainability:

Carbon
Management

50% of our diverse energy mix iscarbon-free

Plan toreduce carbon intensity by 23% over the next 15 years

MSCI Environmental Sustainability and GovernanceA rating (as of 10/27/17)

Energy
Innovation

More than 1,300 MW of installed solar capacity

Plan to add over500 MW of energy storage in the next 15 years

Safety &
Security

70% reduction in Occupational Safety and Health Administration ("OSHA") recordable injuries over the past 10 years

Remain top decile for safety performance in the U.S. electric utilities industry

Water Resources

14% reduction in groundwater use since 2014

20 billion gallons of water recycled each year to cool Palo Verde Generating Station

People

Averageemployee tenure of 13 years due to strong talent strategy

More than 20% of our employees areveterans

Palo Verde hosted a nuclearWomen in Leadership forum

To learn more about our sustainability efforts, please see our Corporate Responsibility Report located on our website (www.pinnaclewest.com).

2018 Proxy Statement     |   �� GRAPHIC 3


Table of Contents

Proxy Statement Summary

Governance Practices

Our Board remains committed to maintaining strong corporate governance practices. Our practices include:

üAdirector retirement policy at age 75;
üProxy access rights allowing up to 20 shareholders owning 3% of our outstanding stock for at least 3 years to nominate up to 25% of the Board;
üStrong ongoing shareholder engagement program that expanded in 2017, including participation of the Lead Director in several shareholder meetings;
üIndependent Lead Director role with clearly defined and robust responsibilities;
üTen of our eleven current directors are independent and the members of all of the Board Committees are independent;
üAnnual elections of all directors (see page 5 of this Proxy Statement Summary for a list of the nominees);
üRobust board and management succession planning;
üNo poison pill plan or similar anti-takeover provision in place;
üNo supermajority provisions in our Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws;
üEach of our directorsattended at least 90% of the Board meetings and any Board committee meeting on which he or she served; and
üOur directors and officers are prohibited from pledging or hedging our stock.

Shareholder Engagement

We have an established shareholder engagement program to maintain a dialogue with our shareholders throughout the year, which was further augmented during 2017 in response to what our Board considered a disappointing level of shareholder support for our annual advisory vote on compensation. Each year we strive to respond to shareholder questions in a timely manner, conduct extensive proactive outreach to investors, and evaluate the information we provide to investors in an effort to continuously improve our engagement. In 2017, we contacted the holders of approximately 50% of the shares outstanding and met with the holders of approximately 40% of the shares outstanding. Our Lead Director and member of the Human Resources Committee, Kathryn Munro, participated in a number of the shareholder discussions providing shareholders with direct access to the Board.

What our shareholders think is important to us and we want to ensure we have the opportunity to engage directly with our shareholders. We seek to maintain a transparent and productive dialogue with our shareholders by:

ü
Providing clear and timely information,

ü
Seeking and listening to feedback, and

ü
Being responsive.

A detailed discussion of this outreach and the Board's response can be found on pages 23-24 and 48-49 of this Proxy Statement.

4GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Proxy Statement Summary

Director Nominees, Their Skills and Experience

GRAPHIC

(1)
Directors' ages as of February 21, 2018.

(2)
Dr. Herberger is currently the Chairman of the Human Resources Committee and will be retiring effective at the Annual Meeting. Mr. Fox will take over as the Chair of the Human Resources Committee effective at the Annual Meeting.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 5


Table of Contents

Proxy Statement Summary

MATTERSBoard Diversity
 BOARD
RECOMMENDATIONS

PAGEDirectors' Key Skills and Experience Matrix
GRAPHIC

Succession Planning

ElectionDirector succession is overseen by the Corporate Governance Committee, which regularly assesses whether the composition of directorsthe Board reflects the knowledge, skills, expertise, and diversity appropriate to serve the needs of the Company. Since 2014 three new members have joined the Board. The Board adopted a Director Retirement Policy in 2016, which is described on page 22 of this Proxy Statement, to better facilitate board refreshment and transition. 
üGRAPHICFOR each nominee
19
Advisory vote to approve executive compensationüFOR80
Ratification of Deloitte & Touche LLP ("D&T") as our
    independent accountants for 2015

üFOR81
Shareholder proposal, if properly presented at the
    Annual Meeting
XAGAINST84

Given our need for specialized experience, we also maintain strong management succession planning practices and are focused on developing and retaining talent within our Company. Our Board's focus on attracting, developing and retaining highly skilled and experienced executives is a core consideration in structuring our executive compensation programs.

6GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 1

Table of Contents

PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY

Our Director Nominees

Our director nominees are:

 
  
 DIRECTOR
SINCE

  
 COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS
NAME
 AGE
 INDEPENDENT
 AC
 CGC
 FC
 HRC
 NOC

Donald E. Brandt

 60 2009 No — Company
President and CEO

 
    

Denis A. Cortese, M.D.

 70 2010 Yes ·     · ·

Richard P. Fox

 67 2014 Yes ·  · · 

Michael L. Gallagher

 70 1999 Yes   ·     GRAPHIC

Roy A. Herberger, Jr., Ph.D.

 72 1992 Yes  · · GRAPHIC 

Dale E. Klein, Ph.D.

 67 2010 Yes ·       ·

Humberto S. Lopez

 69 1995 Yes ·  GRAPHIC · 

Kathryn L. Munro*

 66 2000 Yes   GRAPHIC · ·  

Bruce J. Nordstrom

 65 2000 Yes GRAPHICGRAPHIC ·   ·

David P. Wagener

 60 2014 Yes ·   ·   ·


AC Audit Committee* Lead Director


CGC Corporate Governance Committee




C Chair=GRAPHIC

FC Finance Committee


F Financial Expert=GRAPHIC

HRC Human Resources Committee




NOC Nuclear and Operating Committee




2     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY Summary

2014 Executive Compensation

Total compensation, as reported in the Summary Compensation Table and calculated in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"), is set forth below for Messrs. Brandt, Hatfield, Edington, Falck, and Schiavoni (the "Named Executive Officers"). The total compensation number includes a year-over-year change in pension value as determined under the SEC rules. The change in pension value is subject to many variables that are not related to Company or individual performance, such as interest rates. As such, we do not believe this number is helpful in evaluating executive compensation. We also note that the SEC rules require us to include in the stock award column the grant date fair value of equity grants given to our Named Executive Officers in 2014, even though the performance shares will not vest, if at all, until the end of a three-year performance period and then only to the extent the specified performance conditions are met, and the restricted stock units ("RSUs") will vest in installments each year through 2018.

NAME AND
PRINCIPAL POSITION

 SALARY
($)

 BONUS
($)

 STOCK
AWARDS
($)

 NON-EQUITY
INCENTIVE
PLAN
COMPENSATION
($)

 CHANGE IN
PENSION
VALUE AND
NONQUALIFIED
DEFERRED
COMPENSATION
EARNINGS
($)

 ALL OTHER
COMPENSATION
($)

 TOTAL
($)

 

Donald E. Brandt,
Chairman of the Board, President and CEO of the Company and Arizona Public Service Company ("APS")

 1,240,000 0 4,199,976 1,852,560 2,009,011 26,729 9,328,276 
​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 

James R. Hatfield,
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company and APS

  570,000  0  750,320  502,603  465,143  24,050  2,312,116 

Randall K. Edington,
Executive Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer, APS

 960,511 0 500,031 1,050,775 2,130,198 1,072,586 5,714,101 
​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 

David P. Falck,
Executive Vice President and General Counsel of the Company and APS

  522,000  0  750,320  423,697  419,745  278,991  2,394,753 

Mark A. Schiavoni,
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, APS

 563,958 0 750,320 558,031 424,749 27,419 2,324,477 
​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 3

Table of Contents

PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY

Executive Compensation Program Highlights
 

Highlights of our executiveOur compensation program include:

A programis designed to be straightforwardtransparent with a clear emphasis on rewarding performance by putting pay at risk and retaining key executives. Our executive compensation philosophy incorporatescenters on the following core principlesobjectives of maintaining alignment with shareholder interests and objectives:retaining key management.

Our incentive program structure and metrics are

Alignment with Shareholder Interests.designed to drive sustained value creation We structure our annual cash and long-term equityfor shareholders, with incentive compensation to put pay at risk and reward performance. Payouts under these plans are tied predominantly to the Company's total return to shareholders, stock price,TSR, earnings, and the achievement of measurable and sustainable business and individual goals, so that executives' interests are tied togoals. See the success of the Company and are aligned with those of our shareholders. Several of our performance highlights are set forth below.CD&A on page 44 for further details.

Key Management Retention.  We structure our program to provide compensation at levels necessary to attract, engage and retain an experienced management team who have the skill sets to succeed in our complex operating and regulatory environment, including operating the nation's largest nuclear power station, and to provide consistently strong operating and financial results.

A program with a few key elements. Our key compensation elements are simple and understandable: base salary; annual performance-based cash incentive; three-year performance-based equity grant; a retention-based equity grant that releases over a four-year period; pension and supplemental pension retirement benefits; and limited perquisites.

A program with strong shareholder support. Of the shareholder votes cast at our 2014 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the "2014 Annual Meeting"), more than 93% were "FOR" the compensation of the executives as disclosed in our 2014 Proxy Statement, excluding abstentions.



4     






Pay ElementGRAPHIC Measurement
Period
|
2015 Proxy StatementPerformance Link
Base SalaryCash
​​
AnnualCash1 yearEarnings

CEO: 62.5%

NEOs(1): 50.0%

​  ​​
IncentivesBusiness Unit Performance

CEO: 37.5%

NEOs(1): 50.0%

​​
PerformanceRelative TSR

50%

​  ​​
Long-Term IncentivesShares
60%(2)
3 yearsRelative Operational Performance

50%

​  ​​
Restricted
Stock Units

40%(2)
Vest ratably
over
4 years
Stock Price
(1)
Named Executive Officers ("NEO") identified on page 44 of this Proxy Statement.

(2)
Long-term incentives award mix changed to 70% performance share awards and 30% restricted stock unit ("RSU") awards starting in 2018 for the CEO and Executive Vice Presidents.
2017 CEO
Total Compensation
88% at risk
2017 Average for Other NEOs'
Total Compensation
67% at risk

GRAPHIC


GRAPHIC

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 7


Table of Contents

PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARYProxy Statement — General Information

Performance HighlightsTime, Date and Place
 

In 2014, we delivered strong financial results and operational performance. Our results included:

total shareholder value increased $2 billion in 2014 alone, and $5 billion over the past five years;

the Company's stock price increased 29.1% for 2014, and set new all-time intraday and closing highs;

for the third straight year, the Company increased the common dividend, raising it by 4.85% after two previous increases of 4.0%;

the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station ("Palo Verde") had a capacity factor of 93.7%;

APS achieved another safe year, placing us within the top quartile in the electric utility industry; and

total shareholder return (stock price appreciation plus dividends) ("TSR") performance was solid. Our TSR performance is highlighted in the chart below.


TOTAL SHAREHOLDER RETURN

GRAPHIC

Auditors

We are asking our shareholders to ratify the appointment of D&T as our independent accountants for 2015. A summary of fees paid to D&T in 2013 and 2014 is set forth on page 82.

Important Dates for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders

Shareholder proposals submitted for inclusion in our 2016 Proxy Statement must be received by us no later than December 3, 2015. Notice of shareholder proposals to be raised from the floor of the 2016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders must be received by us no earlier than January 20, 2016 and no later than February 19, 2016.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 5

Table of Contents

PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY

Corporate Governance Highlights

Highlights of our corporate governance include:

annual election of all directors;

nine of our ten directors are independent;

an independent Lead Director with significant responsibilities;

all of our committees of the Board are comprised solely of independent directors;

last year our directors received an average 97% shareholder vote in favor of their election and no director received a vote of less than 87%;

each director attended at least 75% of the Board meetings and any Board committee meetings on which he or she served;

directors and officers are prohibited from pledging or hedging our stock; and

director and officer stock ownership guidelines.
6     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

Proxy Statement — General Information

Place, Date and Time

The Company's 20152018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders ("Annual Meeting") will be held at the Heard Museum, 2301 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004, at 10:30 a.m., Mountain Standard Time, on Wednesday, May 20, 2015.16, 2018. The Annual Meeting will not be held at a physical location, but will instead be held virtually, where shareholders will participate by accessing a website using the Internet. The Annual Meeting will be accessed atwww.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/PNW. To participate in the Annual Meeting, you will need the 16-digit control number included on the proxy card, the Internet Notice or the voting instruction form. Online check-in will begin at 10:15 a.m. Mountain Standard Time, and you should allow ample time for the online check-in proceedings. We will have technicians standing by ready to assist you with any technical difficulties you may have accessing the virtual meeting. If you encounter any difficulties accessing the virtual meeting during the check-in or meeting time, please call: 855-449-0991. An audio broadcast of the Annual Meeting will be available by telephone toll-free at 877-328-2502 (domestic) or 412-317-5419 (international). Upon dialing in, you will need to provide your 16-digit control number.

We continue to believe that the virtual-only format, which we used for the first time last year, is in the best interests of our shareholders, given the time and expense of an in-person meeting compared to the shareholder participation at those meetings. The number of non-employee shareholders actually attending our Annual Meetings of Shareholders has significantly dwindled. For the past five in-person meetings, only about 30 shareholders attended each of the meetings. The meetings, on average, lasted less than 45 minutes, including the formal business portion of the meeting, the remarks by the CEO, a video highlighting the Company's performance, and the question and answer period. A virtual meeting allows all of our shareholders, regardless of location, the ability to participate in the Annual Meeting.

Our virtual meeting will be governed by our Rules of Conduct, which we use for both in-person and virtual meetings. Shareholders at the virtual-only meeting will have the same rights as at an in-person meeting, including the rights to vote and ask questions through the virtual meeting platform.

Notice of Internet Availability
 

Unless you elected to receive printed copies of the proxy materials in prior years, you will receive a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials by mail, or if you so elected, by electronic mail (the "Internet Notice"). The Internet Notice will tell you how to access and review the proxy materials. If you received an Internet Notice by mail and would like to receive a printed copy of the proxy materials, you should follow the instructions included on the Internet Notice.

The Internet Notice is first being sent to shareholders on or about April 2, 2015.March 29, 2018. The Proxy Statement and the form of proxy relating to the Annual Meeting are first being made available to shareholders on or about April 2, 2015.March 29, 2018.

8GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Proxy Statement — General Information

Record Date; Shareholders Entitled to Vote
 

All shareholders at the close of business on March 12, 20159, 2018 (the "record date""Record Date") are entitled to vote at the meeting. Each holder of outstanding Company common stock is entitled to one vote per share held as of the record date on all matters on which shareholders are entitled to vote, except for the election of directors, in which case "cumulative" voting applies (see "Vote Required — Election of directors"). At the close of business on the record date,Record Date, there were 110,746,055111,928,566 shares of common stock outstanding.

Voting
 

GRAPHIC Vote prior to the Annual Meeting by Internet. The website address for Internet voting is on the proxy card, the Internet Notice.Notice and the voting instruction form. Internet voting is available 24 hours a day.

GRAPHIC

 

Vote prior to the Annual Meeting by telephone. The toll-free number for telephone voting is on yourthe proxy card.card, the Internet Notice and the voting instruction form. Telephone voting is available 24 hours a day.

GRAPHIC


Vote prior to the Annual Meeting by scanning the QR code. The QR code is on the proxy card, the Internet Notice and the voting instruction form, and is available 24 hours a day.

GRAPHIC

 

Vote prior to the Annual Meeting by mail. You may vote by mail by promptly marking, signing, dating, and mailing your proxy card or voting instruction form (a postage-paid envelope is provided for mailing in the United States).

GRAPHIC

 

Vote in personduring the Annual Meeting over the Internet. YouTo participate in the Annual Meeting, you will need the 16-digit control number included on the proxy card, the Internet Notice or the voting instruction form. Shares held in your name or shares for which you are the beneficial owner but not the shareholder of record may come to and vote atbe voted electronically during the formal business portion of the Annual Meeting. Shares held in the Pinnacle West 401(k) Plan cannot be voted during the Annual Meeting. If you hold your shares in street name,the Pinnacle West 401(k) Plan, you must obtain a proxy, executed inwill need to submit your favor, fromvote to the holder of record if you wishplan trustee by May 13, 2018 to vote these shares at the meeting. Please also review the requirements for attending the Annual Meeting under the heading "Attendance at the Annual Meeting" on page 9.your shares.
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 7

Table of Contents

PROXY STATEMENT — GENERAL INFORMATION

If you vote by telephone or Internet, DO NOT mail a proxy card.

You may change or revoke your vote at any time beforeby: re-voting by telephone; re-voting by Internet; or re-voting during the formal business portion of the Annual Meeting. For shares held in your name you may change your vote by re-submitting a signed proxy is exercised by:card. In addition, for shares held in your name, you may also revoke a previously submitted proxy card by filing with our Corporate Secretary either a written notice of revocation orrevocation. For shares for which you are the beneficial owner but not the shareholder of record, you may change your vote by re-submitting a signed proxy card bearing a later date; re-voting by telephone; or re-voting by Internet. Your proxy will be suspended with respectvoting instruction form to your broker. In addition, for shares for which you are the beneficial owner but not the shareholder of record, you should contact your broker if you attend the meeting in person and so request, although attendance at the meeting will not by itselfwould like to revoke a previously-granted proxy.your vote.

Your vote is confidential. Only the following persons have access to your vote: election inspectors; individuals who help with the processing and counting of votes; and persons who

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 9


Table of Contents

Proxy Statement — General Information

need access for legal reasons. All votes will be counted by an independent inspector of elections appointed for the Annual Meeting.

Quorum
 

The presence, in person or by proxy, of a majority of the outstanding shares of our common stock is necessary to constitute a quorum at the Annual Meeting. In counting the votes to determine whether a quorum exists, shares that are entitled to vote but are not voted at the direction of the beneficial owner (called abstentions) and votes withheld by brokers in the absence of instructions from beneficial owners (called broker non-votes) will be counted for purposes of determining whether there is a quorum. Shares owned by the Company are not considered outstanding or present at the meeting.

Vote Required
 

Election of directorsdirectors..    Individuals receiving the highest number of votes will be elected. The number of votes that a shareholder may, but is not required to, cast is calculated by multiplying the number of shares of common stock owned by the shareholder, as of the record date,Record Date, by the number of directors to be elected. Any shareholder may cumulate his or her votes by casting them for any one nominee or by distributing them among two or more nominees. Abstentions will not be counted toward a nominee's total and will have no effect on the election of directors. You may not cumulate your votes against a nominee. If you hold shares in your own name and would like to exercise your cumulative voting rights, you must do so by mail. If you hold shares beneficially through a broker, trustee or other nominee and wish to cumulate votes, you should contact your broker, trustee or nominee. If you would like to exercise your cumulativefollow the instructions on the voting rights, you must do so by mail. The Company's Bylaws provide that, in an uncontested election, a director nominee who receives a greater number of votes cast "withheld" for his or her election than "for" such election will promptly tender his or her resignation to the Corporate Governance Committee. The Corporate Governance Committee is required to evaluate the resignation, taking into account the best interests of the Company and its shareholders, and will recommend to the Board whether to accept or reject the resignation.instruction form.

Under the current rules of the New York Stock Exchange ("NYSE"), your broker is not able to vote on your behalf in any director election unless you give your broker specific voting instructions. We encourage you to provide instructions so that your shares will be counted in the election of directors.

Say-on-Pay vote..    The votes cast "for" must exceed the votes cast "against" to approve the advisory resolution on the compensation disclosed in this Proxy Statement of our Named Executive OfficersNEOs identified on page 44 — the Say-on-Paysay-on-pay vote. This resolution is not intended to address any specific item of compensation, but rather the overall compensation of the Named Executive OfficersNEOs and the

8     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

PROXY STATEMENT — GENERAL INFORMATION

compensation philosophy, policies and procedures described in this Proxy Statement. Because your vote is advisory, it will not be binding on the Board or the Company. However, theThe Board will review the voting results and take them into consideration when making future decisions regarding executive compensation. Abstentions and broker non-votes will have no effect on the outcome of this proposal. We will hold an advisory vote on Say-on-Paysay-on-pay on an annual basis until we next hold an advisory vote of shareholders on the frequency of such votes as required by law.

Ratification of the appointment of the independent accountants and approval of the shareholder proposalaccountants..    The votes cast "for" must exceed the votes cast "against" to ratify the appointment of the independent accountants for the year ending December 31, 2015 and for the approval of the shareholder proposal.2018. Abstentions and broker non-votes will have no effect on the outcome of these proposals.this proposal.

Board Recommendations.

Board Recommendations

The Board recommends a vote:

ü
FOR the election of the nominated slate of directors (Proposal 1);

ü
FOR the approval, on an advisory basis, of the resolution approving the compensation of our Named Executive Officers,NEOs, as disclosed in this Proxy Statement (Proposal 2); and

10GRAPHIC |

      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Proxy Statement — General Information
ü
FOR the ratification of the appointment of D&T as the Company's independent accountants for the year ending December 31, 20152018 (Proposal 3); and.

XAGAINST the approval of the shareholder proposal (Proposal 4).

The Board is not aware of any other matters that will be brought before the shareholders for a vote. If any other matters properly come before the meeting, the proxy holders will vote on those matters in accordance with the recommendations of the Board or, if no recommendations are given, in accordance with their own judgment.

Attendance at the Annual Meeting

In order to attend the Annual Meeting, you will need to present a valid picture identification, such as a driver's license or passport, and either:

the Internet Notice or the top portion of your proxy card if you are a shareholder of record (each Internet Notice or proxy card admits up to two shareholders); or

a copy of a brokerage statement showing ownership of our stock as of the close of business on the record date if you hold your shares in street name (each brokerage statement admits up to two shareholders).

Please do not carry items such as large handbags and packages to the meeting, as we reserve the right to inspect any items brought into the meeting. Weapons are prohibited in the meeting. We also reserve the right to prohibit bringing cell phones, pagers, cameras, recording devices, and other items into the meeting room.

Delivery of Annual Reports and Proxy Statements to a Shared Address;Address and Obtaining a Copy of the Annual Report
 

If you and one or more shareholders share the same address, it is possible that only one Internet Notice, Annual Report or Proxy Statement was delivered to your address. Registered

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 9

Table of Contents

PROXY STATEMENT — GENERAL INFORMATION

shareholders at the same address who wish to receive separate copies of the Internet Notice, the Annual Report or Proxy Statement may:

callCall the Company's Shareholder Services Department at 1-602-250-5511;

mailMail a request to Shareholder Services at P.O. Box 53999, Mail Station 8602, Phoenix, AZArizona, 85072-3999; or

e-mailE-mail a request to: shareholderdept@pinnaclewest.com.

The Company will promptly deliver to you the information requested. Registered shareholders who share the same address but wish to receive one Internet Notice, Annual Report or Proxy Statement may contact the Company through the same methods listed above. Shareholders who own Company stock through a broker and who wish to receive single or separate copies of the Internet Notice, Annual Report or Proxy Statement should contact their broker.

You may access our Annual Report and Proxy Statement via the Internet. Copies of the Annual Report and Proxy Statement are available on the Company's website (www.pinnaclewest.com) and will be provided to any shareholder promptly upon request. Shareholders may request copies from Shareholder Services at the telephone number or addresses set forth above, or as described on the Internet Notice.

Shareholder Proposals or Director Nominations for the 20162019 Annual Meeting
 

Shareholder Proposals.To be included in the proxy materials for the 20162019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the "2016"2019 Annual Meeting"), any shareholder proposal intended to be presented at that meeting must be received by our Corporate Secretary no later than December 3, 2015November 29, 2018 at the following address:

Corporate Secretary
Pinnacle West Capital Corporation
400 North Fifth Street, Mail Station 8602
Phoenix, Arizona 85004

A shareholder who intends to present a proposal at the 20162019 Annual Meeting, but does not wish it to be included in the 20162019 proxy materials, must submit the proposal no earlier than January 20, 201616, 2019 and no later than the close of business on February 19, 2016. Nominations15, 2019.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 11


Table of Contents

Proxy Statement — General Information

Shareholder Nominations.    Shareholder nominations for a director to the Board must be received by the Corporate Secretary at the address set forth above by November 19, 2015. 16, 2018 ("Shareholder Nomination").

Proxy Access.    In February 2017, our Board amended the Bylaws to provide, among other things, that under certain circumstances a shareholder or group of shareholders may include director candidates that they have nominated in our annual meeting proxy statement — "proxy access." Under these provisions, a shareholder or group of up to 20 shareholders seeking to include director nominees in our annual meeting proxy statement must own 3% or more of our outstanding common stock continuously for at least the previous three years. Generally the number of qualifying shareholder-nominated candidates the Company will include in its annual meeting proxy materials will be limited to the greater of 25% of the Board or two candidates. Based on the current Board size of 11 directors, the maximum number of proxy access candidates we would be required to include in our proxy materials is two.

Nominees submitted under the proxy access provisions that are later withdrawn or are included in the proxy materials as Board-nominated candidates will be counted in determining whether the 25% maximum has been reached. If the number of shareholder-nominated candidates exceeds 25%, each nominating shareholder or group of shareholders may select one nominee for inclusion in our proxy materials until the maximum number is met. The order of selection would be determined by the amount (largest to smallest) of shares of our common stock held by each nominating shareholder or group of shareholders. Requests to include shareholder-nominated candidates under proxy access must be received by our Corporate Secretary at the address set forth above not earlier than the close of business on October 30, 2018 nor later than the close of business on November 29, 2018. The number of qualifying shareholder-nominated candidates the Company will include in its proxy materials under proxy access will be reduced on a one-for-one basis in the event the Company receives a Shareholder Nomination, but at least one qualifying shareholder-nominated proxy access nominee will be included in the proxy materials.

In all cases, shareholders and nominees must also comply with the applicable rules of the SECSecurities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") and the applicable sections of our Bylaws.Bylaws relating to qualifications of nominees and nominating shareholders and disclosure requirements.

Proxy Solicitation
 

The Board is soliciting the enclosed proxy. The Company may solicit shareholders over the Internet, by telephone or by mail. The Company has retained D.F. King & Co., Inc. to assist in the distribution of proxy solicitation materials and the solicitation of proxies for $10,000,$11,000, plus customary expenses. The costs of the solicitation will be paid by the Company. Proxies may also be solicited in person, by telephone or electronically by Company personnel who will not receive additional compensation for such solicitation. As required, the Company will reimburse brokerage houses and others for their out-of-pocket expenses in forwarding documents to beneficial owners of our stock.

12GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement

10     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

Board Meetings and Attendance

In 2017 each of our directors attended 90% of the Board meetings and any meetings of Board committees on which he or she served.In 2017, our Board held seven meetings and each of our directors attended 90% of the Board meetings and any meetings of Board committees on which he or she served. Each director is expected to participate in the Annual Meeting. All Board members attended the 2017 Annual Meeting.

Board Committees

The Board has the following standing committees: Audit; Corporate Governance; Finance; Human Resources; and Nuclear and Operating. All of the charters of the Board's committees are publicly available on the Company's website (www.pinnaclewest.com). All of our committees conduct a formal review of their charters every other year and as often as any committee member deems necessary. In the years in which a formal review is not conducted, the Board has tasked management with reviewing the charters and recommending any changes management deems necessary or reflective of good corporate governance. The charters are also changed as needed to comply with any corresponding changes to any applicable rule or regulation.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 13


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

All of our committees are comprised of independent directors who meet the independence requirements of the New York Stock Exchange ("NYSE") rules, SEC rules, and the Company's Director Independence Standards, including any specific committee independence requirements. The duties and responsibilities of our committees are as follows:

AUDIT COMMITTEE
Number of Meetings in 2017: 6

RESPONSIBILITIES:




COMMITTEE MEMBERS:

The Audit Committee:

Oversees the integrity of the Company's financial statements and internal controls;

Appoints the independent accountants and is responsible for their qualifications, independence, performance (including resolution of disagreements between the independent accountants and management regarding financial reporting), and compensation;

Participates in the selection of the independent accountants' new lead engagement partner each time a mandatory rotation occurs;

Monitors the Company's compliance with legal and regulatory requirements;

Sets policies for hiring employees or former employees of the independent accountants;

Reviews the annual audited financial statements or quarterly financial statements, as applicable, and the "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" contained therein;

Bruce J. Nordstrom, Chair

Denis A. Cortese

Richard P. Fox

Dale E. Klein

Humberto S. Lopez

David P. Wagener

"The audit function is critical
to sound risk and financial
management, and the
members of the Audit
Committee are committed
to carrying out fully our
duties to the Company and
our shareholders."

-Bruce Nordstrom

Discusses with management and the independent accountants significant financial reporting issues and judgments made in connection with the preparation of the Company's financial statements;

Reviews the Company's draft earnings press releases, as well as financial information and earnings guidance provided to analysts and rating agencies;

Discusses guidelines and policies to govern the process by which risk assessment and risk management is undertaken across the Company and periodically reviews the principal risks related to the Company's financial statements, audit functions and other major financial risk exposures; and

Reviews management's monitoring of the Company's compliance with the Company's Code of Ethics and Business Practices.

The Board has determined that each member of the Audit Committee meets the NYSE experience requirements and that Mr. Nordstrom, the Chair of the Audit Committee, and Mr. Fox are "audit committee financial experts" under applicable SEC rules. None of the members of our Audit Committee, other than Mr. Fox, currently serve on more than three public company audit committees. Mr. Fox currently serves on the audit committees of four public companies, including Pinnacle West. Our Board has discussed with Mr. Fox the time and effort required to be devoted by Mr. Fox to his service on these committees and has affirmatively determined that such services do not impair Mr. Fox's ability to serve as an effective member of our Audit Committee.

14GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE
Number of Meetings in 2017: 5

RESPONSIBILITIES:




COMMITTEE MEMBERS:

The Corporate Governance Committee:

Reviews and assesses the Corporate Governance Guidelines;

Develops and recommends to the Board criteria for selecting new directors;

Identifies and evaluates individuals qualified to become members of the Board, consistent with the criteria for selecting new directors;

Recommends director nominees to the Board;

Recommends to the Board who should serve on each of the Board's committees;

Reviews the results of the Annual Meeting shareholder votes;

Reviews and makes recommendations to the Board regarding the selection of the CEO and CEO and senior management succession planning;

Reviews the Company's Code of Ethics and Business Practices for compliance with applicable law;

Kathryn L. Munro, Chair

Michael L. Gallagher

Roy A. Herberger, Jr.

Bruce J. Nordstrom

"The Corporate Governance
Committee is focused on
effective and accountable
governance practices in
order to maximize the
long-term value of the
Company for its
shareholders."

-Kathy Munro

Recommends a process for responding to communications to the Board by shareholders and other interested parties;

Reviews the independence of members of the Board and approves or ratifies certain types of related-party transactions;

Reviews and makes recommendations to the Board regarding shareholder proposals requested for inclusion in the Company's proxy materials;

Reviews and makes recommendations regarding proxy material disclosures related to the Company's corporate governance policies and practices;

Periodically reviews the principal risks relating to the Company's corporate governance policies and practices;

Oversees the Board and committee self-assessments on at least an annual basis; and

Reviews and assesses the Company's Political Participation Policy, and then reviews the Company's policies and practices with respect to governmental affairs strategy and political activities in accordance with the Company's Political Participation Policy.

The Corporate Governance Committee periodically reviews and recommends to the Board amendments to the Corporate Governance Guidelines and the Political Participation Policy. The Corporate Governance Guidelines and the Political Participation Policy are available on the Company's website (www.pinnaclewest.com).

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 15


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

FINANCE COMMITTEE
Number of Meetings in 2017: 4

RESPONSIBILITIES:




COMMITTEE MEMBERS:

The Finance Committee:

Reviews the historical and projected financial performance of the Company and its subsidiaries;

Reviews the Company's financial condition, including sources of liquidity, cash flows and levels of indebtedness;

Reviews and recommends approval of corporate short-term investment and borrowing policies;

Reviews the Company's financing plan and recommends to the Board approval of the issuance of long-term debt, common equity and preferred securities, and the establishment of credit facilities;

Reviews the Company's use of guarantees and other forms of credit support;

Reviews and monitors the Company's dividend policies and proposed dividend actions;

Establishes and selects the members of the Company's Investment Management Committee to oversee the investment programs of the Company's trusts and benefit plans;

Humberto S. Lopez, Chair

Richard P. Fox

Kathryn L. Munro

Paula J. Sims

David P. Wagener

"The Finance Committee
plays a key role in ensuring
the financial health of the
Company by providing
oversight of the Company's
financial performance,
financing strategy and
dividend policies and
actions."

-Bert Lopez

Reviews and discusses with management the Company's process for allocating and managing capital;

Reviews and recommends approval of the Company's annual capital budget;

Reviews the Company's annual operations and maintenance budget and monitors throughout the year how the Company's actual spend tracks to the budget;

Reviews the Company's insurance programs; and

Periodically reviews the principal risks relating to the Company's policies and practices concerning budgeting, financing and credit exposures.

16GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance
HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE
Number of Meetings in 2017: 7

RESPONSIBILITIES:




COMMITTEE MEMBERS:

The Human Resources Committee:

Reviews management's programs for the attraction, retention, succession, motivation and development of the Company's human resources needed to achieve corporate objectives;

Establishes the Company's executive compensation philosophy;

Recommends to the Board persons for election as officers;

Annually reviews the goals and performance of the officers of the Company and APS;

Approves corporate goals and objectives relevant to the compensation of the CEO, assesses the CEO's performance in light of these goals and objectives, and sets the CEO's compensation based on this assessment;

Makes recommendations to the Board with respect to non-CEO executive compensation and director compensation;

Acts as the "committee" under the Company's long-term incentive plans;

Reviews and discusses with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis on executive compensation set forth in our proxy statements;

Roy A. Herberger, Jr., Chair

Denis A. Cortese

Richard P. Fox

Humberto S. Lopez

Kathryn L. Munro

"The members of the Human
Resources Committee are
committed to the
development of vigorous and
effective practices and
programs designed to attract
and retain the talent required
to achieve the Company's
goals and objectives and
drive shareholder value."

-Roy Herberger

Reviews the number, type, and design of the Company's pension, health, welfare and benefit plans; and

Periodically reviews the principal risks relating to the Company's compensation and human resources policies and practices.

Under the Human Resources Committee's charter, the Human Resources Committee may delegate authority to subcommittees, but did not do so in 2017. Additional information on the processes and procedures of the Human Resources Committee is provided under the heading "Compensation Discussion and Analysis ("CD&A")".

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 17


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

NUCLEAR AND OPERATING COMMITTEE
Number of Meetings in 2017: 4

RESPONSIBILITIES:




COMMITTEE MEMBERS:

The Nuclear and Operating Committee:

Receives regular reports from management and monitors the overall performance of Palo Verde;

Reviews the results of major Palo Verde inspections and evaluations by external oversight groups, such as the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations ("INPO") and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC");

Monitors overall performance of the principal non-nuclear business functions of the Company and APS, including fossil energy generation, energy transmission and delivery, customer service, fuel supply and transportation, safety, legal compliance, and any significant incidents or events;

Reviews regular reports from management concerning the environmental, health and safety ("EH&S") policies and practices of the Company, and monitors compliance by the Company with such policies and applicable laws and regulations;

Reviews APS's planning for generation resources additions and significant expansions of its bulk transmission system;

Periodically reviews the principal risks related to the Company's nuclear, fossil generation, transmission and distribution, and EH&S operations;

Michael L. Gallagher, Chair

Denis A. Cortese

Dale E. Klein

Bruce J. Nordstrom

Paula J. Sims

David P. Wagener

"In managing the oversight of
the Company's overall
operations, the N&O
Committee takes enormous
accountability ensuring that
operations are performed in
an efficient, safe, and secure
manner. Cyber and physical
security are key focus areas
of the committee."

-Mike Gallagher

Receives reports on the Company's sustainability initiatives and strategy;
and

Provides oversight of security policies, programs and controls for protection of cyber and physical assets.

In addition, the Nuclear and Operating Committee receives regular reports from the Off-Site Safety Review Committee (the "OSRC"). The OSRC provides independent assessments of the safe and reliable operations of Palo Verde. The OSRC is comprised of non-employee individuals with senior management experience in the nuclear industry and the Palo Verde Director of Nuclear Assurance.

18GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

The Board's Leadership Structure

Lead Director.    Kathryn L. Munro serves as the Company's Lead Director and chairs the Corporate Governance Committee. The Lead Director performs the following duties and responsibilities as set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines:

Serves as a liaison between the Chairman of the Board (the "Chairman") and the independent directors;

Advises the Chairman as to an appropriate schedule of Board meetings, reviews and provides the Chairman with input regarding agendas for the Board meetings and, as appropriate or as requested, reviews and provides the Chairman with input regarding information sent to the Board;

Presides at all meetings at which the Chairman is not present, including executive sessions of the independent directors (which are regularly scheduled as part of each Board meeting) and calls meetings of the independent directors when necessary and appropriate;

Oversees the Board and Board committee self-assessment process;

Is available for appropriate consultation and direct communication with the Company's shareholders and other interested parties; and

Performs such other duties as the Board may from time to time delegate.

These duties and responsibilities do not, however, fully capture Ms. Munro's active role in serving as our Lead Director. For example, Ms. Munro has regular discussions with the CEO, other members of the senior management team and members of the Board between Board meetings on a variety of topics, and she serves as a liaison between the CEO and the independent directors. Ms. Munro focuses the Board on key issues facing our Company and on topics of interest to the Board. She takes the lead on director recruitment and has a formal annual call with each non-employee director to discuss the Board, its functions, its membership, the individual's plan with respect to his or her continuing Board service, and any other topic the individual desires to discuss with our Lead Director. Her leadership fosters a Board culture of open discussion and deliberation to support sound decision-making. She also encourages communication between management and the Board to facilitate productive working relationships.

Chairman and CEO Positions.    The Chairman is Donald E. Brandt, the Company's President and CEO. The independent directors believe that Mr. Brandt, as an experienced leader with extensive knowledge of the Company and our industry, serves as a highly effective conduit between the Board and management and that Mr. Brandt provides the vision and leadership to execute on the Company's strategy and create shareholder value. The Board believes that separating the roles of the CEO and Chairman and appointing an independent Board Chairman at this time would create an additional level of unneeded hierarchy that would only duplicate the activities already being vigorously carried out by our Lead Director.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 19


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

Succession Planning and Board Evaluations

Management Succession.    Our Board places a high priority on senior management development and succession planning. While the Corporate Governance Committee has principal responsibility for overseeing CEO and other senior management succession planning, the full Board is actively involved in reviewing our senior management succession plans that will allow for smooth and thoughtful leadership transitions in the future.

Executive succession planning and senior management development were specific areas of focus for the Corporate Governance Committee in 2017. The Corporate Governance Committee engaged in thorough and thoughtful discussions regarding the development and evaluation of current and potential senior leaders, as well as the development of executive succession plans, including succession plans for our CEO position.

Board Succession.    Our Board has developed a robust process to refresh the Board and its leadership significantly over the next several years and beyond. The process is designed to continue to provide for a well-qualified, diverse and highly independent Board, with the requisite experience and skills to provide effective oversight. This process includes the identification of the current key skills and experience possessed by our members. A matrix of current key skills and experience possessed by our Board is on page 5 of this Proxy Statement. The identification of these skills and experiences, combined with a comprehensive Board evaluation process, provide visibility into the skills and experience leaving our Board in the future and allows for the identification of additional skills, experience or expertise needed to facilitate the Company's long-term strategy. This information is taken into account when identifying director nominees during the recruitment process.

Board Evaluations.    The Corporate Governance Committee has established a thorough evaluation process wherein each Director completes a Board evaluation as well as an individual self-evaluation annually. The Board evaluation allows each Director the opportunity to examine and evaluate the Board's composition and effectiveness, competency, accountability, deliberations and administration, and each committee, as well as the opportunity to identify any skills, experience or expertise the Director believes should be represented, or more fully represented, on the Board. The individual self-evaluation asks each Director to evaluate different areas of their performance as a Director, including independence, expertise, judgment and skills. The Board assessment results are reviewed both on a one-year standalone basis and on a three-year basis in order to identify any year-over-year trends. The assessment results are initially reviewed by the Lead Director. The Lead Director then has a formal annual call with each Director to discuss the Board, its functions, its membership, the individual's plan with respect to his or her continuing Board service, and any other topic the individual desires to discuss with our Lead Director. The results of the evaluations and calls are presented to the Corporate Governance Committee and full Board each February. This process provides the Board the ability to assess the overall functioning of the Board as a whole, and identify any skills, experience or expertise needed to continue to provide effective oversight of the Company's long-term strategy.

20GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

The Board's Role in Risk Oversight

Top risks discussed by the Board and its committees in 2017 included cybersecurity, data privacy and ownership, physical security, and utility regulation. The Board believes it is important to look at the list fresh each year as part of a diligent risk review.Responsibility for the management of the Company's risks rests with the Company's senior management team. The Board's oversight of the Company's risk management function is designed to provide assurance that the Company's risk management processes are well adapted to and consistent with the Company's business and strategy, and are functioning as intended. The Board focuses on fostering a culture of risk awareness and risk-adjusted decision-making and ensuring that an appropriate "tone at the top" is established. The Board regularly discusses and updates a listing of areas of risk and a suggested allocation of responsibilities for such risks among the Board and the Board committees. The charter for each of our committees requires each committee to periodically review risks in their respective areas. Each committee:

Receives periodic presentations from management about its assigned risk areas;

Receives information about the effectiveness of the risk identification and mitigation measures being employed; and

Discusses their risk reviews with the Board at least annually.

Consistent with the requirements of the NYSE's corporate governance standards, the Audit Committee periodically reviews the Company's major financial risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor and control such exposures. The Audit Committee also reviews the comprehensiveness of the Board's risk oversight activities and the Company's risk assessment process, and plays a coordinating role designed to ensure that no gaps exist in the coverage by the Board committees of risk areas.

The Executive Risk Committee is comprised of senior level officers of the Company and is chaired by the Chief Financial Officer. Among other responsibilities, this Committee is responsible for ensuring that the Board receives timely information concerning the Company's material risks and risk management processes. The Executive Risk Committee provides the Board with a list of the Company's top risks on an annual basis. The internal enterprise risk management group reports to the Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer, who reports to the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. The internal risk management group is responsible for (1) implementing a consistent risk management framework and reporting process across the Company, and (2) ensuring that the Executive Risk Committee is informed of those processes and regularly apprised of existing material risks and the emergence of additional material risks.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 21


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

Director Resignation Policies

We employ a plurality voting standard with a director resignation policy because we believe a majority voting policy is inconsistent with cumulative voting, which is mandated by the Arizona Constitution.With respect to the election of directors, the Company's Bylaws provide that in an uncontested election, a director nominee who receives a greater number of votes cast "withheld" for his or her election than "for" such election will promptly tender his or her resignation to the Corporate Governance Committee. The Corporate Governance Committee is required to evaluate the resignation, taking into account the best interests of the Company and its shareholders, and will recommend to the Board whether to accept or reject the resignation.

Under the Company's Corporate Governance Guidelines, upon a substantial change in a director's primary business position from the position the director held when originally elected to the Board, a director is required to apprise the Corporate Governance Committee and to offer his or her resignation for consideration to the Corporate Governance Committee. The Corporate Governance Committee will recommend to the Board the action, if any, to be taken with respect to the tendered resignation.

Director Retirement Policy

Under the Company's Corporate Governance Guidelines, an individual shall not be eligible to be nominated for election or re-election as a member of the Board of the Company or APS if, at the time of the nomination, the individual has attained the age of 75 years. This policy shall apply regardless of the source of the nomination or whether the nomination was made at a meeting of the Board of Directors, at an Annual Meeting or otherwise.

22GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

Shareholder Engagement and Communications with the Board

Our Goal.    What our shareholders think is important to us. We seek to maintain a transparent and productive dialogue with our shareholders by:

ü
Providing clear and timely information,

ü
Seeking and listening to feedback, and

ü
Being responsive.

Our Plan.    To accomplish this goal, we have an established shareholder engagement program designed to maintain a dialogue with our shareholders, which was further augmented during 2017 in response to what the Board considered a disappointing level of shareholder support for our annual advisory vote on compensation. Each year we strive to respond to shareholder questions in a timely manner, conduct extensive proactive outreach to investors, and evaluate the information we provide to investors in an effort to continuously improve our engagement. In 2017, we contacted the holders of approximately 50% of the shares outstanding and met with the holders of approximately 40% of the shares outstanding. Our Lead Director and member of the Human Resources Committee, Kathryn Munro, participated in a number of the shareholder discussions providing shareholders with direct access to the Board.

GRAPHIC

Our Results.    We listened to our shareholders. After considering their feedback, the Board in late 2017 and early 2018 made several changes in response:

ü
Increased the proportion of performance shares in our CEO's and Executive Vice Presidents' 2018 long-term incentive awards from 60% to 70%;

ü
Clarified how our performance metrics support and align with our long-term strategy;

ü
Revised 2018 metrics in certain key business units to better align with our priorities and emphasize top-quartile and above performance;

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 23


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

ü
Adopted a formalclawback policy;

ü
EnhancedCD&A disclosures;

ü
Redesignedannual incentive disclosure;

ü
Added detail on how we select ourpeer group;

ü
Added specificresponsibility for oversight of sustainability matters to the charter of the Nuclear and Operating Committee; and

ü
Included a director key skills and experience matrix in this Proxy Statement.

Communicating with the Board.    Shareholders and other parties interested in communicating with the Board may do so by writing to the Corporate Secretary, Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, 400 North Fifth Street, Mail Station 8602, Phoenix, Arizona 85004. The Corporate Secretary will transmit such communications, as appropriate, depending on the facts and circumstances outlined in the communications. In that regard, the Corporate Secretary has discretion to exclude communications that are unrelated to the duties and responsibilities of the Board, such as commercial advertisements or other forms of solicitations, service or billing matters and complaints related to individual employment-related actions.

Codes of Ethics and APS Core Strategic Framework

To ensure the highest levels of business ethics, the Board has adopted the Code of Ethics and Business Practices, which applies to all employees, officers and directors, and the Code of Ethics for Financial Executives, both of which are described below:

Code of Ethics and Business Practices ("Code of Ethics").    Employees, directors and officers receive access to and training on the Code of Ethics when they join the Company or APS, as well as annual updates. The Code of Ethics helps ensure that employees, directors and officers of the Company and APS act with integrity and avoid any real or perceived violation of the Company's policies and applicable laws and regulations. The Company provides annual online training and examination covering the principles in the Code of Ethics. This training includes extensive discussion of the Company's values, an explanation of Company ethical standards, application of ethical standards in typical workplace scenarios, information on reporting concerns, assessment questions to measure understanding, and an agreement to abide by the Code of Ethics. All employees of the Company and APS and all of our directors complete the training.

Code of Ethics for Financial Executives.    The Company has adopted a Code of Ethics for Financial Executives, which is designed to promote honest and ethical conduct and compliance with applicable laws and regulations, particularly as related to the maintenance of financial records, the preparation of financial statements, and proper public disclosure. "Financial Executive" means the Company's CEO, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer, Controller, Treasurer, General Counsel, the President and Chief Operating Officer of APS, and other persons designated from time to time as a Financial Executive subject to the Code of Ethics for Financial Executives by the Chair of the Audit Committee.

Both codes are available on the Company's website(www.pinnaclewest.com).

24GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

Core.    The Company and APS have adopted Core, which is a strategic framework that sets forth the foundation from which we operate. It defines our vision, mission, critical areas of focus, and values. APS's vision is to create a sustainable energy future for Arizona. APS's mission is to safely and efficiently deliver reliable energy to meet the changing needs of our customers. The critical areas of focus are employees, operational excellence, security, environment, customer value, community, and shareholder value. The framework affirms our corporate values of safety, integrity and trust, respect and inclusion, and accountability. Here is our Core:

GRAPHIC

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 25


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance

Director Qualifications and Selection of Nominees for the Board

Director Qualifications.    The Bylaws and the Corporate Governance Guidelines contain Board membership criteria that apply to nominees recommended for a position on the Board. Under the Bylaws, a director must be a shareholder of the Company. In determining whether an individual should be considered for Board membership, the Corporate Governance Committee considers the following core characteristics:

High Standards:  We look for directors that set high standards and expectations for themselves and others and the accomplishment of those standards and expectations.

Informed Judgment:  Directors should be thoughtful in their deliberations. We look for directors who demonstrate intelligence, wisdom and thoughtfulness in decision-making. Their decision-making process should include a willingness to thoroughly discuss issues, ask questions, express reservations and voice dissent.

Integrity and Accountability:  Directors should act with integrity. We look for directors who have integrity and strength of character in their personal and professional dealings. Our directors should be prepared to be, and are held, accountable for their decisions.

Time and Effort:  Directors should spend the necessary time to properly discharge their responsibilities as directors, including reviewing written materials provided to the Board or committee in advance of Board or committee meetings. Directors are expected to be present at all Board meetings, the Annual Meeting of Shareholders, and meetings of committees on which they serve. We also expect our directors to make themselves accessible to management upon request.

Other Commitments:  We expect our directors to monitor their other commitments to assure that these other commitments do not impact their service to our Company. Directors may not serve on more than three other boards of public companies in addition to the Pinnacle West Board without the prior approval of the Corporate Governance Committee. A director may not serve as a member of the Audit Committee if they serve on the audit committees of more than three public companies (including the Company) unless the Board determines that such simultaneous service would not impair the ability of such member to effectively serve on the Company's Audit Committee.

Stock Ownership:  We expect our directors to have investments in the Company's stock that align with our shareholders. Our directors are expected to comply with our Director Stock Ownership Policy.

The Corporate Governance Committee considers diversity in its selection of nominees utilizing a broad meaning to include not only factors such as race and gender, but also background, experience, skills, accomplishments, financial expertise, professional interests, and the potential contribution of each candidate to the diversity of backgrounds, experience and competencies which the Board desires to have represented. The Corporate Governance Committee considers the following qualities as well:

Regulatory and political knowledge is relevant to the Company as the utility industry is heavily regulated and directly affected by public policy and the actions of federal, state and local governmental agencies.

Nuclear expertise at the strategic level is important to the Company as we operate, Palo Verde Generating Station, a nuclear power plant and the largest power plant in the United

26GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Information About Our Board and Corporate Governance
Understanding of the Company's business environment is a critical attribute in planning our short- and long-term business strategies. Possessing knowledge of the Company's business environment includes not only experience in the broader utility industry, but also experience with factors unique to the Southwest and Arizona, including understanding the business from the perspective of the customer.

Large organizational leadership of complex operations provides a broad range of skills and experience beneficial to our decision-making, including human resource management, business strategy, finance and capital allocation.

Public company experience, as a member of a public company board or as CEO or other senior leader, gives a director an understanding of many of the structural and business strategy challenges facing a public company. This experience provides invaluable leadership skills in auditing matters, investment strategy and corporate governance.

Risk oversight and management skills are essential to the Board's role in overseeing and managing the risk associated with operating in the utility industry.

Selection of Nominees for the Board.    The Corporate Governance Committee uses a variety of methods to identify and evaluate nominees for a director position. The Corporate Governance Committee regularly assesses the appropriate size of the Board, whether any vacancies on the Board are expected due to retirement or otherwise, and whether the Board reflects the appropriate balance of knowledge, skills, expertise, and diversity required for the Board as a whole. In the event that vacancies are anticipated, or otherwise arise, the Corporate Governance Committee may consider various potential candidates. Candidates may be considered at any point during the year and come to the attention of the Corporate Governance Committee through current Board members, professional search firms or shareholders. The Corporate Governance Committee evaluates all nominees from these sources against the same criteria.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 27


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

The ten nominees for election as directors are set forth below. All nominees will be elected for a one-year term that will expire at the 2019 Annual Meeting. The directors' ages are as of February 21, 2018. All of our directors also serve as directors of APS for no additional compensation.

Donald E. BrandtBACKGROUND

Age 63

Director since 2009

Chairman of the Board, President and CEO of the Company and APS

Mr. Brandt not only serves as our Chairman of the Board, President and CEO, he has been recognized as a leader in the industry, currently serving as Chairman of Nuclear Energy Institute ("NEI") and a Board Member of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations ("INPO"), Nuclear Energy Insurance Limited ("NEIL") and Edison Electric Institute ("EEI"). Mr. Brandt brings the following key attributes to the Company:

Business strategy experience

CEO/senior leadership experience

Complex operations experience

Extensive knowledge of the Company's business environment

Government/public policy/regulatory knowledge

Nuclear experience

Utility industry experience

Mr. Brandt has been Chairman of the Board and CEO of the Company since April 2009 and President of the Company since March 2008. He has been President of APS since May 2013, Chairman of the Board of APS since April 2009, and CEO of APS since March 2008. Mr. Brandt also served as President of APS from December 2006 to January 2009. Mr. Brandt has served as an officer of the Company in the following additional capacities: March 2008 to April 2009 as Chief Operating Officer; September 2003 to March 2008 as Executive Vice President; December 2002 to September 2003 as Senior Vice President; and December 2002 to March 2008 as Chief Financial Officer.

QUALIFICATIONS


As Chairman of the Board, President and CEO of the Company and APS, Mr. Brandt has hands-on experience in leading a large, complex organization. This leadership, combined with nearly three decades of leadership experience in the utility industry, gives Mr. Brandt extensive knowledge of the factors affecting the Company's business environment and business strategy, including utility-specific financial and operational experience and public policy and regulatory knowledge. Mr. Brandt also has strategic nuclear expertise and currently serves as Chairman of NEI and as a Board Member of INPO, NEIL and EEI, all major industry organizations that provide insight into nuclear, operational, financial and policy matters of great importance to the Company.

28GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors
Denis A. Cortese, M.D.BACKGROUND

Age 73

Director since 2010

Committees

Audit

Human Resources

Nuclear and Operating

INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR

Dr. Cortese, former President and CEO of Mayo Clinic, a worldwide leader in medical care with operations located throughout the United States, brings the following key attributes to the Company:

Complex operations experience

Customer perspectives

Finance/capital allocation

Financial literacy/accounting

Government/public policy/regulatory

Human resources management/compensation

Risk oversight and management

Dr. Cortese is the Director of the ASU Health Care Delivery and Policy Program and a Foundation Professor in the Department of Biomedical Informatics, Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering and in the School of Health Management and Policy, W.P. Carey School of Business. He has held these positions since February 2010. Dr. Cortese has been Emeritus President and Chief Executive Officer of the Mayo Clinic (medical clinic and hospital services) since November 2009, and was President and Chief Executive Officer of the Mayo Clinic from March 2003 until his retirement in November 2009. Dr. Cortese is also a director of Cerner Corporation.

QUALIFICATIONS


As former President and Chief Executive Officer of the Mayo Clinic, a multi-state, complex hospital and medical care system, Dr. Cortese gained extensive experience in human resources management, risk oversight and risk management, customer perspectives, and leading complex organizations with multiple constituencies. He led an organization that delivers strong and efficient customer service, which parallels the Company's strategies. Through his service at Mayo, he developed experience in finance, capital allocation, accounting, and regulation, and his background in public policy development, science and technology brings valuable perspective to issues that face the Company.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 29


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors


Richard P. Fox

BACKGROUND


Age 70

Director since 2014

Committees

Audit

Finance

Human Resources

INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR

As a former Managing Partner of Ernst & Young, one of the "Big Four" auditing firms with multinational operations, Mr. Fox brings the following key attributes to the Company:

Audit expertise

Business strategy

Customer perspectives

Financial literacy/accounting

Human resources management/compensation

Public board service

Risk oversight and management

Mr. Fox has served as a consultant and independent board member since 2001 for companies in various industries. Mr. Fox previously held executive, operational and financial positions at CyberSafe Corporation ("CyberSafe"), Wall Data, Incorporated ("Wall Data") and PACCAR Inc., and is a former Managing Partner of Ernst & Young's Seattle office. Mr. Fox is also a director of Acxiom Corporation, Univar, Inc., and ServiceMaster Global Holdings. Within the past five years, Mr. Fox has served as a director of FLOW International Corporation and Pendrell Corporation.

QUALIFICATIONS


As a former Managing Partner of Ernst & Young and as former Chief Financial Officer of Wall Data and President and Chief Operating Officer of CyberSafe, Mr. Fox has a deep understanding of auditing, financial and accounting matters. Mr. Fox has also served on the boards of several companies throughout his career, including seven public companies, giving him extensive insights into business strategy, human resources management and compensation, risk oversight and risk management, and the customer perspective. His extensive board experience, including service on various audit committees and finance committees, including chairmanships, adds to the Board's depth and capabilities.

30GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors


Michael L. Gallagher

BACKGROUND


Age 73

Director since 1999

Committees

Nuclear and Operating (Chair)

Corporate Governance

INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR

As a founding member of Gallagher & Kennedy, Mr. Gallagher built a successful law practice in Arizona. In his role as Chair of the Nuclear and Operating Committee, Mr. Gallagher has devoted significant time in becoming familiar with the Company's generation, transmission and distribution operations. Mr. Gallagher has represented the Company before the NRC and has participated on the Company's behalf in meetings of the World Organization of Nuclear Operators. Mr. Gallagher brings the following key attributes to the Company:

Business strategy

Corporate governance

Customer perspectives

Extensive knowledge of the Company's business environment

Finance/capital allocation

Human resources management/compensation

Risk oversight and management

Mr. Gallagher is Chairman Emeritus of Gallagher & Kennedy P.A. ("Gallagher & Kennedy") in Phoenix, Arizona (an Arizona based law firm). He has held this position since 2001. Mr. Gallagher served as President of Gallagher & Kennedy from 1978 through 2000. Mr. Gallagher is also a director of Werner Enterprises Inc. Within the past five years Mr. Gallagher served as a director of AMERCO, the parent company of U Haul International, Inc., and chaired its Independent Governance Committee. He is currently serving as a Trustee of the Peter Kiewit Foundation.

QUALIFICATIONS


Mr. Gallagher has represented a broad and diverse spectrum of corporate clients. Mr. Gallagher provides guidance and judgment gained through advising senior management and boards of directors on the varied issues regularly considered by the Board. His knowledge and experience from participating on the boards of other publicly-traded and private companies provides valuable perspective to the Company with regard to business strategy, finance/capital allocation, human resources management and compensation and risk oversight and risk management. He also has extensive experience addressing corporate governance matters, making him a good fit for the Corporate Governance Committee. Mr. Gallagher's tenure with the Company and service on the Nuclear and Operating Committee has provided him extensive knowledge of the Company and its business environment and, as a long-time resident and founder of an Arizona-based business, he is familiar with the perspectives of customers in the Central Arizona service territory of APS.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 31


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors


Dale E. Klein, Ph.D.

BACKGROUND


Age 70

Director since 2010

Committees

Audit

Nuclear and Operating

INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR

As former Chairman of the NRC, the entity that formulates policies and regulations governing nuclear reactor and materials safety, issues orders to licensees, and adjudicates legal matters brought before it, Dr. Klein brings the following key attributes to the Company:

CEO/senior leadership

Complex operations experience

Financial literacy/accounting

Government/public policy/regulatory

Human resources management/compensation

Nuclear experience

Utility industry experience

Dr. Klein served as Chairman of the NRC from July 2006 to May 2009, and thereafter continued as a Commissioner until March 2010. He was Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense Programs from November 2001 to July 2006. Dr. Klein is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Texas at Austin. He has held this position since September 1977. Dr. Klein is also Associate Vice Chancellor for Research at the University of Texas System. He has held this position since January 2011. He is also a director of Southern Company.

QUALIFICATIONS


The NRC oversees nuclear power plant operations in the United States. As the former Chairman of the NRC, Dr. Klein brings expertise in all aspects of nuclear energy regulation, operation, technology and safety. His broad national and international experience in all aspects of the nuclear utility industry, nuclear energy, government and regulation brings value to the Board, not only from the perspective of our operations at Palo Verde, but also as the Company and APS look at new opportunities in our evolving utility business. His service with the NRC, including his tenure as Chairman, gives him senior leadership experience in operating large, complex organizations, financial literacy and human resources management and compensation experience.

32GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors


Humberto S. Lopez

BACKGROUND


Age 72

Director since 1995

Committees

Finance (Chair)

Audit

Human Resources

INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR

Mr. Lopez is an accomplished real estate developer throughout Arizona and brings the following key attributes to the Company:

Customer perspectives

Extensive knowledge of the Company's business environment

Finance/capital allocation

Financial literacy/accounting

Human resources management/compensation

Investment experience

Risk oversight and management

Mr. Lopez is Chairman of the Board of HSL Properties, Inc. (real estate development and investment), in Tucson, Arizona. He has held this position since January 2016. Mr. Lopez was President of HSL Properties, Inc. from 1975 to January 2016.

QUALIFICATIONS


In addition to management and business knowledge, Mr. Lopez brings extensive investment and real estate development expertise to the Company. His understanding of real estate and associated markets has proven to be a valuable asset to the Company due to the importance of those markets in Arizona. Mr. Lopez is also extensively familiar with the Company's business environment, including our customers' perspective and the State's historic economic cycles, which help the Company plan for future growth and energy needs. As an entrepreneur who built his own real estate development business, Mr. Lopez has gained essential knowledge and skills and experience in accounting, finance and capital allocation, human resources, and risk oversight and risk management.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 33


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors


Kathryn L. Munro

BACKGROUND


Age 69

Director since 2000

Lead Director

Committees

Corporate Governance (Chair)

Finance

Human Resources

INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR

As a former CEO of BofA's Southwest Banking Group, Ms. Munro brings a wealth of experience to the Company, including the following key attributes:

CEO/senior leadership experience

Corporate governance

Extensive knowledge of the Company's business environment

Human resources management/compensation

Investment experience

Public board service

Risk oversight and management

Ms. Munro is a principal of BridgeWest, LLC (an investment company). She has held this position since July 2003. Ms. Munro was Chairman of BridgeWest, LLC from February 1999 until July 2003. From 1996 to 1998, Ms. Munro served as Chief Executive Officer of Bank of America's ("BofA") Southwest Banking Group and was President of BofA Arizona from 1994 to 1996. Prior to that, Ms. Munro held a variety of senior positions during her 20-year career with BofA. Ms. Munro is also Chairman of the Board of Premera Blue Cross and Lead Director of Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings, Inc. ("Knight-Swift").

Ms. Munro is the Company's Lead Director.

QUALIFICATIONS


As principal of an investment company, and as former Chief Executive Officer of BofA's Southwest Banking Group and President of BofA Arizona, Ms. Munro brings business and investment acumen, financial knowledge, and leadership skills to the Company. Her extensive knowledge of the Company's business environment includes experience with the cycles in Arizona's economy, which assists a growing infrastructure company like Pinnacle West in accessing capital and meeting its financing needs. Ms. Munro is an experienced director, currently serving on the boards of Knight-Swift and Premera Blue Cross, providing her experience in human resources management and compensation, corporate governance, and risk oversight and risk management.

34GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors


Bruce J. Nordstrom

BACKGROUND


Age 68

Director since 2000

Committees

Audit (Chair)

Corporate Governance

Nuclear and Operating

INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR

As the President of Nordstrom and Associates and a practicing CPA, Mr. Nordstrom brings the following key attributes to the Company:

Audit expertise

Corporate governance

Customer perspectives

Extensive knowledge of the Company's business environment

Financial literacy/accounting

Human resources management/compensation

Risk oversight and management

Mr. Nordstrom is President of and a certified public accountant at the firm of Nordstrom & Associates, P.C., in Flagstaff, Arizona. He has held this position since 1988.

QUALIFICATIONS


As the president of an accounting firm, Mr. Nordstrom has an extensive accounting, auditing and financial skill set, as well as familiarity with principles of risk oversight and risk management. His tenure with the Company in addition to operating an Arizona-based business has provided him with extensive knowledge of the Company's business environment. Furthermore, as an individual who built and currently heads an accounting firm in Flagstaff, Arizona, Mr. Nordstrom has obtained experience in human resources management and compensation and corporate governance as well as a familiarity with the perspectives of customers in the Northern Arizona service territory of APS.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 35


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors


Paula J. Sims

BACKGROUND


Age 56

Director since 2016

Committees

Finance

Nuclear and Operating

INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR

Ms. Sims brings hands-on experience in electric utility operations, including, generation, renewable energy, energy efficiency, fuels and energy trading, and customer service, as well as an understanding of the role of management and executive oversight, and brings the following key attributes to the Company:

Business strategy

CEO/senior leadership experience

Complex operations experience

Government/public policy/regulatory

Nuclear experience

Risk oversight and management

Utility industry experience

Ms. Sims is a Professor of Practice and Executive Coach at the University of North Carolina Kenan-Flagler Business School. She has held this position since May 2012. Ms. Sims was Senior Vice President of Corporate Development and Improvement at Progress Energy Inc. from July 2010 to June 2012 and Senior Vice President of Power Operations of Progress Energy from July 2007 to July 2010.

QUALIFICATIONS


Ms. Sims worked directly in the utility industry for more than 13 years. She brings extensive leadership experience to the Company in business strategy, electric utility operations, nuclear strategy, and operating in a regulated environment. In her prior roles at Progress Energy, Ms. Sims was responsible for complex business operations and strategy, including new generation, supply chain and information technology, as well as overall process and efficiency improvements. Her experience gives her extensive insight into the operational, regulatory, and risk-related matters that are of ever-increasing significance to the Company.

36GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors


David P. Wagener

BACKGROUND


Age 63

Director since 2014

Committees

Audit

Finance

Nuclear and Operating

INDEPENDENT DIRECTOR

As the Managing Partner of Wagener Capital Management, Mr. Wagener is experienced at analyzing business strategies, and brings the following key attributes to the Company:

Business strategy

Finance/capital allocation

Financial literacy/accounting

Investment experience

Public board service

Risk oversight and management

Utility industry experience

Mr. Wagener is the Managing Partner of Wagener Capital Management, an investment and advisory firm serving utility and private equity companies. He has held this position since June 1995. Mr. Wagener previously held executive positions at Salomon Brothers and Goldman, Sachs & Co. Mr. Wagener served as a director of SunCor Development Company from January 2011 to March 2013.

QUALIFICATIONS


Mr. Wagener brings to the Board over 35 years of experience in the power/energy industry, project finance and investment banking experience, and knowledge of utility regulation. Through his financial experience and service on boards of public companies he has developed key experience in capital allocation, accounting, and risk oversight and risk management. His participation brings value to the Company and the Board as we address structural and business strategy challenges facing the utility industry.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTEFOR THE
ELECTION OF THE NOMINATED SLATE OF DIRECTORS

Current Director Not Standing for Reelection.    Dr. Roy A. Herberger, Jr. will retire from the Board effective at the Annual Meeting. The Board recognizes Dr. Herberger's distinguished service over the years and thanks Dr. Herberger for his tireless labor, devotion and service to the Company.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 37


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

Director Independence
 

NYSE rules require companies whose securities are traded on the NYSE to have a majority of independent directors. These rules describe certain relationships that prevent a director from being independent and require a company's board of directors to make director independence determinations in all other circumstances. The Company's Board has also adopted Director Independence Standards to assist the Board in making independence determinations. These Director Independence Standards are available on the Company's website (www.pinnaclewest.com).

Based on the Board's review, the Board has determined that one of the Company's directors is not independent and that all of the other directors are independent. The independent directors are Messrs. Fox, Gallagher, Lopez, Nordstrom, and Wagener, Drs. Cortese, Herberger and Klein, and Ms. Munro. Mr. Brandt is not independent under the NYSE rules or the Director Independence Standards because of his employment with the Company. Ms. Susan Clark-Johnson passed away in January 2015. She was independent while she was a member of the Board.

In accordance with the NYSE rules and the Director Independence Standards, the Board undertakes an annual review to determine which of its directors are independent. The review generally takes place in the first quarter of each year; however, directors are required to notify the Company of any changes that occur throughout the year that may impact their independence.

Ten of our eleven directors are independent.Based on the Board's review, the Board has determined that one of the Company's directors is not independent and that all of the other directors are independent. The independent directors are Messrs. Fox, Gallagher, Lopez, Nordstrom, and Wagener, Drs. Cortese, Herberger and Klein, and Mses. Munro and Sims. Mr. Brandt is not independent under the NYSE rules or the Director Independence Standards because of his employment with the Company.

In accordance with the NYSE rules and the Director Independence Standards, the Board undertakes an annual review to determine which of its directors are independent. The review generally takes place in the first quarter of each year; however, directors are required to notify the Company of any changes that occur throughout the year that may impact their independence.


Dr. Cortese is independent under the tests imposed by the NYSE rules and our Director Independence Standards.


Dr. Cortese is an employee of Arizona State University ("ASU") in his capacity as the Director of the ASU Health Care Delivery and Policy Program and a Foundation Professor in the Department of Biomedical Informatics, Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering and in the School of Health Management and Policy, W.P. Carey School of Business. ASU is considered a part of the reporting entity for the State of Arizona (the "State") for financial reporting purposes and, as such, the State is the entity considered in applying the independence tests. In considering the independence of Dr. Cortese, the Board considered the fact that transactions between the State and the Company and its affiliates consist of providing electric service, the payment of various State fees, taxes, memberships, licenses, sponsorships and donations, and the payment by each party of utility-related costs. The Board determined that these matters do not impact Dr. Cortese's independence, since amounts paid to or received from the State are less than the dollar thresholds set forth in the NYSE rules and the Director Independence Standards. In addition, Dr. Cortese did not and does not benefit, financially, directly or indirectly, from ASU's business relationships with the Company, most of which consist of receiving electric service at regulated rates.

38GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

Mr. Fox is independent under the tests imposed by the NYSE rules and our Director Independence Standards.Mr. Fox serves as a director of Univar, Inc. APS purchases chemicals that are used in the operation and maintenance of our power plants, primarily in controlling our water chemistry, from Univar. However, since: (a) the amounts paid to Univar were less than the dollar thresholds set forth in the NYSE rules and our Director Independence Standards and were less than one percent of the Company's and Univar's revenues for fiscal year 2017; (b) the relationship between APS and Univar pre-dates Mr. Fox joining the Board; and (c) our purchases from Univar are negotiated at arm's length, the Board determined that these transactions do not impact Mr. Fox's independence.

Mr. Gallagher the Board considered thatis Chairman Emeritus of the law firm of Gallagher &and Kennedy, P.A. ("Gallagher & Kennedy"), where Mr. Gallagher is Chairman Emeritus, provided legalThe law firm did not provide any services to the Company or APS in 20142017 and is expected to provide legal services that were provided to the Company and APS in 2015. However, since: (a) the amounts paid to Gallagher & Kennedy2016 and 2015 were less than the dollar thresholds set forth in the NYSE rules and the Director Independence Standards and were less than one percent of the Company's and Gallagher &and Kennedy's revenues for fiscal year 2014; (b) Mr. Gallagher does not furnish legal services to the Company;years 2016 and (c) he has advised the Company that he receives no compensation or benefits from Gallagher & Kennedy as a result of the firm providing legal services to the Company, the Board determined that Mr. Gallagher was independent.

Dr. Cortese is an employee of Arizona State University ("ASU") in his capacity as the Director of the ASU Health Care Delivery and Policy Program and a Foundation Professor in the Department of Biomedical Informatics, Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering and in the School of Health Management and Policy, W.P. Carey School of Business. Ms. Clark-Johnson was also an employee of ASU in her capacity as a Professor of Practice at ASU's Walter Cronkite School of Journalism. ASU is considered a part of the reporting entity for the State of Arizona (the "State") for financial reporting purposes and, as such, the State is the entity considered in

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 11

Table of Contents

INFORMATION ABOUT OUR BOARD AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

applying the independence tests. In considering the independence of Ms. Clark-Johnson and Dr. Cortese, the Board considered the fact that transactions between the State and the Company and its affiliates consist of providing electric service, the payment of various State fees, taxes, memberships, licenses, sponsorships and donations, and the payment by each party of utility-related costs. The Board determined that these matters did not impact Ms. Clark-Johnson's independence and do not impact Dr. Cortese's independence, since amounts paid to or received from the State are less than the dollar thresholds set forth in the NYSE rules and the Director Independence Standards. In addition, neither of these directors benefited, and in the case of Dr. Cortese does not benefit, financially, directly or indirectly, from ASU's business relationships with the Company, most of which consist of receiving electric service at regulated rates.

2015, respectively. With respect to all of the directors, the Board considered that many of the directors and/or businesses of which they are officers, directors, shareholders, or employees are located in APS's service territory and purchase electricity from APS at regulated rates in the normal course of business. The Board considered these relationships in determining the directors' independence, but, because the rates and charges for electricity provided by APS are fixed by the Arizona Corporation Commission (the "ACC"), and the directors satisfied the other independence criteria specified in the NYSE rules and the Director Independence Standards, the Board determined that these relationships did not impact the independence of any director. The Board also considered contributions to charitable and non-profit organizations where a director also serves as a director of such charity or organization. However, since no director is also an executive officer of such charitable or non-profit organization, the Board determined that these payments did not impact the independence of any director.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 39

Board Meetings and Attendance

In 2014, our Board held seven meetings and none of our directors attended fewer than 75% of the Board meetings and any meetings of Board committees on which he or she served. Each director is expected to be present at the Annual Meeting. All of the Board members attended the 2014 Annual Meeting.

12     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

INFORMATION ABOUT OUR BOARD AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Board Committees

The Board has the following standing committees: Audit; Corporate Governance; Finance; Human Resources; and Nuclear and Operating. All of the charters of the Board's committees are publicly available on the Company's website (www.pinnaclewest.com). All of our committees are comprised of independent directors who meet the independence requirements of the NYSE rules, SEC rules, and the Director Independence Standards, including any specific committee independence requirements.

RESPONSIBILITIESStock MattersNUMBER OF
MEETINGS
DURING
FISCAL 2014
AUDIT
COMMITTEE
Among other things, the Audit Committee:

oversees the integrity of the Company's financial statements;

appoints the independent accountants and is responsible for their qualifications, independence, performance, and compensation;

reviews the performance of the Company's internal audit function; and

monitors the Company's general compliance with legal and regulatory requirements.

The Board has determined that each member of the Audit Committee meets the NYSE experience requirements and that Mr. Nordstrom, the Chair of the Audit Committee, is an "audit committee financial expert" under applicable SEC rules.

6
CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
COMMITTEE
Among other things, the Corporate Governance Committee:

reviews and assesses the Corporate Governance Guidelines;

develops and recommends to the full Board criteria for selecting new directors;

identifies and evaluates individuals qualified to become members of the Board, consistent with the criteria for selecting new directors;

recommends director nominees to the Board;

recommends to the Board who should serve on each of the Board's committees;

reviews the results of the Annual Meeting shareholder votes; and

reviews and makes recommendations to the full Board regarding the selection of the CEO and CEO succession planning.

The Corporate Governance Guidelines are available on the Company's website (www.pinnaclewest.com).

5
FINANCE
COMMITTEE
Among other things, the Finance Committee:

reviews the Company's historical and projected financial performance and the Company's financing plan and recommends approval of credit facilities and the issuance of long-term debt, common equity and preferred securities;

reviews and recommends approval of the Company's annual capital budget and reviews the annual operations and maintenance budget;

reviews and recommends approval of short-term investments and borrowing policies; and

reviews and recommends to the Board the Company's dividend actions.

4
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 13

Table of Contents

INFORMATION ABOUT OUR BOARD AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

RESPONSIBILITIESNUMBER OF
MEETINGS
DURING
FISCAL 2014
HUMAN
RESOURCES
COMMITTEE
Among other things, the Human Resources Committee:

reviews management's programs for the attraction, retention, and development of the Company's human resources;

recommends to the full Board persons for election as officers;

annually reviews the goals and performance of the officers of the Company and APS;

approves corporate goals and objectives relevant to the compensation of the Company's CEO, assesses the CEO's performance in light of these goals and objectives, and sets the CEO's compensation based on this assessment;

makes recommendations to the Board with respect to non-CEO executive compensation and director compensation; and

acts as the "committee" under the Company's long-term incentive plans.

Under the Human Resources Committee's charter, the Human Resources Committee may delegate authority to subcommittees, but did not do so in 2014. Additional information on the processes and procedures of the Human Resources Committee is provided under the heading "Compensation Discussion and Analysis ("CD&A")."

4
NUCLEAR AND
OPERATING
COMMITTEE
Among other things, the Nuclear and Operating Committee:

receives regular reports from management and monitors the overall performance of Palo Verde;

reviews the results of major Palo Verde inspections and evaluations by external oversight groups, such as the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations ("INPO") and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC");

reviews and monitors the power plant operations, energy transmission and delivery, and customer service functions of the Company; and

reviews and monitors the Company's compliance with environmental, health and safety policies.

In addition, the Nuclear and Operating Committee receives regular reports from the Offsite Safety Review Committee (the "OSRC"). The OSRC provides independent assessments of the safe and reliable operations of Palo Verde. Pursuant to Palo Verde's operating licenses, the OSRC focuses its assessment on operations, engineering, maintenance, safety, security and other support functions. The OSRC is comprised of non-employee individuals with senior management experience in the nuclear industry and the Palo Verde Director of Nuclear Assurance, and it meets periodically throughout the year.

4
14     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

INFORMATION ABOUT OUR BOARD AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The Board's Leadership Structure

Lead Director.    Kathryn L. Munro serves as the Company's Lead Director and chairs the Corporate Governance Committee. The Lead Director performs the following functions:

serves as a liaison between the Chairman of the Board (the "Chairman") and the independent directors;

advises the Chairman as to an appropriate schedule of Board meetings, reviews and provides the Chairman with input regarding agendas for the Board meetings and, as appropriate or as requested, reviews and provides the Chairman with input regarding information sent to the Board;

presides at all meetings at which the Chairman is not present, including executive sessions of the independent directors, which executive sessions are regularly scheduled as part of each Board meeting;

calls meetings of the independent directors when necessary and appropriate;

oversees the Board and Board committee self-assessment process;

is available for consultation and direct communication with the Company's shareholders and other interested parties;

performs such other duties as the Board may from time to time delegate; and

reviews the results of the Annual Meeting shareholder votes.

Chairman and CEO Positions.    The Chairman is Donald E. Brandt, the Company's President and CEO. The Board believes that combining the roles of the CEO and Chairman enhances the Board's ability to communicate clearly and effectively with management, and that an independent Board Chairman would create an additional level of hierarchy that would only duplicate the activities already being vigorously carried out by its Lead Director.

The Board's Role in Risk Oversight

The ultimate responsibility for the management of the Company's risks rests with the Company's senior management team. The Board's oversight of the Company's risk management function is designed to provide assurance that the Company's risk management processes are well adapted to and consistent with the Company's business and strategy, and are functioning as intended. The Board focuses on fostering a culture of risk awareness and risk-adjusted decision-making and ensuring that an appropriate "tone at the top" is established. The Board regularly discusses and updates a listing of areas of risk and a suggested allocation of responsibility for such risks among the Board committees. The charter for each of our committees requires each committee to periodically review risks in their respective areas. Each committee:

receives periodic presentations from management about its assigned risk areas;

considers the effectiveness of the risk identification and mitigation measures being employed; and

discusses their risk reviews with the full Board at least annually.
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 15

Table of Contents

INFORMATION ABOUT OUR BOARD AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Consistent with the requirements of the NYSE's corporate governance standards, the Audit Committee periodically reviews the Company's major financial risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor and control such exposures. The Audit Committee also reviews the comprehensiveness of the Board's risk oversight and the Company's risk assessment process, and plays a coordinating role designed to ensure that no gaps exist in the coverage by the Board committees of risk areas. In recommending the composition of the Board's committees and the selection of committee Chairs, the Corporate Governance Committee takes into account the effective functioning of the risk oversight role of each Board committee and the risk areas assigned to it.

The Executive Risk Committee is comprised of senior level officers of the Company and is chaired by the Chief Financial Officer. Among other responsibilities, this Committee is responsible for ensuring that the Board receives timely information concerning the Company's material risks and risk management processes. The Executive Risk Committee annually provides the Board with a list of the Company's top risks. The internal enterprise risk management group reports to the Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer, who reports to the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of APS. The internal risk management group is responsible for (1) implementing a consistent risk management framework and reporting process across APS, and (2) ensuring that the Executive Risk Committee is informed of those processes and regularly apprised of existing material risks and the emergence of additional material risks.

Director Qualifications; Selection of Nominees for the Board

Director Qualifications.    The Bylaws and the Corporate Governance Guidelines contain Board membership criteria that apply to nominees recommended for a position on the Board. Under the Bylaws, a director must be a shareholder of the Company. In determining whether an individual should be considered for Board membership, the Corporate Governance Committee considers the following qualities, among others: integrity; knowledge, including regulatory and political knowledge, and nuclear expertise at the strategic level; judgment; understanding of the Company's business environment; and the potential contribution of each candidate to the diversity of backgrounds, experience and competencies which the Board desires to have represented, including large organizational leadership, public company experience and risk oversight skills. The Corporate Governance Committee considers diversity in its selection of nominees utilizing a broad meaning to include not only factors such as race and gender, but also background, experience, skills, accomplishments, financial expertise, and professional interests. The Corporate Governance Committee also considers the amount of time that a person will likely have to devote to his or her duties as a director, including responsibilities as an executive officer, board member or trustee of other businesses and charitable institutions.

Selection of Nominees for the Board.    The Corporate Governance Committee uses a variety of methods to identify and evaluate nominees for a director position. The Corporate Governance Committee regularly assesses the appropriate size of the Board, whether any vacancies on the Board are expected due to retirement or otherwise, and whether the Board reflects the appropriate balance of knowledge, skills, expertise, and diversity required for the Board as a whole. In the event that vacancies are anticipated, or otherwise arise, the Corporate Governance Committee may consider various potential candidates. Candidates may be considered at any point during the year and come to the attention of the Corporate Governance

16     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

INFORMATION ABOUT OUR BOARD AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Committee through current Board members, professional search firms or shareholders, and the Corporate Governance Committee evaluates all nominees from these sources against the same criteria. Any shareholder nominations proposed for consideration by the Corporate Governance Committee should include the nominee's name and qualifications for Board membership and should be addressed to:

Corporate Secretary
Pinnacle West Capital Corporation
400 North Fifth Street, Mail Station 8602
Phoenix, Arizona 85004

Any shareholder who wishes to submit a nomination for a director to the Board must deliver that nomination to our Corporate Secretary by November 19, 2015 and comply with the information requirements in the Company's Bylaws.

Director Resignation Due to a Substantial Change in their Primary Business Position

Under the Company's Corporate Governance Guidelines, upon a substantial change in a director's primary business position from the position the director held when originally elected to the Board, a director is required to apprise the Corporate Governance Committee and to offer his or her resignation for consideration to the Corporate Governance Committee. The Corporate Governance Committee will recommend to the Board the action, if any, to be taken with respect to the tendered resignation.

Communication with the Board

Shareholders and other parties interested in communicating with the Board may do so by writing to the Corporate Secretary, Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, 400 North Fifth Street, Mail Station 8602, Phoenix, Arizona 85004, indicating who should receive the communication, for example, the Lead Director or the independent directors. The Corporate Secretary will transmit communications not otherwise specifically addressed and that raise substantial issues to the Lead Director and to the Chair of the Board Committee most closely associated with the matter. The Corporate Secretary has discretion to exclude communications that are commercial advertisements or other forms of solicitations, service or billing complaints and complaints related to individual employment-related actions.

Codes of Ethics and Strategic Framework

To ensure the highest levels of business ethics, the Board has adopted the Code of Ethics and Business Practices, which applies to all employees, officers and directors, and the Code of Ethics for Financial Executives, both of which are described below:

Code of Ethics and Business Practices (the "Code of Ethics").    Employees, directors and officers receive the Code of Ethics when they join the Company or APS, as well as any subsequent updates. The Code of Ethics helps ensure that employees, directors and officers of the Company and APS act with integrity and avoid any real or perceived violation of the Company's policies and applicable laws and regulations.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 17

Table of Contents

INFORMATION ABOUT OUR BOARD AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The Company provides periodic online training and examination covering the principles in the Code of Ethics. This training includes extensive discussion of the Company's values, an explanation of Company ethical standards, application of ethical standards in typical workplace scenarios, information on reporting concerns, assessment questions to measure understanding and an agreement to abide by the Code of Ethics. All employees of the Company and APS and all of our directors complete the training.

Code of Ethics for Financial Executives.    The Company has adopted a Code of Ethics for Financial Executives, which is designed to promote honest and ethical conduct and compliance with applicable laws and regulations, particularly as related to the maintenance of financial records, the preparation of financial statements, and proper public disclosure. "Financial Executive" means the Company's CEO, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer, Controller, Treasurer, General Counsel, President and Chief Operating Officer of APS, and other persons designated from time to time as a Financial Executive subject to this policy by the Chair of the Audit Committee.

Both codes are available on the Company's website (www.pinnaclewest.com).

The Company's Strategic Framework.    APS has adopted a Strategic Framework that defines its vision, mission, areas of focus, and values. APS's vision is to create a sustainable energy future for Arizona. APS's mission is to safely and efficiently generate and deliver reliable electric power and related services to its customers. The areas of focus are employees, operational excellence, environmental stewardship, customers and communities, and shareholder value. The framework affirms our corporate values of safety, integrity and trust, respect, and accountability. Here is our Strategic Framework:

GRAPHIC

18     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

The ten nominees for election as directors are set forth below, where we provide a description of their occupation, business background and other directorships, as well as a discussion of the specific skills that the Board believes qualifies each of our nominees to serve as a director. All nominees will be elected for a one-year term that will expire at the 2016 Annual Meeting. The directors' ages are as of February 20, 2015. All of our directors also serve as directors of APS.

Donald E. Brandt

BACKGROUND


  Age 60

  Director since 2009

  Chairman of the Board,
  President and CEO
  of the Company and
  APS

Mr. Brandt has been Chairman of the Board and CEO of the Company since April 2009 and President of the Company since March 2008. He has been President of APS since May 2013, Chairman of the Board of APS since April 2009, and CEO of APS since March 2008. Mr. Brandt also served as President of APS from December 2006 to January 2009. Mr. Brandt has served as an officer of the Company in the following additional capacities: March 2008 to April 2009 as Chief Operating Officer; September 2003 to March 2008 as Executive Vice President; December 2002 to September 2003 as Senior Vice President; and December 2002 to March 2008 as Chief Financial Officer.

QUALIFICATIONS


As Chairman of the Board, President and CEO of the Company and APS, and with nearly three decades of experience in the utility industry, Mr. Brandt has a broad understanding of the factors affecting the Company's business. Mr. Brandt currently serves on the boards of INPO, Nuclear Energy Institute, Edison Electric Institute, and Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited; all major industry organizations that provide insight into operational, financial and policy matters of great importance to the Company.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 19

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Denis A. Cortese, M.D.

BACKGROUND


  Age 70

  Director since 2010

Committees

Audit

Human Resources

Nuclear and Operating

Dr. Cortese is the Director of the ASU Health Care Delivery and Policy Program and a Foundation Professor in the Department of Biomedical Informatics, Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering and in the School of Health Management and Policy, W.P. Carey School of Business. He has held these positions since February 2010. Dr. Cortese has been Emeritus President and Chief Executive Officer of the Mayo Clinic (medical clinic and hospital services) since November 2009, and was President and Chief Executive Officer of the Mayo Clinic from March 2003 until his retirement in November 2009. Dr. Cortese is also a director of Cerner Corporation.

QUALIFICATIONS


As former President and Chief Executive Officer of the Mayo Clinic, Dr. Cortese has extensive experience in leading complex organizations with multiple constituencies and has led an organization that delivers strong and efficient customer service, which parallels the Company's strategies. Further, his background in public policy development, science and technology brings valuable perspective to issues that face the Company.

Richard P. Fox

BACKGROUND


  Age 67

  Director since 2014

Committees

Audit

Finance

Human Resources

Mr. Fox has served as a consultant and independent board member since 2001 for companies in various industries. Mr. Fox previously held executive, operational and financial positions at CyberSafe Corporation ("CyberSafe"), Wall Data, Incorporated ("Wall Data") and PACCAR, Inc., and is a former Managing Partner of Ernst & Young's Seattle office. Mr. Fox is also a director of Acxiom Corporation and Service Master Global Holdings. Within the past five years, Mr. Fox has served as a director of FLOW International Corporation, Orbitz Worldwide, and Pendrell Corporation.

QUALIFICATIONS


As a former Managing Partner of Ernst & Young and as former Chief Financial Officer of Wall Data and President and Chief Operating Officer of CyberSafe, Mr. Fox has a deep understanding of financial and accounting matters. Mr. Fox has also served on the boards of several companies over his career, including six public companies. His extensive board experience, including service on various audit committees and finance committees, including chairmanships, will add to the Board's depth and capabilities.

20     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Michael L. Gallagher

BACKGROUND


  Age 70

  Director since 1999

Committees

Nuclear and Operating (Chair)

Corporate Governance

Mr. Gallagher is Chairman Emeritus of Gallagher & Kennedy in Phoenix, Arizona (an Arizona-based law firm). He has held this position since 2001. Mr. Gallagher served as President of Gallagher & Kennedy from 1978 through 2000. Mr. Gallagher is a director of AMERCO, the parent company of U-Haul International, Inc., and chairs its Independent Governance Committee. He is also a Trustee of the Peter Kiewit Foundation.

QUALIFICATIONS


Mr. Gallagher has represented a broad and diverse spectrum of corporate clients. Mr. Gallagher provides guidance and judgment gained through advising senior management and boards of directors on the varied issues regularly considered by the Board. His knowledge and experience from participating on the boards of other publicly-traded and private companies provides valuable perspective to the Company, and his extensive experience addressing corporate governance matters makes him a good fit for our Corporate Governance Committee.

Roy A. Herberger, Jr., Ph.D.

BACKGROUND


  Age 72

  Director since 1992

Committees

Human Resources (Chair)

Corporate Governance

Finance

Dr. Herberger is President Emeritus of the Thunderbird School of Global Management (graduate management school) ("Thunderbird"). He has held this position since November 2004. Dr. Herberger was President of Thunderbird from 1989 until August 2004. Dr. Herberger is also a director of the Apollo Education Group, Inc. ("Apollo Group") and a Trustee for the Mayo Clinic.

QUALIFICATIONS


Dr. Herberger has both management experience and a strong understanding of business and economic trends. He also has extensive corporate board service, which aids in his contributions to the Company's Board. Dr. Herberger's service as the Lead Director and Chair of the Compensation Committee of the Apollo Group, a Fortune 500 company, and his service as a Trustee for the Mayo Clinic, contributes to the strength of the Company's governance and human resources processes.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 21

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Dale E. Klein, Ph.D.

BACKGROUND


  Age 67

  Director since 2010

Committees

Audit

Nuclear and Operating

Dr. Klein served as Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission from July 2006 to May 2009, and thereafter continued as a Commissioner until March 2010. He was Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Defense Programs from November 2001 to July 2006. Dr. Klein is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Associate Director of the Energy Institute at the University of Texas at Austin. He has held these positions since April 2010. Dr. Klein is also Associate Vice Chancellor for Research at the University of Texas System. He has held this position since January 2011. He is also a director of Southern Company.

QUALIFICATIONS


Dr. Klein brings expertise in all aspects of nuclear energy regulation, operation, technology and safety. His broad national and international experience in all aspects of nuclear energy and government brings value to the Board, not only from the perspective of our operations at Palo Verde, but also as the Company and APS look at new opportunities in our evolving utility business.

Humberto S. Lopez

BACKGROUND


  Age 69

  Director since 1995

Committees

Finance (Chair)

Audit

Human Resources

Mr. Lopez is President of HSL Properties, Inc. (real estate development and investment), in Tucson, Arizona. He has held this position since 1975.

QUALIFICATIONS


In addition to management and business knowledge, Mr. Lopez brings extensive investment and real estate development expertise to the Company. His understanding of real estate and associated markets has proven a valuable asset to the Company because of the importance of those markets in Arizona. Mr. Lopez is also familiar with the State's historic economic cycles, which helps the Company plan for future growth and energy needs.

22     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Kathryn L. Munro

BACKGROUND


  Age 66

  Director since 2000

  Lead Director

Committees

Corporate Governance (Chair)

Finance

Human Resources

Ms. Munro is a principal of BridgeWest, LLC (an investment company). She has held this position since July 2003. Ms. Munro was Chairman of BridgeWest,  LLC from February 1999 until July 2003. From 1996 to 1998, Ms. Munro served as Chief Executive Officer of Bank of America's ("BofA") Southwest Banking Group and was President of BofA Arizona from 1994 to 1996. Prior to that, Ms. Munro held a variety of senior positions during her 20-year career with BofA. Ms. Munro is also a director of Knight Transportation, Inc. ("Knight") and Premera Blue Cross. Within the past five years, Ms. Munro was a director of FLOW International Corporation.

Ms. Munro is the Company's Lead Director.

QUALIFICATIONS


As principal of an investment company, and as former Chief Executive Officer of BofA's Southwest Banking Group and President of BofA Arizona, Ms. Munro brings business acumen and financial knowledge to the Company. Her experience with the cycles in Arizona's economy assists a growing infrastructure company like Pinnacle West in accessing capital and meeting its financing needs. Ms. Munro is also an experienced director, currently serving on the boards of Knight and Premera Blue Cross.

Bruce J. Nordstrom

BACKGROUND


  Age 65

  Director since 2000

Committees

Audit (Chair)

Corporate Governance

Nuclear and Operating

Mr. Nordstrom is President of and a certified public accountant at the firm of Nordstrom & Associates, P.C., in Flagstaff, Arizona. He has held this position since 1988.

QUALIFICATIONS


As the president of an accounting firm, Mr. Nordstrom has an extensive accounting, auditing and financial skill set. Additionally, he provides familiarity with principles of risk management and oversight, and the perspectives of customers in the Northern Arizona service territory of APS.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 23

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

David P. Wagener

BACKGROUND


  Age 60

  Director since 2014

Committees

Audit

Finance

Nuclear and Operating

Mr. Wagener is the Managing Partner of Wagener Capital Management, an investment and advisory firm serving utility and private equity companies. He has held this position since June 1995. Mr. Wagener previously held executive positions at Salomon Brothers and Goldman Sachs & Co. Within the past five years, Mr. Wagener served as director of Ormat Technologies. Mr. Wagener served as a director of SunCor Development Company from January 2011 to March 2013.

QUALIFICATIONS


Mr. Wagener brings to the Board over 30 years of experience in the power/energy industry, project finance and investment banking expertise, and knowledge of utility regulation. His participation brings value to the Company and the Board as we address structural and business challenges facing the utility industry.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTEFOR ELECTION OF THE NOMINATED SLATE OF DIRECTORS

24     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

Ownership of Pinnacle West Stock

The following table shows the amount of Pinnacle West common stock owned by the Company's directors, the Named Executive Officers,NEOs, our directors and executive officers as a group, and those persons who beneficially own more than 5% of the Company's common stock. Unless otherwise indicated, each shareholder listed below has sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares beneficially owned.

The address of each of the listed shareholders not otherwise set forth below is P.O. Box 53999, Mail Station 8602, Phoenix, Arizona 85072-3999. Unless otherwise indicated, all information is as of March 12, 2015,9, 2018, the record dateRecord Date for the Annual Meeting.

NAME
 NUMBER OF SHARES
BENEFICIALLY OWNED(1)
(#)

 PERCENT OF
CLASS
(%)

NUMBER OF SHARES
BENEFICIALLY OWNED(1)
(#)

PERCENT OF
CLASS
(%)

Directors:

          

Donald E. Brandt

   188,560   *105,291*

Denis A. Cortese, M.D.

   11,864   *13,968*

Richard P. Fox

   2,923   *6,522*

Michael L. Gallagher

   28,112   *20,475*

Roy A. Herberger, Jr., Ph.D.

   31,156   *36,859*

Dale E. Klein, Ph.D.

   9,834   *15,545*

Humberto S. Lopez

   59,129   *55,904*

Kathryn L. Munro

   30,648   *27,776*

Bruce J. Nordstrom

   30,345   *34,810*

Paula J. Sims

2,416*

David P. Wagener

   4,036   *9,221*

Other Named Executive Officers:

        

Other NEOs:

  

Robert S. Bement

18,226*

Randall K. Edington

   57,848   *37,630*

David P. Falck

   49,670   *52,739*

James R. Hatfield

   57,562   *41,710*

Mark A. Schiavoni

   30,393   *42,888*

All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (22 Persons):

   681,556   *

All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (23 Persons):

596,829*

5% Beneficial Owners:(2)

          

BlackRock, Inc. and certain related entities(3)
40 East 52nd Street
New York, NY 10022



 
  10,396,427   9.40%

Franklin Resources, Inc. and certain related entities(4)
One Franklin Parkway
San Mateo, CA 94403-1906

   6,358,730   5.80%

State Street Corporation and certain related entities(5)
One Lincoln Street
Boston, MA 02111



 
  6,249,722   5.70%

The Vanguard Group Inc.(6)
100 Vanguard Boulevard
Malvern, PA 19355

   8,824,780   7.98%

BlackRock, Inc. and certain related entities(3)
40 East 52nd Street
New York, NY 10055



11,354,30510.20%

State Street Corporation and certain related entities(4)
One Lincoln Street
Boston, MA 02111

5,825,3975.21%

The Vanguard Group Inc.(5)
100 Vanguard Boulevard
Malvern, PA 19355



12,139,06810.86%

*
Represents less than 1% of the outstanding common stock.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 25

Table of Contents

OWNERSHIP OF PINNACLE WEST STOCK
(1)
IncludesIncludes: vested Supplemental RSUs (as defined later in the CD&A)on pages 82-83 of this Proxy Statement) for the Named Executive Officers;NEOs; vested RSUs and stock units ("SU") payable in stock for the directors; and associated dividends payable in

40GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Stock Matters
(2)
The Company makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of the information in the filings reported in footnotes 3-6.3-5.

(3)
BlackRock, Inc. Schedule 13G/A filing, dated January 12, 2015,19, 2018, relating to a parent holding company and certain affiliates, reports beneficial ownership as of 10,396,427December 31, 2017 of 11,354,305 shares, with sole voting power as to 9,452,31810,249,504 shares and sole dispositive power as to 10,396,42711,354,305 shares. The Company maintains normal commercial relationships with BlackRock, Inc. and its subsidiaries. The Company does not consider these relationships to be material.

(4)
Franklin Resources, Inc., Charles B. Johnson, Rupert H. Johnson, Jr., and Franklin Advisers, Inc. Schedule 13G/A filing, dated February 3, 2015, reports beneficial ownership collectively of 6,358,730 shares, with sole voting power as to 6,258,730 shares and sole dispositive power as to 6,358,730 shares in Franklin Advisers, Inc.

(5)
State Street Corporation Schedule 13G filing, dated February 11, 2015,14, 2018, relating to a parent holding company and certain affiliates, reports beneficial ownership as of 6,249,722December 31, 2017 of 5,825,397 shares, with shared voting and dispositive power. The Company maintains normal commercial relationships with State Street Corporation and its subsidiaries. The Company does not consider these relationships to be material.

(6)(5)
The Vanguard Group, Inc. Schedule 13G/A, dated February 9, 2015,2018, reports beneficial ownership as of 8,824,780December 31, 2017 of 12,139,068 shares with shared voting power as to 51,289 shares, sole voting power as to 201,151168,940 shares, shared dispositive power as to 180,751201,540 shares, and sole dispositive power as to 8,644,02911,937,528 shares; Vanguard Fiduciary Trust Company as beneficial owner of 147,851120,713 shares; and Vanguard Investments Australia, Ltd., as beneficial owner of 86,200128,516 shares.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), requires the Company's directors and executive officers, and persons who own more than 10% of the Company's common stock, to file reports of ownership and changes of ownership with the SEC. Based solely on the Company's review of these reports, the Company believes that its directors, executive officers, and greater than 10% beneficial owners complied with their respective Section 16(a) reporting requirements for fiscal year 20142017 on a timely basis.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 41

26     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

Related Party Transactions

The Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for reviewing and approving all transactions with any related party, which consists of any of our directors, director nominees, executive officers, shareholders owning more than 5% of the Company's common stock and, with respect to each of them, their immediate family members and certain entities in which they are an officer or a shareholder, partner, member or other participant who, directly or indirectly, has a substantial ownership interest in or otherwise substantially controls or shares control of such entity (a "Related Party"). This obligation is set forth in writing in our Statement of Policy Regarding Related Party Transactions (the "Policy").

To identify Related Party Transactions, as defined in the Policy, each year the Company requires our directors and officers to complete director and officer questionnaires identifying any transactions with the Company in which a Related Party has an interest. We review Related Party Transactions due to the potential for a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest occurs when an individual's private interest interferes, or appears to interfere, in any way with our interests. The Code of Ethics requires all directors, officers, and employees who may have a potential or apparent conflict of interest to notify the Company's management. In addition, the Policy specifically provides that any Related Party Transaction must be approved or ratified by the Corporate Governance Committee. A "Related Party Transaction" is any transaction or a series of similar transactions in which the Company or any of its subsidiaries is or was a participant, where the amount involved exceeds $120,000 in the aggregate, and in which any Related Party has a direct or indirect material interest, other than:

transactionsTransactions in which rates or charges are fixed in conformity with law or governmental authority (such as APS rates approved by the ACC);

transactionsTransactions in which the rates or charges are determined by competitive bid; or

theThe payment of compensation by the Company to the executive officers, directors, or nominees for directors.

Based on the Policy, SEC rules, and our review, we had no Related Party Transactions in 2014.2017.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 27

42GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Report of the Human Resources Committee Report

The Human Resources Committee*Committee submitted the following report:

The Human Resources Committee is composed of non-employee directors, each of whom is independent as defined by NYSE rules and the Company's Director Independence Standards.

In accordance with SEC rules, the Human Resources Committee discussed and reviewed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis with management and, based on those discussions and review, the Human Resources Committee recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement.

HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE CHAIR
Roy A. Herberger, Jr., Ph.D.
 HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Denis A. Cortese, M.D.
Richard P. Fox
Humberto S. Lopez
Kathryn L. Munro
*
Mr. Fox joined the Human Resources Committee after this report was approved by the Human Resources Committee.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 43


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Compensation Discussion and Analysis ("CD&A")
 

Named Executive Officers

Our NEOs for 2017 were:

Donald E. Brandt
Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of PNW and APS
​ 
James R. Hatfield
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of PNW and APS
​ 
Robert S. Bement
Executive Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer of Palo Verde Generating Station, APS
​ 
Randall K. Edington
Former Executive Vice President and Advisor to the Chief Executive Officer of APS(1)
​ 
David P. Falck
Executive Vice President, Law, PNW
​ 
Mark A. Schiavoni
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of APS

(1)
Mr. Edington retired on March 22, 2017

44GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents


Executive Compensation

Executive Summary

Business Overview

Pinnacle West is an electric utility holding company based in Phoenix, Arizona, one of the fastest growing metropolitan areas in the United States. Through our principal subsidiary, APS, we provide retail electricity service to approximately 1.2 million customers in 11 of Arizona's 15 counties.

APS is a vertically-integrated, regulated utility company that maintains full operational control of several power plants, including Palo Verde Generating Station, a nuclear power plant and the country's largest power producer of any kind for more than 25 years.

Plants for which APS has full operational control and responsibility include:

GRAPHIC

(1)
Net generation rating

Palo Verde is a significant source of our energy supply and while we share ownership of this plant with six other utilities, APS retains full day-to-day operational responsibility. This responsibility includes regulatory responsibility to the NRC. The size of Palo Verde and the complexity of running a nuclear plant of this magnitude requires a highly specialized and experienced management team.

Between our CEO and our Executive Vice Presidents, we have more than 200 combined years of experience in the energy industry, including relevant specialized nuclear experience. This highly skilled team has driven strong performance and value creation for our shareholders. Given our need for specialized experience within our organization, we maintain strong succession planning practices and are focused on developing and retaining talent within our Company. Our Board's focus on attracting, developing and retaining highly skilled and experienced executives is a core consideration in structuring our executive compensation programs.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 45


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Building Shareholder Value Through Operational Excellence and a Sustainable Energy Future

As Arizona's largest and longest-serving electric company, we're proud of our heritage and performance. We also recognize the implications of new technologies and growing customer expectations, which are leading to changes at our Company and in our industry. Our strategy for building long-term value is driven by our core operational excellence and financial strength while also capitalizing on technology advances that promote a sustainable energy future:






Executing on our financial and
operational objectives


Ensuring a sustainable energy future

Sustaining our operational excellence

Maintaining our financial strength

Leveraging economic growth

Integrating technology to modernize the grid

Taking steps to address rate design

2017 Rate Review Order.    As an Arizona-based regulated electric utility company, APS periodically submits requests to the ACC for a comprehensive review of our electricity rates. Approval of a rate adjustment enables us to generate revenue with which we fund improvements in our operations and investments that benefit our customers. In June 2016, we initiated our first rate review in five years, and in August 2017, after working with the ACC Staff and key stakeholders, we received approval for our comprehensive rate review. This approval allows for a 3% increase in overall revenues, as well as additional funds for our AZ Sun II rooftop solar program, a refund of surplus of energy efficiency program funds to customers, increased funding for programs assisting limited-income customers, and other key investments in Arizona's energy future. This was an important milestone for us as it allows us to continue making efficient, cost-effective investments while providing safe, reliable service for our customers.

46GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Track Record of Delivering Results

Our management team has maintained a focus on our core business of operating and investing in a vertically-integrated electric utility. Under the leadership of the senior officer team, since 2009 Palo Verde Generating Station has become one of the top performing nuclear power plants in the U.S., and we have seen strong, sustained gains in shareholder returns and significant improvements in our credit rating.


Performance Transformation

GRAPHIC

(1)
TSR reflects dividend-adjusted share price between the periods of April 30, 2002-April 30, 2009 and April 30, 2009-December 31, 2017.

During 2017 we continued to deliver strong performance and hit key milestones:

Total shareholder value increased $1.1 billion in 2017, $2.8 billion over the last three years, and $5.2 billion over the last five years;

Our TSR for 2017 was 12.7%; since May 1, 2009, Pinnacle West has delivered an annualized TSR of 18.8%, exceeding the annualized returns of the S&P 1500 Electric Utilities Index of 11.8% and the S&P 500 Index of 16.2%;

Pinnacle West increased its dividend for the 6th straight year, by 6% in 2017;

2017 was another successful year for APS with regard to safety, remaining in the top decile for safety performance in the U.S. electric utilities industry; and

Pinnacle West obtained a "Leadership" rating from CDP for climate change and water management — one of only two U.S. utilities to earn the highest rating in both categories.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 47


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Shareholder Engagement and Board Responsiveness

Our Philosophy and Objectives.2017 Shareholder Engagement.    We have an established shareholder outreach program to maintain a dialogue with our shareholders, and feedback from our shareholders informs our Human Resources Committee's (for purposes of this CD&A, the "Committee") actions. We were disappointed with the level of shareholder support for the 2017 say-on-pay vote, and during the fall following our 2017 Annual Meeting:

We specifically sought direct feedback on our compensation program from shareholders;

Our Lead Director and Human Resources Committee member, Kathy Munro, participated in a number of the meetings with our shareholders to receive their direct feedback and share it with the Board; and

We contacted the holders of approximately 50% of shares outstanding and met with the holders of approximately 40% of shares outstanding, including many of our largest institutional shareholders as well as smaller holders to collect a range of perspectives.

2017 Board Responsiveness.    As in prior years, the feedback received from shareholders during this outreach was an important input into the Committee's and Board's review process. While many of the investors that we spoke to believed our compensation structure was well-aligned with performance, we received valuable feedback about how we could improve the program and make it more transparent.

Following thoughtful discussion of shareholder feedback and a review of the compensation program, the Committee made several changes that it believes align with feedback received and further support our commitment to pay-for-performance.

48GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents


Executive Compensation

2017 Shareholder Feedback and Changes Made in Response






Shareholder Feedback Themes
Human Resources Committee Actions
We can provide better and simpler disclosure

Streamlined our compensation-related disclosure

Provided additional disclosure around our goal setting processes and Committee decisions

Investors are highly focused on the performance-based aspects of our program

Increased the proportion of performance shares in our CEO's and Executive Vice Presidents' 2018 long-term incentive awards from 60% to 70%

Revised 2018 metrics in certain key business units to better align with our priorities and emphasize top quartile performance and/or improve on historical trends

Earnings goals set for 2018 reflect the August 2017 approval of our comprehensive rate review and represent meaningful year-over-year increases

Adopted a formal clawback policy covering short- and long-term incentive awards

Clarified how our performance metrics support and align with our business strategy (pages 54-56)

Questions about retention awards to our CEO

Provided additional disclosure regarding the 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award made to our CEO in 2017, including a more detailed discussion of the rationale for the award and the specific goals that must be achieved for payout to occur (page 65)

Provided additional information regarding our succession planning process and how our limited use of performance-contingent awards supports Pinnacle West's continued success (pages 20 and 65)

These changes follow several prior changes to our program in recent years as we seek to align our compensation structure with the evolution of our business and the feedback from our shareholders. Recent changes include:

The Committee limited its use of discretion to adjust the CEO's annual incentive awards solely to the occurrence of unanticipated events beginning in 2015;

We formally introduced detailed business unit metrics to the CEO's incentive plan to tie the incentive directly to overall operational performance and financial results beginning in 2015;

We increased the stock ownership guideline for the CEO to 5x base salary starting in 2016; and

We increased the proportion of our annual long-term equity awards allocated to performance-based measures from 55% to 60% beginning in 2016.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 49


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

2017 Compensation Design

For 2017, the Company's core executive compensation program consisted of the following key components:












Pay Element
Measurement
Period


Performance
Link


Description
​  Base SalaryCashSalary is based on experience, performance and responsibilities and is benchmarked to a peer group and market survey data to align with competitive levels.
​​​​
​  AnnualEarnings

CEO: 62.5%
NEOs: 50.0%
Universal measure of business financial performance; encourages achievement of bottom-line earnings growth goals.
​  ​​​​
​  IncentivesCash1��yearBusiness Unit
Performance
(1)

CEO: 37.5%
NEOs: 50.0%
Pre-established operational business unit performance goals that include safety, customer satisfaction and operational quality and efficiency metrics.
​​​​
​  PerformanceRelative
TSR


50%
Relative measures incentivize sustained
​  ​​​​
​  Long-Term
Incentives

Shares

60%(2)
3 yearsRelative
Operational
Performance
(3)

50%
shareholder value creation and strong performance on operational benchmarks.
​  ​​​​
​  Restricted Stock Units

40%(2)
Vest ratably over4 yearsStock PriceEncourages retention; value dependent upon share price appreciation and four-year vesting to encourage retention.
​​​​
​  BenefitsWe provide benefits, including pension and deferred compensation programs, change of control agreements and limited perquisites, designed to attract and retain our executive talent.
(1)
Based on the following business units, as applicable: Corporate Resources (Communications, Finance/Accounting, Human Resources, Information Technology, Legal, Public Policy, Resource Management, Supply Chain, Sustainability), Palo Verde, Customer Service, Fossil Generation, and Transmission and Distribution. For additional details regarding our goal-setting process and the specific business unit goals for 2017, please refer to pages 54 and 59.

(2)
Long-term incentives award mix changed to 70% performance share awards and 30% RSU awards starting in 2018 for the CEO and Executive Vice Presidents.


50GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation
(3)
Based on the following benchmarks: Customer reliability, customer-to-employee improvement ratio, OSHA all-incident injury rate, nuclear generation capacity factors, coal generation capacity factors; all of which are based on comparisons to companies selected by independent, objective data providers. For additional details regarding our goal-setting process and the specific relative long-term operational goals for 2017 performance share awards, please refer to page 63.

Pay at Risk.    The Company believes that a significant portion of each NEO's total compensation opportunity should reflect both upside potential and downside risk.

The charts below illustrate the strong emphasis that we place on performance-based, shareholder-aligned incentive compensation:

2017 CEO
Total Compensation
88% at risk
2017 Average for Other NEOs'
Total Compensation
67% at risk

GRAPHIC


GRAPHIC

Key 2017 Compensation Decisions

For the year ended December 31, 2017, the Committee approved the following compensation decisions for our NEOs:

2017 Base Salary Adjustments.  For fiscal 2017, the Committee increased Mr. Brandt's salary by 3%; Messrs. Hatfield, Bement, Falck and Schiavoni received base salary increases of between 3.2%-4.4%.

2017 Annual Incentive Award.  Our 2017 annual incentive performance goals were set within the context of the business and economic circumstances known at that time. As a regulated utility, we are generally unable to adjust our base retail prices outside of a rate case. As such, in years in which we do not expect a retail rate adjustment, changes in our revenues over the previous year would depend largely on factors beyond our control, such as customer growth, weather and customer usage patterns.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 51


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award.  As previously disclosed in advance of our 2017 Annual Meeting, in March 2017 the Committee granted the CEO a two-year, performance-based cash award ("2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award"). This award is designed to incent Mr. Brandt, a retirement eligible CEO, to remain in his current role while further emphasizing the Board's succession planning priorities. Given the specialized skill sets required of the senior management team in our industry and our Company, a major priority of the CEO is to ensure that the Company's succession strategy and workforce development pipeline is sufficiently robust and continues to be effective. The Committee believed that this award was critical to retaining a retirement-eligible CEO for what was perceived to be a multiple-year succession planning period. The 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award is subject to clearly-defined performance goals. The performance goals, as detailed further on page 65, are structured to incentivize continued financial performance while ensuring that succession- and development-related milestones are met. As discussed further below, for Mr. Brandt to fully realize this award, return on equity, earnings, and succession and development hurdles must be achieved in 2017 and 2018.

Compensation Governance

Our executive compensation program is overseen by the Committee. Through ongoing shareholder engagement and regular assessment of our compensation governance practices, we seek to continue to improve our compensation governance:








Compensation Governance



​  GRAPHICShareholder feedback informs compensation program design
GRAPHICSubstantial proportion of target compensationis at risk (88% for the CEO and 67% for other NEOs)
​  GRAPHICPerformance shares are 100% tied torelativeperformance (50% on relative TSR and 50% on relative operational metrics) and require 90th percentile performance for maximum payouts
GRAPHICNo excise tax gross-up provisions in new or materially amended Change of Control Agreements with our NEOs
​  GRAPHICAnti-hedging and anti-pledging policy
GRAPHICStock ownership guidelines for all NEOs (all NEOs' actual ownership levels exceed guidelines)

52GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Our Philosophy and Objectives

Our compensation program is designed to be straightforwardtransparent with a clear emphasis on putting pay at risk and retaining key executives. Our executive compensation philosophy incorporates the following core principles and objectives:

Alignment with Shareholder InterestsInterests..  We structure our annual cash and long-term equity incentive compensation to put pay at risk and reward business performance. Payouts under these plans are tied predominantly to the Company's total return to shareholders, stock price, earnings, and the achievement of measurable and sustainable business and individual goals, so that executives' interests are tied to the success of the Company and are aligned with those of our shareholders.

Key Management RetentionRetention..  We structure our program to provide compensation at levels necessary to attract, engage and retain an experienced management team who have the skill sets and industry experience to succeed in our complex operating and regulatory environment, including operating the Palo Verde the nation's largest nuclear power station,Generating Station, and towho can provide consistently strong operating and financial results.

28     

GRAPHIC Executive Compensation Components
|2015 Proxy Statement

Base Salary

Base salaries are set at competitive levels to attract and retain qualified, experienced executives. Salary levels are based on experience, performance and responsibilities, and benchmarked to a peer group and market survey data to align with competitive levels. The Committee reviews competitive salary information and individual salaries for executive officers on an annual basis. In considering individual salaries, the Committee reviews the scope of job responsibilities, individual contributions, business performance, retention concerns, and current compensation compared to market practices. In setting base salaries, the Committee also considers that base salary is used as the basis for calculating annual incentive awards.

In December of 2016, the Committee, based on the considerations set forth above, made the following adjustments to the base salaries of the following NEOs for fiscal year 2017:

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Name
 2016 Base Salary
 2017 Base Salary
 
​  Mr. Brandt$1,315,000$1,355,000
 Mr. Hatfield $620,000 $640,000 
​  Mr. Bement$575,000$600,000
 Mr. Falck $565,000 $585,000 
​  Mr. Schiavoni$680,000$710,000

Mr. Edington retired on March 22, 2017 and his salary remained at $1,100,000 for 2017.

Annual Cash Incentives

Our annual cash incentives are strongly performance-based and designed to both reward achievement of pre-determined annual performance objectives that are critical to our business operations and to attract and retain qualified, experienced executives. Performance for NEOs is measured based on relevant and objective earnings and business unit metrics.

CEO.  For fiscal year 2017, Mr. Brandt participated in the CEO Incentive Plan.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 53


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Other NEOs.   Messrs. Hatfield, Falck and Schiavoni participated in the APS 2017 Annual Incentive Award Plan (the "APS Incentive Plan") and Messrs. Bement and Edington participated in the APS 2017 Annual Incentive Award Plan for Palo Verde Employees (the "Palo Verde Incentive Plan").

The APS Incentive Plan and the Palo Verde Incentive Plan are collectively referred to as the "APS Incentive Plans," and the APS Incentive Plans and the CEO Incentive Plan are collectively referred to as the "2017 Incentive Plans". In December 2016, the Committee approved the CEO Incentive Plan and the Board, on the recommendation of the Committee, approved the APS Incentive Plans.


2017 Incentive Plan Opportunities

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 NEO


 Threshold
(% of Salary)


 Target
(% of Salary)


 Maximum
(% of Salary)


 2017 Actual
(% of Salary)


 2017 Actual
($)


 
​  Mr. Brandt50%125%(1)200%170.8%$2,314,340
 Mr. Hatfield 17.5% 70% 140% 105.3% $673,994 
​  Mr. Bement18.75%75%150%132.0%$792,000
 Mr. Edington 16.25% 65% 130% 25.4% $279,264(2) 
​  Mr. Falck16.25%65%130%98.5%$576,155
 Mr. Schiavoni 18.75% 75% 150% 114.6% $813,633 
(1)
Reflects a representative target amount under the CEO Incentive Plan — the Committee structured the CEO Incentive Plan so that if Pinnacle West earnings came in at the mid-point between threshold and maximum amounts and each business unit achieved its target performance levels, Mr. Brandt would receive an incentive award equal to 125% of his 2017 base salary.

(2)
Mr. Edington retired on March 22, 2017, and under the terms of the Palo Verde Incentive Plan, he received a pro-rated award for his service during the year.

Assessing Performance and Payouts

The Board oversees the Company's business strategy. The Company maintains a rigorous performance goal-setting process wherein goals are set based on our annual business planning process and reviewed for relevance and appropriate alignment with our business strategy. This goal-setting approach is integrated into our performance tracking and business reporting, providing a clear line of sight across the Company on an ongoing basis.

The Committee annually reviews the metrics utilized under the annual cash incentive plans to ensure that they remain relevant, with target performance goals set at levels that are intended to be challenging without incentivizing inappropriate risk taking.

Individual awards under our annual cash incentive plans are based on the achievement of relevant and objective earnings and business unit goals, which tie payouts directly to core measures of business performance and key operational business unit results and ultimately serve to enhance shareholder value.

54GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation


2017 Annual Incentive Plan Component Summary

GRAPHIC

(1)
Weightings are shown as a percentage of total incentive opportunity

Earnings Component Target Setting

In designing the annual cash incentives, the Committee sets earnings levels based on a reasonable range of expectations for the year, while taking into account prior year performance and economic conditions.

Due to the regulated nature of the utility industry, earnings growth is impacted by the base rates approved by regulators. Given that the rates we charge customers are generally fixed for several years, our revenue streams don't increase in a linear year-over-year fashion. As a result, our annual earnings are impacted by our ability to manage costs associated with our operations and investments while our revenues typically remain relatively flat in years following a rate adjustment. Furthermore, planned outages, weather patterns and varying electricity demand can lead to cyclical earnings fluctuations. These factors are considered in our annual business planning and ultimately reflected in the earnings targets that are approved by the Committee.

2017 Earnings Goals.    For fiscal year 2017, the Committee set threshold, target and maximum Pinnacle West and APS earnings goals above prior year goals, however, as discussed previously, target earnings were set relatively flat to achieved earnings for purposes of the 2017 Incentive Plans since at the time 2017 goals were set, the outcome of APS's rate review was still pending and the timing of the decision and magnitude of impact on Pinnacle West's revenues was as yet undetermined. As a result, fiscal 2017 earnings goals were set based on the expectation of earnings in the context of the business and economic conditions at that time, and did not take into account any projection of revenue and earnings in a new rate environment.

The August 2017 approval of our comprehensive rate review is reflected in earnings goals set for 2018. Given the increase in revenues enabled by the rate adjustment, 2018 earnings goals represent meaningful year-over-year increases in the earnings metrics in our annual incentive plans.

Business Unit Component Target Setting

The business unit metrics component of our annual plan ensures that our compensation program appropriately focuses our employees on core measures of overall Company health and performance. Our use of business unit metrics in our NEOs' incentive plans promotes our

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 55


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

continued success as a safe, sustainable, and overall well-run vertically-integrated and regulated electric utility.

Determination Process.    The determination of business unit metrics and targets is a year-long, multi-step process guided by our strategic priorities. The Board oversees the Company's business strategy. The Company maintains a rigorous performance goal-setting process wherein goals are set based on our annual business planning process and reviewed for relevance and appropriate alignment with our business strategy. Individual business unit targets are developed using a variety of methods depending on the metric under consideration, including internal trends, external considerations, opportunities to improve performance, and use of industry benchmark data. Targets are intended to incentivize performance while still being attainable. The business unit metrics and targets are then shared and discussed with the Committee and the Board before final metrics and targets are approved by the Committee and the Board.

GRAPHIC

Under the business unit components of the 2017 Incentive Plans, the range of potential achievement for each business unit metric was zero to 200% of the target level. In addition to a target level, some of the performance measures also provided for a threshold level (equal to 50% of target) and a maximum level (equal to 200% of target). Performance above the maximum level resulted in achievement of 200% of target. If performance fell between threshold and target or between target and maximum, linear interpolation was used to determine the actual percentage of target performance achieved.

2017 Business Unit Goals.    The 2017 Incentive Plans measured NEOs on pre-established business unit performance in up to five key areas: Corporate Resources, Customer Service, Fossil Generation, Palo Verde, and Transmission and Distribution. Within each of these categories are specific metrics designed to incentivize achievements in operational excellence, customer satisfaction, safety and employee performance, and cost management, ultimately resulting in shareholder value creation.

The CEO was evaluated against metrics within each of these five categories to tie the CEO's incentive to overall operational performance of the Company, and not to emphasize any one unit's performance over the others. Other NEOs were evaluated based on performance in the business units that correlate to their responsibilities.

See "Business Unit Components Under the 2017 Incentive Plans" on page 59 for additional details regarding the metrics, targets and 2017 achievement levels for each business unit. As discussed above, we have revised our 2018 metrics in certain key business units to more closely align with our priorities and emphasize top quartile performance and/or improve on

56GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

historical trends, with year-over-year backtesting conducted to ensure that we are maintaining or increasing the rigor of our goals.

2017 Annual Cash Incentive Outcomes

CEO Incentive Plan

Earnings Component.    For Mr. Brandt, the earnings portion of the annual cash incentive was determined based on PNW earnings. The component was weighted at 62.5% of the award, with 25% of the award (50% of base salary) earned based on achievement of threshold performance. The CEO Incentive Plan provided that if the threshold earnings number is not met, no incentive payment will be awarded, regardless of business unit performance.

Under the terms of the CEO Incentive Plan, earnings calculations are made excluding the impact of rate adjustments related to actions of the ACC within the plan year, and the Committee evaluates the impacts of unusual or non-recurring adjustments on actual earnings and may make adjustments to reflect such impacts. As such, the Committee adjusted the Pinnacle West earnings number to exclude primarily the impacts of the rate adjustment and the impact of the 2017 Tax Act. The net effect of these adjustments was to reduce Pinnacle West earnings from $488.5 million to $475.4 million.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Performance (in millions)
 Metric
 Threshold
 Midpoint
 Maximum
 2017 Actual
 

 


PNW Earnings


 


$390


 


$440(1)


 


$490


 


$475.4


 
(1)
Reflects a representative target amount under the CEO Incentive Plan — the Committee structured the CEO Incentive Plan so that if Pinnacle West earnings came in at the mid-point between threshold and maximum amounts and each business unit achieved its target performance levels, Mr. Brandt would receive an incentive award equal to 125% of his 2017 base salary.

Business Unit Component.    As noted above, Mr. Brandt was evaluated against metrics within each of the five business unit areas to tie his incentive to overall operational performance. The business unit component of the CEO Incentive Plan was weighted at 37.5% of the award.

See "Business Unit Components Under the 2017 Incentive Plans" for detailed goals and achievement levels for each business unit.


2017 CEO Incentive Plan Results

The metrics, weightings, and results for Mr. Brandt under the 2017 CEO Incentive Plan are outlined below:

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   37.5% Business Unit Performance
 NEO


 62.5% PNW
Earnings



 Corporate
Resources


 Customer
Service


 Fossil
Generation


 Palo
Verde


 Transmission /
Distribution


 2017
Total


 
​  Mr. Brandt171%(1)142%(2)94%160%190%174%152%
 Weighting (62.5%) (7.5%) (7.5%) (7.5%) (7.5%) (7.5%) (37.5%) 
(1)
As a percentage of midpoint; and as noted above, midpoint reflects a representative target amount under the CEO Incentive Plan — the Committee structured the CEO Incentive Plan so that if Pinnacle West earnings came in at the mid-point between threshold and maximum amounts and each business unit achieved its target performance levels, Mr. Brandt would receive an incentive award equal to 125% of his 2017 base salary.

(2)
Reflects the average of the following Corporate Resources business units: Communications, Finance/Accounting, Human Resources, Information Technology, Legal, Public Policy, Resource Management, Supply Chain, Sustainability.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 57


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Mr. Brandt's incentive award was determined exclusively based on the metrics set forth in the CEO Incentive Plan. Other than the earnings adjustments previously discussed that were contemplated by the terms of the CEO Incentive Plan, the Committee did not exercise any discretion to make adjustments to the award based on unanticipated events.

APS Incentive Plans

Earnings Component.    For all NEOs other than the CEO, the earnings portion of the annual cash incentive was weighted at 50% of the award and determined based on APS earnings. The APS Incentive Plan provided that if the threshold earnings number is not met, no incentive payment will be awarded, regardless of business unit performance.

The Palo Verde Incentive Plan provided that if the threshold earnings number is not met, the APS portion of the incentive payment will not be awarded. In addition, under the Palo Verde Incentive Plan, Palo Verde's overall business unit performance was required to achieve at least 100% of the target level for 2017 before Messrs. Edington and Bement could receive any payout under the APS earnings portion.

Under the terms of the APS Incentive Plans, the Committee may adjust plan targets or incentive results and may make other changes to the plan deemed necessary or appropriate due to unanticipated events that arise during the performance period or unusual or non-recurring adjustments on actual earnings that arise during the performance period, including without limitation, ACC rate-related impacts on earnings. As such, the Committee adjusted the APS earnings number to exclude primarily the impacts of the rate adjustment and the impact of the 2017 Tax Act. The net effect of these adjustments was to reduce APS earnings from $504.3 million to $483.8 million.

 

 

  Performance (in millions)
​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 

 

 

Metric


 Threshold
 Target
 Maximum
 2017 Actual

 

 

APS Earnings

   

$403

   

$453

   

$503

   

$483.8

  

Business Unit Component.    As indicated above, NEOs other than the CEO are evaluated based on performance in the business units that correlate to their responsibilities. The business unit component for each NEO other than the CEO was weighted at 50%, with multiple business unit results averaged for applicable NEOs. The APS Incentive Plans allow the Committee to make adjustments for individual performance, and the Committee may exercise discretion under the APS Incentive Plans due to unanticipated events that might arise during the performance period. The Committee did not make any such adjustments for the NEOs in 2017.

See "Business Unit Components Under the 2017 Incentive Plans" for detailed goals and achievement levels for each business unit.

58GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation


2017 APS Incentive Plan Results

The metrics, weightings, and results for Messrs. Hatfield, Falck, and Schiavoni under the APS Incentive Plan, and Messrs. Bement and Edington under the Palo Verde Incentive Plan, are outlined below:

​     50% APS  50% Business Unit Performance
​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 
​   NEO
 Earnings
 Corporate
 Customer
 Fossil
 Palo
 Transmission /
 2017
​       Resources
 Service
 Generation
 Verde
 Distribution
 Total
​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 
​   Mr. Hatfield  162%  139%(1)          139% 
  Weighting   (50.0%)   (50.0%)                   (50.0%)  
​   Mr. Bement  162%        190%    190% 
  Weighting   (50.0%)               (50.0%)       (50.0%)  
​   Mr. Edington(2)  162%        190%    190% 
  Weighting   (50.0%)               (50.0%)       (50.0%)  
​   Mr. Falck  162%  141%(3)          141% 
  Weighting   (50.0%)   (50.0%)                   (50.0%)  
​   Mr. Schiavoni  162%  146%(4)  94%  160%    174%  144% 
  Weighting   (50.0%)   (12.5%)   (12.5%)   (12.5%)       (12.5%)   (50.0%)  
(1)
Reflects the average of the following Corporate Resources business units: Finance/Accounting, Human Resources, Information Technology.

(2)
Mr. Edington retired on March 22, 2017, and under the terms of the Palo Verde Incentive Plan, he received a pro-rated award for his service during the year.

(3)
Reflects the following Corporate Resources business unit: Legal.

(4)
Reflects the average of the following Corporate Resources business units: Resource Management, Supply Chain, Sustainability.

Business Unit Components under the 2017 Incentive Plans

The following table summarizes the metrics used for each business unit, in addition to individual weightings, targets, and 2017 results. The percentage of target performance achieved reflects the comparison of our actual achievement of a particular measure for 2017 to the target established for that measure.

  Business Unit Measures
and Weighting


 Measure
 Target
 Actual
Results


 % of Target
Performance
Achieved



  Corporate Resources
 
​   (Communications; Finance/Accounting; Human Resources; Legal; Public Policy; Supply Chain)
141% 
  Employees (15%)   OSHA Recordables(1) (15%)   2   5   0%  
  Operational Excellence (60%)   Average of All Business Unit Results(2) (60%)   100%   154.6%   155%  
  Shareholder Value (25%)   Total Corporate Resources O&M Budget (25%)   Budget   1.9% Under Budget   193%  
​   Corporate Resources (Information Technology)
135% 
  Employees (15%)   OSHA Recordables(1) (15%)   2   5   0%  
  Operational Excellence (70%)   Average of All Business Unit Results(2) (60%)   100%   154.6%   155%  
      Capital Project Execution (10%)   90%   91.43%   129%  
  Shareholder Value (15%)   Total Corporate Resources O&M Budget (15%)   Budget   1.9% Under Budget   193%  

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 59


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation


  Business Unit Measures
and Weighting


 Measure
 Target
 Actual
Results


 % of Target
Performance
Achieved



​   Corporate Resources (Resource Management)
155% 
  Employees (15%)   OSHA Recordables(1) (15%)   2   5   0%  
      ERMG Violations (20%)   5   4   150%  
  Operational Excellence (60%)   Passing EIM T-55 Hourly Balancing Test (20%)   90%   94.2%   184%  
      Transmission Unreserved Use (20%)   $150K   $65.0   200%  
  Shareholder Value (25%)   Total Corporate Resources O&M Budget (25%)   Budget   1.9% Under Budget   193%  
​   Corporate Resources (Sustainability)
142% 
  Employees (15%)   OSHA Recordables(1) (15%)   2   5   0%  
  Operational Excellence (70%)   Average of All Business Unit Results(2) (60%)   100%   154.6%   155%  
      Capital Project Execution (10%)   90%   96.77%   200%  
  Shareholder Value (15%)   Total Corporate Resources O&M Budget (15%)   Budget   1.9% Under Budget   193%  
​   Palo Verde(3)(4)
190% 
      Reactivity Management (4%)   95   97.4   200%  
  Employees (22.5%)   Site Safety Index(5) (5%)   5 G/W; No Red   6 of 6 G   200%  
      INPO Recordable Rate (5%)   £ 0.110   0.256   0%  
      Collective Radiation Exposure (3.5%)   70   55.02   200%  
      Accreditation (5%)   Split Vote   Unanimous   200%  
      Site Capacity Factor (20%)   92%   93.8   200%  
  Operational Excellence (30%)   Spring Outage Days (5%)   £ 31   30D 23H   200%  
      Fall Outage Days (5%)   £ 31   30D 18H   200%  
      Equipment Reliability Index (5%)   93   98   200%  
      Corrective Action Performance Scorecard (CAP)(5) (5%)   4 G/W; No Red   5 G/W   200%  
  Performance Improvement (27.5%)   Site Clock Resets (Less Safety) (5%)   1   0   200%  
      Site Operational Focus Indicator(5) (of 8) (7.5%)   7 G/W; No Red   8 of 8 G/W   200%  
      Continuous Improvement Process (5%)   800   1,018   200%  
  Shareholder Value (20%)   O&M Budget (15%)   ³ $1.25M Under Budget & 10 Months Forecast Cashflow Performance ±5%   $6.2M Under & 12 months   200%  
      Capital Budget (5%)   £ Budget & 10 Months Forecast Cashflow Performance ±10%   $8.5M Under & 12 months   200%  
​   Customer Service
94% 
  Employees (15%)   OSHA Recordable Incidents (15%)   1   3   0%  
      Self-Service Transactions per Customer (20%)   8.53   8.66   165%  
  Operational Excellence (45%)   Average Speed to Answer (in seconds) (10%)   157   234   0%  
      Percentage of Billing To-Dos Completed by Day 3 (15%)   93.71%   64.95%   0%  

60GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation
  Business Unit Measures
and Weighting


 Measure
 Target
 Actual
Results


 % of Target
Performance
Achieved



  Customer Value (15%)   Customer Outcome Satisfaction – CCT (15%)   85%   82.6%   76%  
  Shareholder Value (25%)   Customer Service O&M Budget (25%)   Budget   2.6% Under Budget   200%  
​   Fossil Generation
160% 
  Employees (15%)   OSHA Recordable Incidents (15%)   6   4   200%  
      Fleet Summertime Equivalent Availability Factor(6) (20%)   91.8%   87.44%   0%  
  Operational Excellence (70%)   G&O Start-up Reliability (20%)   98.0%   99.05%   200%  
      Capital Project Execution (20%)   95%   98.44%   200%  
      Fossil EH&S Repeat Deficiencies (10%)   16   7   200%  
  Shareholder Value (15%)   Net Operating Expense (15%)   Budget   2.4% Under Budget   200%  
​   Transmission & Distribution
174% 
      OSHA Recordable Incidents (15%)   18   15   175%  
  Employees (30%)
   Human Performance Event Clock Resets (15%)   34   31   160%  
      System Average Interruption Duration Index ("SAIDI") (15%)   82   74.53   200%  
  Operational Excellence (50%)
   System Average Interruption Frequency Index ("SAIFI") – Clear Weather (15%)   0.61   0.54   200%  
      Capital Project Execution (20%)   95%   97.5%   183%  
  Shareholder Value (20%)   Transmission & Distribution O&M Budget (20%)   Budget   0.7% Under Budget   135%  
(1)
OSHA Recordable Incidents metric is a rollup of all Corporate Resources business areas.

(2)
Average includes: Transmission & Distribution, Customer Service, Fossil Generation and Palo Verde.

(3)
If APS earnings threshold is not met, there can still be a payout under the Business Unit performance component.

(4)
Incentive budget forecast metric exclusions — One-time items that can be anticipated but timing and/or impact are unknown at the time incentive goals are set and that are outside of the control of Palo Verde should be excluded from the budget forecast metric incentive results.

(5)
The Site Safety Index, CAP Scorecard and Site Operational Focus Indicator are 6-month goals that are actualized and funded on June 30th and December 31st.

(6)
Summertime Equivalent Availability Factor (EAF) calculations from June-September.

Long-Term Incentives

Our long-term equity incentive compensation is intended to align the interests of executives and our shareholders and increase long-term shareholder value while also offering an award opportunity that helps attract and retain qualified, experienced executives. The Company currently uses two types of equity awards: performance shares and RSUs. Beginning with the 2016 awards, our annual long-term equity awards have been granted 60% to performance-based measures and 40% to time-based vesting. For 2018, we have increased the grant allocation to 70% performance-based measures and 30% time-based vesting for our CEO and our Executive Vice Presidents.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 61


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Our Compensation Components. 2017 Long-Term Equity Incentive Component Summary
    At

Vehicle

% of Target
Equity Pay Mix

Measurement
Period

Performance Link

​  


Performance


Relative TSR (50%)
​  ​​​​

​  

Shares

60%(1)3 yearsRelative Operational Performance (50%)
​​​​

RSUs

40%(1)

Vest ratably
over 4 years

Stock Price

(1)
Long-term incentives award mix changed to 70% performance share awards and 30% RSU awards starting in 2018 for the 2014 Annual Meeting, our shareholders overwhelmingly approvedCEO and Executive Vice Presidents.

To determine the amount of performance share and RSU awards, the Committee first establishes a target compensation value for each officer that it wants to deliver through long-term equity award opportunities. The Committee considers various factors, including the retention value of our executive officers. As a result, while the Human Resourcestotal compensation package, the long-term equity component in light of the competitive environment, and individual performance. The Committee (foralso considers target value in light of the Company's achievement of earnings targets and overall performance. Once the target value is established, the Committee determines the number of shares subject to the awards by reference to the then-current market value of the Company's common stock and then allocated the 2017 awards 60% to performance shares and 40% to RSUs.

The 2017 awards to the NEOs were as follows:

​  

Name


Performance
Shares – 60%
(#)



RSUs – 40%
(#)


Grant Date Value
($)(1)


 

Mr. Brandt

33,09622,064$4,400,113

 

Mr. Hatfield

 6,770 4,516 $900,284 

​  

Mr. Bement

4,5143,012$600,349

 

Mr. Edington

 3,010 2,008 $400,286 

​  

Mr. Falck

5,6423,764$750,316

 

Mr. Schiavoni

 8,274 5,516 $1,100,028 
(1)
For purposes of this CD&A,table, Grant Date Value is equal to the "Committee") reviewed and discussed developments in executive compensation practices, no modifications were madetotal number of shares multiplied by the Company's closing stock price on the date of grant ($79.77).

62GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Performance Shares

We granted performance shares to our programNEOs in 2014. February 2017 for a three-year performance period (the "2017 Performance Shares"), with two distinct elements — relative TSR and relative operational performance against five metrics.

​  

Metrics


Weighting
Rationale &
Performance Link


​  

Relative TSR

Measures the Company's TSR performance against:

S&P 1500 Super Composite Electric Utility Index




50%

Links pay to key measure generating shareholder value relative to others in the industry
​​​​

​  

Relative Operational Performance

Measures the Company's average percentile ranking in:

-Customer reliability

-Customer-to-employee improvement ratio

-OSHA all-incident injury rate

-Nuclear generation capacity factors

-Coal generation capacity factors








50%

Metrics are direct indicators of operational performance and provide a clear barometer of performance versus external benchmarks

The keyCommittee grants each award recipient a specified number of performance shares, which is considered the "Base Grant." Under each of the two performance elements, up to 100% of our program are:the Base Grant may be earned based on performance. The maximum award opportunity is 200% of the Base Grant, which reflects the sum of the maximum opportunities for performance against the two elements:

GRAPHIC

TSR.    TSR is the measure of a company's stock price appreciation plus dividends during the three-year performance period. We believe using TSR strengthens the link between officer performance and shareholder return. We anticipate that the common stock payout, if any, related to this element will be made in February 2020.

Operational Performance.    The Company's "Average Performance" with respect to the metrics listed below will be the average of the Company's percentile ranking for each of these metrics during each of the three years of the performance period:

base salary — base salary is fixed with referenceThe Company's percentile ranking based on customer reliability results relative to competitive market components and our needother companies reported in the Edison Electric Institute ("EEI") data;

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 63


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

The Company's ranking for a customer-to-employee improvement ratio, based on data provided by SNL Financial ("SNL"), an independent third-party data system, relative to attract talent and retain key management;other companies reported in the SNL data;

annual cash incentive —The Company's percentile ranking based on the cash incentive plans are 100% pay at risk tied directlyOSHA rate (All Incident Injury Rate) relative to earnings, business unit performance, and individual performance;other companies reported in the EEI data;

three-year long-term equity grants of performance shares (55% ofThe Company's percentile ranking based on nuclear generation capacity factors relative to other companies reported in the equity grant) — payout is 100% pay at risk tied to TSRSNL data; and business performance;

four-yearThe Company's percentile ranking based on coal generation capacity factors relative to other companies reported in the SNL data.

For 2017 performance share awards, we determined not to use the J.D. Power Residential National Large Segment Survey benchmark as we had for prior awards. APS is undergoing an extensive technology upgrade to our customer service platform. This undertaking is focused on providing flexibility and scalability to respond to industry and customer demands. We believe that the J.D. Power benchmark is not an appropriate indicator of operational performance during this enterprise-wide project.

The metrics selected are direct indicators of key business performance success. The metrics can be readily benchmarked and provide a clear barometer of top-tier performance excellence. We believe a focus on these performance metrics over a three-year period aligns long-term equity grants of RSUs (45%compensation with key operational goals, thereby enhancing overall Company performance. We anticipate that the common stock payout, if any, related to this performance element will be made in October 2020.

The recipient must remain employed with the Company throughout the performance period, unless the recipient meets any of the equity grant) —exceptions described under "Potential Payments upon Termination or Change of Control."

A recipient of performance shares will receive additional shares of common stock equal to the amount of dividends that the recipient would have received had the recipient directly owned the shares from the date of grant to the date of payment, plus interest on such dividends at the rate of 5% per annum, compounded quarterly, divided by the fair market value of one share of stock on the date of the stock payout. This common stock is paid out only if the related common stock payout is made. The 2017 Performance Shares are not included in calculating pension benefits.

The 2017 Performance Shares are included in the Summary Compensation Table in the column under "Stock Awards" and in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table.

Payouts of 2014 Plan Awards.    In 2014, the Committee granted performance shares to the NEOs, based on relative TSR and relative operational performance. For the three-year period ended December 31, 2016, our TSR percentile was 84.2% compared to the Index. For the same period, our Average Performance percentile with respect to the performance metrics was 73.5% compared to the companies included in the performance metrics. The actual payout to each NEO is identified in the Option Exercises and Stock Vested table.

RSUs

We granted RSUs encourage retention and are consideredto our NEOs in February 2017. RSUs vest in equal 25% installments over four years if the award recipient remains employed by the Company to be pay at risk becauseor one of its subsidiaries unless the recipient meets any of the exceptions described under "Potential Payments upon Termination or Change of Control."

64GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Each RSU represents the fair market value of one share of our common stock on the applicable vesting date, and the value rises and falls with the Company's stock price;price.

The 2017 RSUs are payable at the election of the participant made shortly after the date of the initial grant, either 100% in stock, 50% in cash and 50% in stock, or 100% in cash, and will vest each February 20 in an amount equal to the number of RSUs vesting on such date multiplied by the closing price of a share of our common stock on that date.

The RSUs accrue dividend rights on the vested RSUs, equal to the amount of dividends that the participant would have received had the participant directly owned stock equal to the number of vested RSUs from the date of grant to the date of payment, plus interest at the rate of 5% per annum, compounded quarterly, with such amount paid either 100% in stock, 50% in cash and 50% in stock, or 100% in cash based on the participant's election as discussed above.

The 2017 RSUs are included in the Summary Compensation Table in the column under "Stock Awards" and in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table. RSUs granted in previous years that vested in 2017 are identified in the Option Exercises and Stock Vested table.

Supplemental Awards

2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award.    As previously disclosed in advance of our 2017 Annual Meeting, in March 2017, the Committee granted the CEO a two-year, performance-based cash award. This award is designed to incent Mr. Brandt, a retirement eligible CEO, to remain in his current role while further emphasizing the Board's succession planning priorities. Given the specialized skill sets required of the senior management team in our industry and our Company, a major priority of the CEO is to ensure that the Company's existing succession strategy and workforce development pipeline is sufficiently robust and continues to be effective. The Committee believed that this award was critical to retaining a retirement-eligible CEO for what was perceived to be a multiple-year succession planning period.

The award is comprised of two tranches that are performance-conditioned on specific return on equity, earnings, and succession planning goals, with a maximum potential payout to Mr. Brandt of $4 million:


Structure and Performance Criteria of 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award

​  

Hurdle


Tranche 1
Tranche 2
Performance Link

No portion of award payable if

Minimum 8.00% ROE condition (2017)


2017 earnings threshold(1)

(2017 calendar year)




2018 earnings threshold(1)

(2018 calendar year)



neither earnings thresholds are met

If only one earnings threshold is met, 50% of the award may be earned subject to additional adjustments based on succession planning & development performance
​​​​​​​​​​​​

No portion of award payable if ROE condition not met

Succession planning and development — year 1 milestonesSuccession planning and development goalsFull award subject to goals being satisfied
(1)
The 2017 earnings threshold and the 2018 earnings threshold are equal to the threshold earnings level in the CEO Incentive Plan in their respective years.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 65


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

The payment date of the 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award is February 28, 2019 (the "Award Payment Date"), provided that Mr. Brandt is still employed by Pinnacle West on that date. In the event of death or disability, retirement or termination of employment, Mr. Brandt may be entitled to receive all or a portion of the 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award earlier than the Award Payment Date depending on the circumstances and subject to performance goal achievements, as follows:

If Mr. Brandt's employment with the Company terminates by reason of death or if the Committee determines that Mr. Brandt is suffering from a Disability (as defined in the Award Agreement):

o
Prior to March 1, 2018, Mr. Brandt would have been eligible to receive at least 50% of the 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award as determined by the Committee in its discretion with due regard to the progress toward meeting the applicable award conditions.

o
Between March 1, 2018 and the Award Payment Date, Mr. Brandt will receive the full CEO Performance-Contingent Award.

If Mr. Brandt's employment with the Company terminates by reason of normal retirement (as defined in the Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Retirement Plan):

o
Prior to March 1, 2018, Mr. Brandt would have forfeited the right to receive any of the CEO Performance-Contingent Award.

o
Between March 1, 2018 and the Award Payment Date, Mr. Brandt will receive (i) 50% of the award subject to a determination by the Committee that the (A) ROE condition, (B) 2017 earnings threshold, and (C) year 1 succession milestones each have been met, plus (ii) up to an additional 50% of the award as the Committee may determine if at the time of the normal retirement, the Board has selected and elected the CEO's successor.

If Mr. Brandt is terminated by the Board for Cause (as defined in the Award Agreement) during the performance period, Mr. Brandt will forfeit the right to receive any of the 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award.

benefits — we offer customary benefits and limited perquisites; andIf Mr. Brandt's employment as CEO is terminated by the Board without Cause:

o
Prior to March 1, 2018, Mr. Brandt would have received 50% of the award subject to a determination by the Committee that the ROE condition had been met.

o
stock ownership guidelinesBetween March 1, 2018 and prohibitions on the pledging and hedging of Company common stock.Award Payment Date, Mr. Brandt would receive the full CEO Performance-Contingent Award subject to a determination by the Committee that the ROE condition has been met.

Benefits

Overview of 2014 Company Performance.Pension Programs.    The NEOs participate in the Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Retirement Plan (the "Retirement Plan") and the Supplemental Excess Benefit Retirement Plan (the "Supplemental Plan"). We describe these plans in more detail under "Discussion of Pension Benefits." The Company believes that the pension programs are important recruitment and retention tools.

66GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Deferred Compensation Program.    The Company offers to its executive officers the ability, if the officer so chooses, to participate in a deferred compensation program. We describe our deferred compensation program in more detail under "Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation." We offer our deferred compensation program because the Committee believes that it is standard market practice to permit officers to defer some portion of their cash compensation. However, we generally consider the value in the deferred compensation plan to be the participant's own money and do not give this amount significant weight in making compensation decisions. Discretionary credits under the deferred compensation plan for Messrs. Bement and Falck are discussed under the heading "Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation" and for Mr. Edington, under the narrative disclosure to the Summary Compensation Table and Grants of Plan-Based Awards table.

Change of Control Agreements.    The Company maintains Key Executive Employment and Severance Agreements (the "Change of Control Agreements") for our officers, including the NEOs. Similar to our deferred compensation programs, Change of Control Agreements do not have a holding companysignificant impact on compensation design. We discuss our Change of Control Agreements in more detail under "Potential Payments upon Termination or Change of Control." Our Change of Control Agreements are "double trigger" agreements that derives essentially allprovide severance benefits if, during a specified period following a change of control, the Company terminates an employee without "cause" or the employee terminates employment "for good reason." We believe that the possibility of strategic transactions or unsolicited offers creates job uncertainty for executives, and that the Change of Control Agreements are effective tools to provide incentives for executives to stay with the Company in light of these uncertainties. In addition, we believe that if the agreements are appropriately structured, they do not deter takeovers or disadvantage shareholders. Each agreement is terminable on notice given six months prior to each anniversary of the agreement.

In May 2009, in connection with a review of its revenues and earnings from our wholly-owned subsidiary, APS, a vertically-integrated electric utility. Our 2014 accomplishments included:

total shareholder value increased $2 billion in 2014 alone, and $5 billion in the past five years;

the Company's stock price increased 29.1% for 2014, and set new all-time intraday and closing highs;

for the third straight year,executive compensation practices, the Company increased the common dividend, raisingdetermined that, on a going-forward basis, it by 4.85% after two previous increaseswould no longer provide excise tax gross-up payments in new and materially amended Change of 4.0%;

Control Agreements with its NEOs. In unusual circumstances where the Company continuedbelieves that accommodations have to be made to recruit a new executive to the Company, limited reimbursement for taxes payable on change of control payments may be included in executives' contracts, but even in those circumstances, the excise tax gross-ups will be limited to payments triggered by both a change of control and termination of employment and will be subject to a three-year sunset provision.

In addition to the Change of Control Agreements described above, under the terms of our 2012 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended (the "2012 Plan") awards are accelerated upon a change of control only if the Board chooses not to exercise its focus on safety, ranking withinoverride authority. In exercising its override authority, the top quartileBoard must conclude, in good faith, that participants' awards shall remain outstanding, be assumed, or be exchanged for new awards pursuant to a change of electric utility safety performance;control, and that there will be no material impairment to either the value of the awards or the opportunity for future appreciation in respect of the awards.

Perquisites.

Palo Verde    We have had a capacity factorlong-standing practice of 93.7%; and

TSR was 34.5%, 45.0%, 60.0% and 133.7% for 1, 2, 3 and 5-year periods, respectively. Our TSR ranked 14th highest outproviding only limited perquisites to our executive officers. We describe our perquisites paid to each of the 48 companiesNEOs in footnote 4 to the Edison Electric Industry Utility Index for the twelve-month period ending December 31, 2014.Summary Compensation Table.

Setting 2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 67


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Setting Executive Compensation

The Human Resources Committee.    The Committee monitors executive officer compensation throughout the year and undertakes a thorough analysis of our executive officer compensation each Fall.fall. This review includes consideration of competitive positions relative to specified labor markets, the mix of elements of compensation components, performance requirements, the degreeportion of pay that is at risk with respectand tied to performance, and a consideration of individual officerperformance evaluations. From December through February, the Committee then makes adjustments toconsiders and approves executive officer compensation, including salary and cash and non-cash incentives.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 29

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Role of Executive Officers in Determining Executive Compensation. The Committee makes all compensation decisions relating to our CEO's compensation, makes awards under the 2012 Long-Term Incentive Plan, (the "2012 Plan"), and determines the awards under the 20142017 Incentive Plans, as defined later in this CD&A.Plans. The Committee recommends other executive officer compensation decisions, which are approved by the Board for Pinnacle West officers and the Board of Directors of APS for APS officers.

Role of Executive Officers in Determining Executive Compensation.    Management works with the Committee in establishing the agenda for Committee meetings and in preparing meeting information. Management conducts evaluations and provides information on the performance of the executive officers for the Committee's consideration and provides such other information as the Committee may request. Management also assists the Committee in recommending: salary levels; annual incentive plan structure and design, including earnings and business unit performance targets or other goals; long-term incentive plan structure and design, including award levels; and the type, structure, and amount of other awards. The executive officers are available to the Committee's compensation consultant to provide information as requested by the consultant. At the request of the Chair of the Committee, the CEO or other officers may attend and participate in portions of the Committee's meetings.

Role of Compensation Consultants.    The Committee's charter gives the Committee the sole authority to retain and terminate any consulting firm used by the Committee in evaluating non-employee director and officer compensation. The Committee engaged Frederick W. Cook & Co. to assist the Committee in its evaluation of 20142017 compensation for our executive officers (the "Consultant"). The Consultant does not provide any other services to the Company or its affiliates. The Committee has assessed the independence of the Consultant and has concluded that the Consultant is an independent consultant to the Committee as determined under the NYSE rules. The Committee instructed the Consultant to prepare a competitive analysis of the compensation of the executive officers of the Company and of APS, and to make recommendations for changes to the existing compensation program, if warranted.

Pay Comparisons

In evaluating compensation for the NEOs, the Committee takes into account analysis provided by the Consultant and its recommendations regarding the competitiveness and structure of compensation. The Committee considers the competitive market data presented by the Consultant as an important reference point to assure the Committee of the reasonableness of compensation levels and programs provided to executive management; however, actual compensation levels also take into account the individual executives and their responsibilities, skills, expertise, value added, as well as the competitive marketplace for executive talent.

68GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Consultant's Report and Peer Group.Report.    The Consultant reviewed our executive compensation practices and considered the extent to which these practices support our executive compensation objectives and philosophy. As part of this study, the Consultant performed competitive pay comparisons for our executive officers based on:on three data sets:

GRAPHIC

(1)
2012 compensation information as disclosed in 2013 SEC filingsReflects weightings used for the Peer Group, as defined later in this CD&A;

general industry data based on surveys published by Aon Hewitt (averaging dataMessrs. Brandt, Hatfield, Falck, and Schiavoni. Weightings for companies in the $2.5 — $5 billion revenue bracketMessrs. Bement and the $5 — $10 billion revenue bracket) and Towers Watson & Co. ("Towers Watson") (averaging data for companies in the $3 — $6 billion revenue bracket and the $6 — $10 billion revenue bracket); and

industry-specific survey data from the Towers Watson Energy Services Industry Survey (reflecting the average between companies in the $3 — $6 billion revenue bracket and companies with revenues greater than $6 billion).Edington are discussed below.

From these sources, the Consultant developed a consensus in which the competitive industry comparison for Messrs. Brandt, Hatfield, Falck, and Schiavoni reflects one-thirda weighting of one third peer group proxy statement data, one-thirdone third Energy Services Industry Survey, and one-thirdone third general industry surveys. The competitive industry comparison for Mr. Schiavoni was to the position of a Chief Operating Officer reduced by 15% because Mr. Schiavoni's position at the time was at an Executive Vice President level rather than at a Chief Operating Officer level,Messrs. Bement and his position did

30     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

not include all the responsibilities of a Chief Operating Officer. However, for purposes of the Consultant's analysis, the position of Chief Operating Officer with the 15% adjustment was the most comparable to Mr. Schiavoni's position. Mr. Edington did not have a general industry survey match, so histhe competitive industry comparison for Mr. Bement's position reflects one-half proxy statement data and one-halfa 100% weighting of Energy Services Industry Survey.Survey data for Top Nuclear Executives and the competitive industry comparison for Mr. Edington's position reflects a 100% weighting of peer group proxy statement data. Compensation levels were updated to July 2014 using a 3% annual growth factor that the Consultant indicated reflected2017 based on projected executive-levelexecutive level market movement from major salary-planningsalary planning surveys selected by the Consultant.

As part of the executive compensation review for 2014, the Committee reviewed the Peer Group for its continued appropriateness. As a result of such review, the Committee approved the use of the same Peer Group that was used in setting 2013 executive compensation, with the exception of Progress Energy, Inc., which was acquired by another entity. The Peer Group is broadly similar to the Company with respect to industry, complexity, and business lines, and positions the Company close to the median with respect to revenues (adjusted as explained below). The Peer Group consisted of the following predominantly rate-regulated utilities (the "Peer Group"):


Peer Group

Alliant EnergyAmeren CorporationDTE Energy CompanyEntergy Corporation
NextEra EnergyNortheast UtilitiesNV Energy, Inc.OGE Energy Corporation
PPL CorporationSCANA CorporationSouthern CompanyTECO Energy, Inc.
Wisconsin Energy CorporationXcel Energy, Inc.

In determining both the composition of the Peer Group and the Company's relative position to that group, the number used for APS revenues was adjusted to take revenues attributable to managed assets, in addition to owned assets, into account. This adjustment was based on the following:

Palo Verde is the United States' largest nuclear generating facility, with a net generation rating of approximately 4,000 megawatts. APS owns 29.1% of Units 1 and 3 and owns or leases 29.1% of Unit 2; however, APS is responsible for the operation of 100% of the facility.

Four Corners is a 2-unit coal-fired plant located in New Mexico, with a net generation rating of approximately 1,540 megawatts, of which APS owns 63%. Similar to Palo Verde, APS is responsible for the operation of 100% of the facility.

While APS contracts with the other owners for reimbursement of costs attributable to them, APS is subject to additional business risks and operational requirements as the licensed operator of 100% of the Palo Verde and the Four Corners plants, including plant-wide procurement activities, legal and regulatory compliance, and hiring and supervising the expanded workforce necessary to operate these facilities.

As a result, APS used a number of $5.5 billion compared to its reported revenues of $3.4 billion solely for determining its relative position in the Peer Group. The adjustment placed APS near the median of the Peer Group for revenues. The Committee believes that the senior executives of the Company face challenges in the operation of Palo Verde that require skill sets similar to those that executives at a number of the Peer Group companies with nuclear operations also have, which reinforces the appropriateness of the inclusion of these companies for benchmarking purposes.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 31

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

In providing information to the Committee with respect to setting 20142017 compensation, the Consultant reviewed the total compensation of the Named Executive OfficersNEOs and presented its analysis in October 2013.2016. The Consultant also reviewed the individual elements of compensation, including the type of annual incentives and long-term incentives, and evaluated the competitiveness of the individual elements of compensation of each such officer based on the survey data discussed above.

In its analysis, the Consultant looked at competitive findings for base salary, baseannual incentive, and long-term equity incentives toand target total direct compensation for the Named Executive OfficersNEOs as compared towith the 25th, 50th and 75th percentile.percentile (compensation data was considered at the 25th, 50th or

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 69


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

the 75th percentile if it was within +/– 10%). The conclusions of the report as to competitive pay comparisons of the Named Executive OfficersNEOs for these three compensation elements are as follows:

OFFICER
 BASE SALARY
 2012 ACTUAL
ANNUAL INCENTIVE
AS A PERCENTAGE
OF BASE SALARY

 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE(1)





Mr. Brandt​   at the 75th
percentileName

above the 50Target Annual
Cash
(Salary + Target
Annual
Incentives)




Long-Term
Incentivesth(1)

percentile but below
Target Total
the Direct
Compensation(1)


​  Mr. Brandt75th percentile

 
at the 50th
percentile
Mr. Hatfield at the 50th
percentile
above the 25th
percentile but below
the 50th percentile
 at the 25th
percentile
Mr. Edington above the 75th
percentile

above the 25th
percentile but below
the 50th percentile


below the 25th
percentile
Mr. Falckat the 50th
50th percentile
 
Mr. Hatfieldabove the 25th
percentile but below
the 50th percentile
 at the 25th percentile25th percentile
​  Mr. Bement75th percentile<25th percentile50th percentile
Mr. Edington75th percentile<25th percentile50th-75th percentile
​  Mr. Falck75th percentile50th
percentile
50th percentile
Mr. Schiavoni at the 50th
percentile

 
above the 25th
percentile but below
the 50th percentile


 
at the 2550th
percentile
50th percentile

(1)
Long-term incentive comparison excludes: (i) the one-time award of the supplemental grants of RSUs that were granted in February 2011 for performance prior to 2011 (the "Supplemental RSUs"), and which are discussed in footnote 5 to the Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End table and in footnote 1 to the Option Exercises and Stock Vested table; and (ii)excludes the special performance-linked retention award of RSUs that were granted to Mr. Brandt in December 2012 (the "Retention Grant"), which is discussedand certain arrangements for Messrs. Edington and Bement under the non-qualified deferred compensation plan as described later in footnote 3 to the Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End table.this Proxy Statement.

Application of the Committee's Judgment.    The analysis in the Consultant's report and its recommendations regarding the competitiveness and structure of compensation are factors that the Committee takes into account in its evaluation of compensation for the Named Executive Officers.NEOs. The Committee has determined that in order to meet its objectives, the Committee should, and does, take into considerationconsiders the competitive market survey data presented by the Consultant as an important reference point to assure the Committee of the reasonableness of the compensation levels and programs provided to executive management; however, actual compensation levels also take into account the individual executives and their responsibilities,

32     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

skills, expertise, value added, and other external factors, suchas well as the competitive marketplace for executive talent.

In setting Mr. Edington's compensation and entering into his 2012 Supplemental Agreement and 2014 Supplemental Agreement, which are discussed later in the narrative disclosure to the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table, the Committee took into account Mr. Edington's critical skills, nuclear expertise, the demand in the competitive marketplace for Chief Nuclear Officers, and his demonstrated performance in significantly improving the operating performance of Palo Verde.

Company, business unit, and individual officer performance, as well as compensation competitiveness, are the primary factors in determining the level of total direct compensation for the Named Executive Officers.NEOs. While the Committee considers internal pay equity in making compensation decisions, we do not have a policy requiring any set levels of internal pay differentiation. Finally, the Committee evaluates other factors that it considers relevant, such as the financial condition of the Company and APS. The Company does not have a pre-established policy or target for allocation between cash and non-cash compensation or between short-term and long-term incentive compensation. Thecompensation, although the Committee does allocate long-term awards between the two forms of equity grantsgrants.

Determining the Peer Group.    The Peer Group used as stated underone input in our pay comparison process is reviewed annually for its continued appropriateness. The Committee takes into consideration the heading "Executive Summary"scope and complexity of the Company's management responsibility and liability needs, including the following factors:

Pinnacle West's operating subsidiary APS operates Palo Verde Generating Station, the largest nuclear power plant in this CD&A.

As noted above, at our 2014 Annual Meeting, the shareholders cast an advisory vote on our executive compensation. U.S., which has a $1B annual budget, employs one-third of APS employees, and is subject to comprehensive and complex nuclear and environmental regulation

o
The vote was not binding uponmanagement scope of Palo Verde Generating Station operations necessitates that the Company our directors or the Committee. Of the shareholder votes cast, more than 93% were "FOR" the compensation of the executives as disclosed in our 2014seeks talent from larger utilities, including those with significant nuclear operations and similar regulatory and business challenges

70GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement excluding abstentions. The Committee was cognizant of this result in its consideration of the key components, design, implementation and amounts of our compensation program.

Executive Compensation Components

The Company's executive compensation program consists of the following components:

GRAPHIC

In addition, the Company provides pension programs, a deferred compensation program, change of control arrangements and limited perquisites.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 33

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation
APS has full operational control and legal responsibility for Palo Verde Generating Station, Four Corners Generating Station and Cholla Power Plant. This is an important factor because APS does not have 100% ownership of these stations and this operational responsibility would not be accounted for in standard measures of Pinnacle West's or APS's size.

Given these factors, we make certain adjustments to our size measure to account for our operational responsibilities, rather than solely ownership, to allow for more appropriate comparability of Pinnacle West to potential peer companies. In determining the composition of the Peer Group, we adjust our revenues to reflect our control and responsibility for Palo Verde Generating Station, Four Corners Generating Station and Cholla Power Plant. The chartnumber used for APS revenues is adjusted to take into account the revenues that are attributable to co-owned assets over which APS maintains full operational control and legal compliance responsibility. This adjustment resulted in a number of $5.2 billion compared to its reported twelve months ended June 30, 2016 revenues of $3.5 billion.

Within the range of potential peers based on adjusted revenues, the Peer Group below indicates how each elementis then determined based on additional factors including:

Scope of our 2014management complexity

Nuclear operations

Top industry talent (related to management complexity)

Regulated vs. non-regulated operations

Complexities of a challenging regulatory environment

CEO/senior management leadership

As a result of such review, the Committee approved the use of the same peer group that was used in setting 2016 executive compensation program was intendedcompensation. The Peer Group is broadly similar to achieve our compensation objectives of aligning the interests of executives and shareholders and attracting and retaining qualified, experienced executives.

2014WHY WE PAY IT
COMPENSATION ELEMENTALIGNMENTPAY AT
RISK
ATTRACT
AND RETAIN
COMMENTS
​ ​ ​ ​ 
Base SalaryüSalary is based on experience and responsibilities and is benchmarked to the Peer Group and market conditions to maintain competitive levels.
Annual Cash IncentiveüüüAnnual cash incentive is designed to reward achievement of annual performance objectives, which are designed to enhance shareholder value.
Performance SharesüüüPerformance shares reward achievement of long-term performance objectives — payout is tied to seven performance metrics that are intended to enhance shareholder value and the payout is determined at the end of a three-year performance cycle.

Performance shares also encourage retention.

RSUsüüüThe value of RSUs is dependent upon share price appreciation, which reflects Company performance and enhances alignment with shareholder interests.

Four-year vesting encourages retention.

BenefitsüüOur pension programs and deferred compensation program are designed to attract and retain talented executives.

Our change of control agreements provide alignment in change of control situations by removing job loss concern and promoting executive retention.

Because the Company offers limited perquisites, we do not believe that they are a material component of our compensation program. We provide them to attract and retain key management.

34     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Compensation Design

Pay at Risk.    The Company believes that a significant portion of each Named Executive Officer's total compensation opportunity should reflect both upside potential and downside risk. The illustrations below show how the Company viewsin scope and complexity of operations (taking into account nuclear operations, regulatory profile, and other quantitative and qualitative considerations) and positions the allocationCompany close to the median with respect to revenues (adjusted as explained above).

As outlined previously, peer proxy data is only one third of the Named Executive Officers' compensation between guaranteed pay (base salary)information that is referenced for our NEOs (except for Messrs. Bement and payEdington, where peer proxy statement data is weighted at risk (annual incentive plan, other cash incentives, performance shares,0% and RSUs)100%, respectively). For 2017, the Peer Group consisted of the following predominantly rate-regulated utilities (the "Peer Group"):


2014 CEO Total Compensation

GRAPHIC


2014 Average for Other Named Executive Officers' Total Compensation

GRAPHIC

Risk-Taking.    The compensation program is designed to put pay at risk for performance but not encourage unacceptable risk-taking. The Committee evaluates the potential for unacceptable risk-taking in compensation design on an ongoing basis. We believe that the design of our executive compensation program does not unduly incentivize our executives to take actions that may conflict with our risk-based decision-making. Material risk in our compensation design is mitigated in several ways:

earnings goals and award opportunities in our annual cash incentive programs are at levels intended to be challenging without the need to take inappropriate risks;

our long-term incentives consist of time-based RSUs that vest over a multi-year period and performance shares that are earned at the end of a three-year period, both of which provide upside potential and downside risk; moreover, the use of RSUs in our long-term incentive program mitigates the likelihood of risk-taking because RSUs, as opposed to stock options, for example, retain some value even in a depressed market;
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 35

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
payouts are capped under the annual cash and long-term incentive plans at no more than twice the target amount of the award or the Base Grant;

more than one performance metric is used in our long-term performance share awards, and the award opportunities under our annual cash incentive program are based on multiple considerations, thereby minimizing the ability of the executive to manipulate results;

the stock components inherent in our long-term incentive program, combined with our stock ownership guidelines and retention requirements, align the interests of our executives with a goal of long-term appreciation of shareholder value; and

our program is consistent throughout the Company so that no one area or group is incentivized in a manner that would encourage risk-taking.

In addition, the Committee has reviewed the overall compensation program for the Company's employees and has concluded that its program is balanced and does not encourage imprudent risk-taking. Employee compensation generally consists of some or all of the compensation components described in this CD&A. Our Officer Stock Ownership and Retention Guidelines (the "Guidelines") prohibit our officers from pledging or hedging shares of Company common stock owned by them. Equity award agreements for our management employees contain a similar prohibition in respect of shares received by them under such awards.

2014 Compensation

Base Salary

The Committee reviews competitive salary information and individual salaries for executive officers on an annual basis. In considering individual salaries, the Committee reviews the scope of job responsibilities, individual contributions, business performance, retention concerns, and current compensation compared to market practices. In setting base salaries, the Committee also considers that base salary is used as the basis for calculating annual incentive awards. The base salaries for Messrs. Brandt, Hatfield, Falck and Schiavoni were within plus or minus 15% of the median of the benchmarking data and, based on competitive considerations, Mr. Edington's base salary was set above the 75th percentile.

In December of 2013, the Committee, based on the considerations set forth above, made the following adjustments to the base salaries of the following Named Executive Officers for fiscal year 2014:

NAME
 2013 BASE SALARY
($)

 2014 BASE SALARY
($)

Mr. Brandt

 1,203,300 1,240,000

Mr. Hatfield

    540,000    570,000

Mr. Falck

    502,000    522,000

Mr. Schiavoni

    485,000    525,000

Effective as of January 1, 2014, Mr. Edington's base salary increased from $925,000 to $950,000 pursuant to the 2012 Supplemental Agreement and effective as of September 30, 2014, Mr. Edington's base salary increased to $1,000,000 pursuant to the 2014 Supplemental Agreement. The 2012 Supplemental Agreement and the 2014 Supplemental Agreement are defined in the narrative disclosure accompanying the Summary Compensation Table and the

36     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Grants of Plan-Based Awards table. Effective as of June 19, 2014, Mr. Schiavoni's base salary increased to $600,000 in connection with his promotion to Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer at APS.


Annual Cash Incentives

The Committee approved the Pinnacle West 2014 Annual Incentive Award Plan (the "CEO Incentive Plan") in December 2013, which covered Mr. Brandt. Also in December 2013, acting on the recommendation of the Committee, the Board approved the APS 2014 Annual Incentive Award Plan (the "APS Incentive Plan"), which covered Messrs. Hatfield, Falck, and Schiavoni, and the APS 2014 Annual Incentive Award Plan for Palo Verde Employees (the "Palo Verde Incentive Plan"), which covered Mr. Edington. The APS Incentive Plan and the Palo Verde Incentive Plan are collectively referred to as the "APS Incentive Plans," and the APS Incentive Plans and the CEO Incentive Plan are collectively referred to as the "2014 Incentive Plans."

The award opportunity under the 2014 Incentive Plans for each of the Named Executive Officers was as follows:


Incentive Award OpportunityPeer Group

NAME
 EARNINGS
(% OF BASE SALARY)

 BUSINESS UNIT
PERFORMANCE
(% OF BASE SALARY)

 TOTAL INCENTIVE
OPPORTUNITY
(% OF BASE SALARY)

Mr. Brandt: Pinnacle West Earnings  
Threshold   50.0    50.0
Target 100.0  100.0
Maximum 200.0  200.0
Mr. Hatfield: APS Earnings Corporate Resources Business Unit (Finance, Human Resources/Ethics and Information Technology)  
Threshold    15.0   15.0
Target   30.0   30.0   60.0
Maximum   60.0   60.0 120.0
Mr. Edington: APS Earnings Palo Verde Business Unit 
Threshold    16.25 16.25
Target   32.5   32.5   65.0
Maximum   65.0   65.0 130.0
Mr. Falck: APS Earnings Corporate Resources Business Unit (Legal)  
Threshold    15.0   15.0
Target   30.0   30.0   60.0
Maximum   60.0   60.0 120.0
Mr. Schiavoni: APS Earnings Corporate Resources (Supply Chain, Resource Management and Sustainability), Transmission and Distribution, Fossil Generation, and Customer Service Business Units (1/4 each) 
Threshold    17.5   17.5
Target   35.0   35.0   70.0
Maximum   70.0   70.0 140.0
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 37

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

In addition to the specific business unit performance measures discussed below, the 2014 Incentive Plans allowed the Committee to consider shareholder value creation, customer service, financial strength, operating performance, and safety for the awards for the Named Executive Officers, and for Mr. Brandt's incentive, the Committee could also consider leadership effectiveness (collectively, the "General Performance Objectives"). The APS Incentive Plans also allow the Committee to make adjustments for individual performance.

In designing the 2014 Incentive Plans, the Committee set the target earnings level based on a reasonable range of expectations for the year, while taking into account prior year performance and economic conditions.


Earnings Components

EARNINGS PERFORMANCE MEASURE
2014 TARGETS
2014 RESULTS

Pinnacle West Earnings

Alliant Energy Corporation
 Threshold:
Target:
Maximum:


$337 million
$381 million
$425 million


$381.9 million, or 102% (100% plus 2% of the potential earnings range between target and maximum)

APS Earnings

Ameren Corporation
 Threshold:
Target:
Maximum:Consolidated Edison, Inc.
 $344 million
$388 million
$432 millionDTE Energy Company
Edison International $390.8 million, or 106% (100% plus 6% of the potential earnings range between target and maximum)Eversource Energy (formerly known as Northeast Utilities)Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc.NiSource Inc.
OGE Energy Corp.PPL CorporationSCANA CorporationThe Southern Company
TECO Energy, Inc. (acquired by Emera, Inc. in July 2016)WEC Energy Group, Inc.Xcel Energy, Inc.

Under the terms of the 2014 Incentive Plans, impacts of unusual or non-recurring adjustments on actual earnings will be evaluated by the Committee, and ACC rate-related impacts are excluded. In considering the 2014 awards under the APS Incentive Plans, the Committee adjusted the APS earnings number to exclude the effect of the timing of an ACC decision related to the Four Corners cost recovery matter and to reflect certain costs incurred primarily for the benefit of APS and its customers but booked at Pinnacle West. The net effect of these adjustments was to reduce APS earnings from $421.2 million to $390.8 million for purposes of the 2014 awards. In considering the 2014 award under the CEO Incentive Plan, the Committee adjusted the Pinnacle West earnings number to reflect the exclusion of the timing effect of the ACC decision discussed above and to remove a $4.6 million loss on a sale of an investment asset because the initial investment was made prior to Mr. Brandt's appointment as Chairman of the Board and CEO of the Company. The net effect of these adjustments was to reduce Pinnacle West earnings from $397.6 million to $381.9 million for purposes of the 2014 CEO award.2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 71

The CEO Incentive Plan and the APS Incentive Plan provided that if the threshold earnings number is not met, no incentive payment will be awarded, regardless of business unit performance. The Palo Verde Incentive Plan provides that if the threshold earnings number is not met, no APS portion of the incentive payment will be awarded.

38     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION


Business Unit Components

The business unit performance measures were tied to the components of our Strategic Framework. Individual business unit measures that could be directly correlated to earnings were set at levels that, if achieved at target, would contribute to earnings being achieved at target. However, some of the measures, like safety and customer satisfaction, were not directly correlated to earnings, and were instead set with reference to prior year performance and a reasonable range of expectations of performance of comparable companies in our industry. The following tables disclose the performance targets, actual results, and the percentage of target performance achieved for the Corporate Resources, Palo Verde, Transmission and Distribution, Fossil Generation and Customer Service business units. Performance of the Corporate Resources business unit was responsible for 50% of the overall 2014 incentive target opportunity for Messrs. Hatfield and Falck, performance of the Palo Verde business unit was responsible for 50% of the overall 2014 incentive target opportunity for Mr. Edington, and the performance of the Corporate Resources, Transmission and Distribution, Fossil Generation and Customer Service business units were each weighted equally and, together comprised 50% of the overall 2014 incentive target opportunity for Mr. Schiavoni.

Business Unit Metrics Calculations.    The range of potential achievement for each business unit metric was zero to 200% of the target level. The percentages attributable to weighting in the tables below reflect the weight of each measure as a percentage of the applicable Named Executive Officer's 2014 incentive target opportunity. The percentage of target performance achieved reflects the comparison of our actual achievement of a particular measure for 2014 to the target established for that measure. In addition to a target level, some of the performance measures also provided for a threshold level (equal to 50% of target) and a maximum level (equal to 200% of target). Performance above the maximum level resulted in achievement of 200% of target. If performance fell between threshold and target or between target and maximum, linear interpolation was used to determine the actual percentage of target performance achieved. In addition, the Palo Verde Incentive Plan provided that Palo Verde's overall business unit performance was required to achieve at least 100% of the target level for 2014 before Mr. Edington could receive any payout under the APS earnings portion. The overall Palo Verde business unit performance for 2014 was 178% of target, so this hurdle requirement was met.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 39

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Mr. Hatfield's business unit performance metrics (50% of the overall opportunity) were as follows:

CORPORATE RESOURCES PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND WEIGHTING
 MEASURE
 TARGET
 ACTUAL
RESULTS

 % OF TARGET
PERFORMANCE
ACHIEVED

Finance Performance Measures — 16.68%:

        

Employees — 4.17%

 Human Performance Event Clock Resets (4.17%) 8 5 200%

Operational Excellence — 8.34%

 Finance & Admin. Total Cost as % of Operating Agent Revenues (4.17%) 0.95% 0.92% 200%

 Average of All Four Business Unit Results (4.17%)(1) 100% 158% 158%

Shareholder Value — 4.17%

��Operating and Maintenance Budget (4.17%) Budget > 2.0% Under Budget 200%

Finance Results


190%

Human Resources/Ethics Performance Measures — 16.68%:

        

Employees — 4.17%

 Human Performance Event Clock Resets (4.17%) 8 5 200%

Operational Excellence — 8.34%

 Human Resources Cost per Employee (4.17%) Budget 5.6% < Budget 200%

 Average of All Four Business Unit Results (4.17%)(1) 100% 158% 158%

Shareholder Value — 4.17%

 Operating and Maintenance Budget (4.17%) Budget > 2.0% Under Budget 200%

Human Resources/Ethics Results

 190%

Information Technology Performance Measures — 16.67%:

        

Employees — 4.17%

 OSHA Recordable Incidents (1.67%) 1 1 200%

 Human Performance Event Clock Resets (2.50%) 8 5 200%

Operational Excellence — 8.33%

 Capital Project Execution (1.67%) 80% 83% 130%

 Project Delivery Performance (3.33%) 75% 89% 200%

 Average of All Four Business Unit Results (3.33%)(1) 100% 158% 158%

Shareholder Value — 4.17%

 Operating and Maintenance Budget (4.17%) Budget > 2% Under Budget 200%

Information Technology Results


185%

Overall Hatfield Incentive Result

 188%
(1)
The average for all four business units — Customer Service, Transmission and Distribution, Fossil Generation and Palo Verde — results are included in each of the Corporate Resources areas overseen by Mr. Hatfield and reflected as such in the table above. The weight of this metric for Mr. Hatfield emphasizes the goal of the various Corporate Resources areas in supporting the Company's business units.
40     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Mr. Falck's business unit performance metrics (50% of the overall opportunity) were as follows:

CORPORATE RESOURCES PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND WEIGHTING
 MEASURE
 TARGET
 ACTUAL
RESULTS

 % OF TARGET
PERFORMANCE
ACHIEVED

Employees — 12.50%

 Human Performance Event Clock Resets (12.50%) 8 5 200%

Operational Excellence — 25.00%

 Critical Legal Outcomes (12.50%) 8 8 100%

 Average of all Business Units Results (12.50%) 100% 158% 158%

Shareholder Value — 12.50%

 Operating and Maintenance Budget — Corporate Resources (12.50%) Budget > 2.0% Under Budget 200%

Overall Falck Incentive Result


165%

Mr. Edington's business unit performance metrics (50% of the overall opportunity) were as follows:

PALO VERDE PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND WEIGHTING
 MEASURE
 TARGET
 ACTUAL
RESULTS

 % OF TARGET
PERFORMANCE
ACHIEVED

Employees — 11.25%

 Reactivity Management (1.50%) 94 96.5 200%

 Site Safety (2.50%) 5 G/W; no Red 6 G/W 200%

 Operations Training Accreditation (3.50%) Split Vote Unanimous Vote 200%

 Total Industrial Safety Accidents Reported (2.50%) £ 0.02 0.03 75%

 Collective Radiation Exposure (1.25%) 75 61 200%

Operational Excellence — 15.00%

 Site Capacity Factor (10.00%) 91% 93.7% 200%

 Spring Outage (2.50%) £ 31 Days 28.92 Days 200%

 Fall Outage (2.50%) £ 31 Days 31.75 Days 63%

Performance Improvement — 13.75%

 Equipment Reliability Index (2.50%) 89 95 200%

 Corrective Action Performance Scorecard (2.50%) 7 G/W; no Red 8 G/W 200%

 Site Clock Resets (Less Safety) (2.50%) 2 2 100%

 Site Operational Focus Indicator (3.75%) 7 8 200%

 Continuous Improvement Process (2.50%) 450 717 200%

Shareholder Value — 10.00%

 Operating and Maintenance Budget (7.50%) £ Budget 0.7% < Budget 183%

 Capital Budget (2.50%) £ Budget 0.7% < Budget 180%

Overall Edington Incentive Result

 178%
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 41

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Mr. Schiavoni's business unit performance metrics (50% of the overall opportunity) were as follows:

PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND WEIGHTING
 MEASURE
 TARGET
 ACTUAL
RESULTS

 % OF TARGET
PERFORMANCE
ACHIEVED

Corporate Resources Business Unit — 12.50%:

        

Business Area

 Supply Chain (4.17%) 100% 190% 190%

Performance — 12.50%

 Sustainability (4.17%) 100% 177% 177%

 Resource Management (4.16%) 100% 187% 187%

 COO Corporate Resources Business Unit Results
185%

Transmission and Distribution Business Unit — 12.50%:

        

Employees — 3.12%

 OSHA Recordable Incidents (1.87%) 19 19 100%

 Human Performance Event Clock Resets (1.25%) 38 34 157%

Operational Excellence — 7.51%

 System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) — All Weather (3.13%) 69 68 125%

 System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI) — All Weather (3.13%) 0.75 0.74 125%

 Capital Project Execution (1.25%) 80% 94.5% 200%

Shareholder Value — 1.87%

 Operating and Maintenance Budget (1.87%) Budget 1.9% < Budget 195%

 COO Transmission and Distribution Business Unit Results 132%

Customer Service Business Unit — 12.50%:

        

Employees — 2.50%

 OHSA Recordable Incidents (2.50%) 3 3 100%

Operational Excellence — 2.50%

 Number of ACC Complaints Substantiated (2.50%) 13 10 200%

Environmental Stewardship — 1.25%

 Number of Customers with Paperless Billing (1.25%) 291,000 299,196 200%

Customers and Communities — 3.12%

 Customer Contact Survey (0.62%) 84% 88.5% 200%

 Customer Satisfaction Survey (1.25%) 82% 85% 200%

 JD Power Residential IOU Survey (1.25%) 1st Quartile Ranking 1st Quartile Ranking 200%

Shareholder Value — 3.13%

 Operating and Maintenance Budget (3.13%) Budget 1.1% < Budget 159%

 COO Customer Service Business Unit Results
170%
42     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND WEIGHTING
 MEASURE
 TARGET
 ACTUAL
RESULTS

 % OF TARGET
PERFORMANCE
ACHIEVED

Fossil Generation Business Unit — 12.50%:

        

Employees — 2.50%

 OHSA Recordable Incidents (2.50%) 9 6 200%

Operational Excellence(2) — 6.41%

 Varies by Plant/Engineering (6.41%) 100% 140% 140%

Shareholder Value — 2.34%

 Net Operating Expense
(2.34%)

 
Budget 0.2% < Budget 110%

Environmental Stewardship — 1.25%

 Reportable Environmental Incidents — Plants only (1.25%) 8 5 200%

Fossil Generation Business Unit Results


152%

Overall COO Incentive Result

 160%
(2)
This performance measure consists of 23 measures across seven plants and an engineering group, none of which were responsible for more than 1% of Mr. Schiavoni's total opportunity. The primary purpose of these measures is to determine incentive compensation for the employees at the plants and in the engineering group.

The following chart summarizes the target and maximum award opportunities and the actual amount awarded to each of the Named Executive Officers:


Summary of 2014 Incentive Awards

NAME
 TARGET
AWARD
OPPORTUNITY
($)

 MAXIMUM
AWARD
OPPORTUNITY
($)

 ACTUAL
AWARD
AMOUNT
($)

 ACTUAL AMOUNT
AS A PERCENT
OF TARGET
(%)

Mr. Brandt

 1,240,000 2,480,000 1,852,560 149

Mr. Hatfield

    342,000    684,000    502,603 147

Mr. Edington

    650,000 1,300,000    923,975 142

Mr. Falck

    313,200    626,400    423,697 135

Mr. Schiavoni

    420,000    840,000    558,031 133

Under the CEO Incentive Plan, the threshold incentive (50% of base salary) is earned when the threshold earnings level is reached. Mr. Brandt's additional incentive opportunity is based on the achievement of earnings in excess of the threshold amount. Pinnacle West's earnings of $381.9 million would have resulted in an overall incentive award for Mr. Brandt of $1,264,800, before consideration of any adjustments for the General Performance Objectives. The Committee determined it should further consider the General Performance Objectives in determining Mr. Brandt's award in light of his leadership in guiding the business units to strong performance results. Accordingly, the Committee exercised discretion and based the portion of Mr. Brandt's incentive pay in excess of the threshold amount on both actual 2014 Pinnacle West earnings achieved and the average of the performance of each of the business units as measured by the metrics discussed in the prior tables. The resulting overall incentive award for Mr. Brandt was $1,852,560 or 149% of target.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 43

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Under the APS Incentive Plans, the calculated incentive award was proportional to the actual earnings achieved and begins when earnings exceed the threshold performance level. APS's earnings of $390.8 million exceeded both the threshold and target earnings levels. Under the APS Incentive Plans, the earnings achievement combined with the applicable business unit performance results resulted in the indicated incentive awards, without further adjustment for individual performance, for Messrs. Edington, Falck, Hatfield and Schiavoni.

APS adopted the 2014 Palo Verde Specific Compensation Opportunity, which provided Mr. Edington the opportunity to receive an amount of up to $125,000 upon the achievement of the following Palo Verde operational and performance targets: successful INPO accreditation in six operations training programs; the achievement of a site capacity factor greater than 92%; no substantive cross-cutting issues existing by the end of 2014; and no NRC colored findings by the end of 2014. All of the metrics were achieved, and as such, Mr. Brandt awarded Mr. Edington $125,000.


Long-Term Incentives

The Company currently uses two types of equity grants: performance shares and RSUs. In 2014, awards consisted of 55% performance shares and 45% RSUs to further focus the equity awards on the achievement of specific multi-year performance goals. The 2014 grants to the Named Executive Officers were as follows:

NAME
 PERFORMANCE
SHARES
(#)

 RSUs
(#)

 TOTAL
SHARES
(#)

 TOTAL
VALUE(1)
($)

Mr. Brandt

 42,122 34,464 76,586 4,199,976

Mr. Hatfield

   7,522   6,160 13,682    750,320

Mr. Edington

   5,014   4,104   9,118    500,031

Mr. Falck

   7,522   6,160 13,682    750,320

Mr. Schiavoni

   7,522   6,160 13,682    750,320
(1)
Based on the closing price of Pinnacle West common stock on the date of grant of $54.84 per share and the 2014 Performance Shares valued at 100% of the Base Grant, as defined below.

To determine the amount of performance share and RSU awards, the Committee first establishes a target compensation value for each officer that it wants to deliver through long-term equity award opportunities. The Committee considers various factors, including the retention value of the total compensation package, the long-term equity component in light of the competitive environment, and individual performance. The Committee also considers target value in light of the Company's achievement of earnings targets and overall performance. Once the target value is established, the Committee determines the number of shares subject to the awards by reference to the then-current market value of the Company's common stock and then allocates 55% of the awards to performance shares and 45% of the awards to RSUs.

44     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Performance Shares.    We granted performance shares to our Named Executive Officers in February 2014 for a three-year performance period (the "2014 Performance Shares").

The following graph illustrates how the 2014 Performance Shares work:

GRAPHIC

The Committee grants each award recipient a specified number of performance shares, which is considered the "Base Grant." The maximum award opportunity is 200% of the Base Grant. The 2014 Performance Shares have two distinct elements — TSR and six operational performance metrics. The TSR metric provides a well-understood linkage to overall shareholder return. The operational performance metrics provide a clear line of sight to factors in the utility industry that drive management performance to increase earnings. We believe that the combination of these two elements in the same equity award provides a mix of motivations for performance that is superior to utilizing all of one element or the other.


50% of the Base Grant

IF THE COMPANY'S TSR OVER THE PERFORMANCE PERIOD AS COMPARED TO THE TSR OF THE COMPANIES IN THE S&P 1500 SUPER COMPOSITE ELECTRIC UTILITY INDEX (THE "INDEX") IS:
THE NUMBER OF
PERFORMANCE SHARES WILL BE:

90th Percentile or GreaterExecutive Compensation

100% of the Base Grant

75th Percentile

  75% of the Base Grant

50th Percentile

  50% of the Base Grant

25th Percentile

  25% of the Base Grant

Less than 25th Percentile

None

TSR is the measure of a company's stock price appreciation plus any dividends paid during the performance period. We believe using TSR strengthens the link between officer performance and shareholder return. Additionally, TSR is the most prevalent long-term incentive metric used among the Peer Group. We anticipate that the common stock payout, if any, related to this element will be made in February 2017.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 45

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION


50% of the Base Grant

IF THE COMPANY'S AVERAGE PERFORMANCE WITH RESPECT TO THE PERFORMANCE METRICS IS:
THE NUMBER OF
PERFORMANCE SHARES WILL BE:

90th Percentile or Greater

100% of the Base Grant

75th Percentile

  75% of the Base Grant

50th Percentile

  50% of the Base Grant

25th Percentile

  25% of the Base Grant

Less than 25th Percentile

None

The Company's "Average Performance" with respect to the metrics listed below will be the average of the Company's percentile ranking for each of these metrics during each of the three years of the performance period:

the J.D. Power Residential National Large Segment Survey for investor-owned utilities percentile ranking of the Company relative to other participating companies;

the Company's percentile ranking based on customer reliability results relative to other companies reported in the Edison Electric Institute ("EEI") data;

the Company's ranking for a customer-to-employee improvement ratio, based on data provided by SNL Financial ("SNL"), an independent third-party data system, relative to other companies reported in the SNL data;

the Company's percentile ranking based on the OSHA rate (All Incident Injury Rate) relative to other companies reported in the EEI data;

the Company's percentile ranking based on nuclear generation capacity factors relative to other companies reported in the SNL data; and

the Company's percentile ranking based on coal generation capacity factors relative to other companies reported in the SNL data.

The metrics selected encompass performance inclusive of all departments and are direct indicators of key business performance success. The metrics can be readily benchmarked and will provide a clear barometer of top-tier performance excellence. We believe a focus on these performance metrics over a three-year period aligns long-term compensation with key operational goals, thereby enhancing overall Company performance. We anticipate that the common stock payout, if any, related to this performance element will be made in October 2017.

The recipient must remain employed with the Company throughout the performance period, unless the recipient meets any of the following exceptions. In the case of the recipient's retirement while qualifying for Early Retirement or Normal Retirement (the "Retirement Qualified Employee") under the Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Retirement Plan (the "Retirement Plan"), the employee is deemed to have been employed through the end of the performance period. In the case of the recipient's retirement after reaching age 60 with five years of service, but not otherwise qualifying for Early Retirement or Normal Retirement under the Retirement Plan (a "Late Career Employee"), any performance share payout will vest pro-rata based on the number of days the recipient was employed during the performance period compared to the

46     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

total number of days in the period. In the event the recipient is terminated for cause (regardless of the recipient's retirement date), the recipient shall not be deemed to have been employed through the end of the performance period and will forfeit the right to receive any payout. In the event of the death or disability of a Retirement Qualified Employee or a Late Career Employee, the employee is deemed to have been employed through the end of the performance period. In the event the recipient's employment is terminated without cause during the performance period, the CEO in his discretion and with the Committee's approval may determine if, to what extent, and when, any unvested portion of the grant may vest. The 2014 Performance Shares also contain confidentiality protections that apply during employment and survive termination, and non-competition and employee solicitation restrictions that survive for a period of one year following termination of employment.

A recipient of performance shares will receive additional shares of common stock equal to the amount of dividends that the recipient would have received had the recipient directly owned the shares from the date of grant to the date of payment, plus interest on such dividends at the rate of 5% per annum, compounded quarterly, divided by the fair market value of one share of stock on the date of the stock payout. This common stock is paid out when and only if the related common stock payout is made. The 2014 Performance Shares are not included in calculating pension benefits.

If a change of control occurs, immediately prior to the change of control, the performance shares will convert to either cash or RSUs payable in stock, at the election of the recipient, and shall immediately vest. In converting the performance shares, the recipient will receive the number of shares of stock or the cash equivalent that would have been earned at the target level of performance, unless the Committee determines that a higher level of attained performance is reasonably ascertainable as of a specified date prior to the closing of the change of control transaction. The dividend equivalent awards will be paid in cash or stock as determined in accordance with the applicable award agreement. However, prior to a change of control, the Board may determine that no change of control shall be deemed to have occurred or that some or all of the enhancements to the rights of the recipient shall not apply to specified awards. The Board may exercise such override authority only if, before or immediately upon the occurrence of the specified event that would otherwise constitute a change of control, the Board reasonably concludes in good faith, that: (1) recipients holding awards affected by action of the Board override shall be protected by legally binding obligations of the Company or the surviving entity or the parent thereof because such awards (A) shall remain outstanding following consummation of all transactions involved in or contemplated by such change of control, (B) shall be assumed and adjusted by the surviving entity resulting from such transactions or the parent thereof, or (C) shall be exchanged for new awards issued by the surviving entity resulting from such transaction or the parent thereof; and (2) changes in the terms of the award resulting from such transactions will not materially impair the value of the awards to the participants or their opportunity for future appreciation in respect of such awards.

The 2014 Performance Shares are included in the Summary Compensation Table in the column under "Stock Awards" and in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table. In 2011, the Committee granted performance shares to the Named Executive Officers, based on the same performance metrics as the 2014 grant. For the three-year period ended December 31, 2013, our TSR percentile was 47.6 compared to the Index. For the same period, our Average Performance percentile with respect to the performance metrics was 77.2 compared to the companies included in the performance metrics. The actual payout to each Named Executive Officer is identified in the Option Exercises and Stock Vested table.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 47

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

RSUs.    We granted RSUs to our Named Executive Officers in February 2014. RSUs are incentive awards that vest in equal 25% installments over four years if the award recipient remains employed by the Company or one of its subsidiaries. Each RSU represents the fair market value of one share of our common stock on the applicable vesting date,Risk-Management and the value rises and falls with the Company's stock price. Since a portion of multiple RSU awards may vest each February, the Committee selected February 20 as the vesting date for all RSUs as an administrative convenience. The following graph illustrates how the 2014 RSUs work:

GRAPHIC

The 2014 RSUs are payable at the election of the participant made shortly after the date of the initial grant, either 100% in stock or 50% in cash and 50% in stock and will vest each February 20 in an amount equal to the number of RSUs vesting on such date multiplied by the closing price of a share of our common stock on that date. If a Retirement Qualified Employee retires, the RSUs will fully vest and will be payable on the dates and in the percentages specified in the vesting schedule. If a Retirement Qualified Employee or a Late Career Employee dies or becomes disabled before the end of the vesting period, any outstanding RSUs will fully vest and will be payable no later than March 15 of the year following the year in which the event occurs. If a Late Career Employee retires, the recipient will receive a pro-rata payout of the portion that would have released on the next vesting date based on the number of days the recipient was employed from the last vesting date. In the event a recipient is terminated for cause, any award the recipient would otherwise be entitled to receive following the date of termination is forfeited. In the event a recipient is terminated without cause, the CEO in his discretion and with the Committee's approval may determine if, and to what extent, any unvested portion of the grant will vest. See the discussion in the narrative disclosure to the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table regarding the vesting of the 2014 RSU grant for Mr. Edington.

The RSUs accrue dividend rights on the vested RSUs, equal to the amount of dividends that the participant would have received had the participant directly owned stock equal to the number of vested RSUs from the date of grant to the date of payment, plus interest at the rate of 5% per annum, compounded quarterly, with such amount paid either 100% in stock or 50% in cash and 50% in stock. The RSUs are not included in the calculation of pension benefits. Subject to Board discretion, as discussed with respect to the performance shares, if a change of control occurs, immediately prior to the change of control, the time-based restriction imposed on the RSUs and the risk of forfeiture will lapse and all RSUs shall become immediately payable and shall be paid in stock or cash, in accordance with the terms of the applicable award agreement. The RSUs contain confidentiality protections that apply during employment and survive termination, and non-competition and employee solicitation restrictions that survive for a period of one year following termination of employment.

The 2014 RSUs are included in the Summary Compensation Table in the column under "Stock Awards" and in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table. RSUs granted in previous years that vested in 2014 are identified in the Option Exercises and Stock Vested table.

48     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION


Benefits

Pension Programs.Assessment.    The Named Executive Officers participateCommittee reviewed a compensation risk assessment conducted independently by the Consultant. The assessment focused on the design and application of the Company's executive compensation programs and whether such programs encourage excessive risk taking by executive officers. In addition, management advised the Committee that management has reviewed the overall compensation programs for the Company's employees and has concluded that the programs are balanced and do not encourage imprudent risk-taking. Management advised the Committee that non-executive employee compensation programs generally consist of the compensation components contained in the Retirement Planexecutive compensation programs. Based on the outcome of the Consultant assessment and the Supplemental Excess Benefit Retirement Plan (the "Supplemental Plan"). We describe these plans in more detail under "Discussion of Pension Benefits." The Company believes that the pension programs are important recruitment and retention tools.

Deferred Compensation Program.    The Company offers to its executive officers the ability, if the officer so chooses, to participate in a deferred compensation program. We describe our deferred compensation program in more detail under "Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation." We offer our deferred compensation program becauseinformation from management, the Committee believes that it is standard market practice to permit officers to defer some portion of their cash compensation. However, we generally consider the value in the deferredCompany's compensation plan to be the participant's own money andprograms (i) do not give this amount significant weight in making compensation decisions. Discretionary credits undermotivate our executive officers or our non-executive employees to take excessive risks, (ii) are well designed to encourage behaviors aligned with the deferred compensation plan for Messrs. Falcklong-term interests of stockholders and Edington(iii) are discussed undernot reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the heading "Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation" and for Mr. Edington, under the narrative disclosure to the Summary Compensation Table and Grants of Plan-Based Awards table.Company.

Change of Control Agreements.    The Company maintains Key Executive Employment and Severance Agreements (the "Change of Control Agreements") for our officers, including the Named Executive Officers. Similar to our deferred compensation programs, Change of Control Agreements do not have a significant impact on compensation design. However, in setting annual incentives, we do consider that the change of control payment, if triggered, would be based on the average of the incentives for the prior four years. We discuss our Change of Control Agreements in more detail under "Potential Payments upon Termination or Change of Control." Our Change of Control Agreements are "double trigger" agreements that provide severance benefits if, during a specified period following a change of control, the Company terminates an employee without "cause" or the employee terminates employment "for good reason." We believe that the possibility of strategic transactions or unsolicited offers creates job uncertainty for executives, and that the Change of Control Agreements are effective tools to provide incentives for executives to stay with the Company in light of these uncertainties. In addition, we believe that if the agreements are appropriately structured, they do not deter takeovers or disadvantage shareholders. Each agreement is terminable on notice given six months prior to each anniversary of the agreement.

In May 2009, in connection with a review of its executive compensation practices, the Company determined that, on a going-forward basis, it would no longer provide excise tax gross-up payments in new and materially amended Change of Control Agreements with its Named Executive Officers. In unusual circumstances where the Company believes that accommodations have to be made to recruit a new executive to the Company, limited reimbursement for taxes payable on change of control payments may be included in executives' contracts, but even in those circumstances, the excise tax gross-ups will be limited to payments triggered by both a change of control and termination of employment and will be subject to a three-year sunset provision.

Perquisites.    We have had a long-standing practice of providing only limited perquisites to our executive officers. We describe our perquisites paid to each of the Named Executive Officers in footnote 4 to the Summary Compensation Table.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 49

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONOther Considerations

Taxation and Accounting Considerations Regarding Executive Compensation

Publicly-traded corporations generally are not permitted to deduct, for federal income tax purposes, annual compensation in excess of $1 million paid to any of certain top executives, except to the extent the compensation qualifies as "performance-based" under rules set forth in the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code"). The Company does not use the deduction as a justification for awarding compensation below $1 million. To the extent the awards do exceed $1 million, the Company believes that it is in the shareholders' best interests to not only consider what components qualify for the deduction, but also preserve flexibility in designing a compensation program. For example, the RSUs described above do not qualify as performance-based compensation under the applicable tax provisions. The Committee and the Board may weigh the tax and accounting consequences of the total compensation program and the individual components of compensation when setting total compensation and determining the individual elements of an officer's compensation package. However, the Committee and the Board do not routinely apply the tax-deductibility rules to limit what they determine otherwise to be necessary and appropriate compensation awards.

Stock Ownership and Retention Guidelines

We believe that linking a significant portion of an officer's current and potential future net worth to the Company's success, as reflected in our stock price, helps to ensure that officers have a stake similar to that of our shareholders. Stock ownership guidelines also encourage the long-term management of the Company for the benefit of the shareholders.

The Company's Guidelines are based on the officer's position and his or her base salary. The ownership requirements are shown below in respect of the indicated officer position:

OFFICER
 MULTIPLE OF BASE SALARY



​  

Officer

Multiple of Base Salary(1)

​  

Chief Executive Officer

 45 times Base Salary

APS President and all Executive and Senior Vice Presidents

 2 times Base Salary

​  

All other Vice Presidents and Officers

 1 times Base Salary

(1)
Each officer iswas expected to meet his or her ownership requirement within five years following the later of January 2010 or such officer's election (the "Phase-in Period"). In the event of (1) a promotion or a change in thesethe Guidelines that would cause the officer to move into a higher multiple level or (2) a base salary increase of more than 20% over the officer's previous base salary, an officer will have an additional three yearsthree-years to meet his or her applicable ownership requirement.

The types of ownership arrangements counted toward the Guidelines are: common stock, whether held individually, jointly, or in trust with or for the benefit of an immediate family member; shares issued upon the vesting of RSUs or the payout of performance shares; and unvested RSUs to the extent they will result in the issuance of common stock to the officer.

Officers may not sell or otherwise transfer ("Dispose") any shares of Company stock received by them pursuant to any of the Company's compensation or benefit programs (net of shares sold or surrendered to meet tax withholding or exercise requirements) until his or her ownership requirement has been met. Thereafter, the officer may Dispose of any sharesMr. Edington retired in March 2017 and is no longer subject to the extent such transaction would not causeGuidelines. All of the officer's share ownership to fall below his or her applicableother NEOs are in compliance with the Guidelines.

72GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement

50     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

requirement. The retention requirement applies both duringfollowing graphs illustrate how our NEOs' holdings compare to the Guidelines:

GRAPHIC

(1)
Based on the 12-month average stock price as of the Record Date.

(2)
Excluding Mr. Edington, who retired in March 2017.

Prohibition on Hedging and after the Phase-in Period. In addition, officersPledging

Officers may not pledge, margin, hypothecate, hedge, or otherwise grant an economic interest in any shares of Company stock whether or not his or her ownership requirement has been met. This restriction extends to the purchase or creation of any short sales, zero-cost collars, forward sales contracts, puts, calls, options or other derivative securities in respect of any shares of Company stock. If the officer does not attain compliance with his or her ownership requirement by the end of the Phase-in Period, any subsequent grants of equity compensation to such officer will be payable solely in shares of stock until the ownership requirement is met. Under the Guidelines, the CEO may grant exceptions for hardship and other special circumstances.

AllClawback Policy

Pinnacle West has adopted a clawback policy that applies to specified current or former executive officers, including our NEOs (an "Executive"). Under the policy, in the event of any material restatement of the Named Executive Officers are in complianceconsolidated financial statements of the Company and its subsidiaries within three years of the first public release or filing with the Guidelines.SEC, the Committee may, within 12 months after the material restatement, require forfeiture and/or return to the Company of all or a portion of the compensation vested, awarded or received under any bonus award, short-term incentive award, equity award (including any award of restricted stock, performance shares, phantom stock, deferred stock units or restricted stock units) or other award during the period subject to restatement and the 12-month period following the first public issuance or filing with the SEC of the financial statements that were restated, by any Executive that the Committee determines has personally engaged in intentional misconduct that caused or partially caused the need for such restatement. Any forfeiture and/or return of compensation by an Executive under the policy will be limited to the portion that the Executive would not have received if the consolidated financial statements had been reported properly at the time of first public release or filing with the SEC. By accepting any award as to which this policy applies, each Executive agrees to forfeit and/or return compensation to the Company as provided by the policy. The policy does not limit the ability of the Company to pursue forfeiture or reclaim payments under other legal rights.

2015

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 73

|GRAPHIC 51

Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Taxation Considerations Regarding Executive Compensation

Pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code"), for federal income tax purposes, publicly-traded corporations generally are not permitted to deduct annual compensation in excess of $1 million paid to any of certain top executives. The Committee and the Board may weigh the tax consequences of the total compensation program when setting the total compensation package for an officer. However, the Committee and the Board do not routinely apply the tax-deductibility rules to limit what they determine otherwise to be necessary and appropriate compensation awards or as a justification for awarding compensation below $1 million.

As a result of changes made by the 2017 Tax Act, certain "performance-based" compensation, which was excludible from the scope of 162(m) under prior law, must now be included in determining the $1 million limitation unless it qualifies under a transition rule applicable to certain compensation arrangements in place as of November 2, 2017. The Company believes that performance-based awards granted to our executive officers, and in place as of November 2, 2017, will continue to be deductible under this transition rule. However, because of current ambiguities regarding the scope of this transition rule, no assurance can be given that compensation intended to satisfy the requirements for this transition rule will in fact be deductible. Further, the Committee reserves the right to modify compensation that was initially intended to be exempt from Section 162(m) if it determines that such modifications are consistent with the Company's business needs.

74GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

Summary Compensation Table
 

The following table provides information concerning the total compensation earned or paid to the Company's Named Executive Officers:NEOs:

NAME AND
PRINCIPAL POSITION

 YEAR
 SALARY
($)

 BONUS
($)

 STOCK
AWARDS
($)(1)

 NON-EQUITY
INCENTIVE PLAN
COMPENSATION
($)(2)

 CHANGE IN
PENSION
VALUE AND
NONQUALIFIED
DEFERRED
COMPENSATION
EARNINGS
($)(3)

 ALL OTHER
COMPENSATION ($)(4)

 TOTAL
($)

 YEAR
 SALARY
($)

 BONUS
($)

 STOCK
AWARDS
($)(1)

 NON-EQUITY
INCENTIVE PLAN
COMPENSATION
($)(2)

 CHANGE IN
PENSION
VALUE AND
NONQUALIFIED
DEFERRED
COMPENSATION
EARNINGS
($)(3)

 ALL OTHER
COMPENSATION
($)(4)

 TOTAL
($)

Donald E. Brandt,

 2014 1,240,000 0 4,199,976 1,852,560 2,009,011      26,729   9,328,276 2017 1,355,000 0 4,374,133 2,314,340 2,462,556 27,410 10,533,439

Chairman of the Board,

 2013 1,203,300 0 4,000,235 1,893,994 1,020,892      26,344   8,144,765 2016 1,315,000 0 5,908,828 1,910,695 2,199,029 25,675 11,359,227

President and CEO of

 2012 1,146,000 0 7,100,295 1,795,782 1,391,623      26,644 11,460,344 2015 1,277,000 0 4,400,029 2,066,186 1,567,172 27,183 9,337,570

the Company and APS

                                

James R. Hatfield,

 2014    570,000 0    750,320    502,603    465,143       24,050   2,312,116 2017 640,000 0 894,969 673,994 599,183 28,177 2,836,323

Executive Vice

 2013    540,000 0    700,005    485,611    347,743       23,621   2,096,980 2016 620,000 0 844,845 530,695 546,693 25,901 2,568,134

President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company and APS

 2012    515,000 0    500,260    392,715    319,091       24,582   1,751,648 2015 593,000 0 750,144 548,572 458,772 30,492 2,380,980

Randall K. Edington,

 2014    960,511 0    500,031 1,050,775 2,130,198 1,072,586   5,714,101

Robert S. Bement,

 2017 600,000 0 596,805 793,800 662,448 35,108 2,688,161

Executive Vice

 2013    925,000 0    500,208    814,505       96,488       21,708   2,357,909                

President and Chief

 2012    900,000 0    500,260    716,775 2,990,713 4,021,498   9,129,246

Nuclear Officer, APS

                

President and Chief Nuclear Officer of APS

                

Randall K. Edington,(5)

 2017 244,110 0 397,923    279,464 2,590,863 1,076,323 4,588,683

Executive Vice

 2016 1,100,000 0 596,606 1,202,275 3,560,478    821,925 7,281,284

President and Advisor

 2015 1,050,000 0 600,063 1,228,738 1,164,712       28,593 4,072,106

to the Chief Executive Officer of APS

                

David P. Falck,

 2014    522,000 0    750,320    423,697    419,745    278,991   2,394,753 2017 585,000 0 745,887 576,155 494,307   35,690 2,437,039

Executive Vice

 2013    502,000 0    700,005    454,059    303,367       28,764   1,988,195 2016 565,000 0 745,657 443,565 395,787 129,674 2,279,683

President and General Counsel of the Company and APS

 2012    487,000 0    700,098    354,171    249,667       28,771   1,819,707

President, Law, PNW

 2015 544,000 0 750,144 478,437 368,182   25,675 2,166,438

Mark A Schiavoni,

 2014    563,958 0    750,320    558,031    424,749       27,419   2,324,477

Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, APS

 2013    485,000 0    700,005    446,219    275,670       25,373   1,932,267

Mark A. Schiavoni,

 2017 710,000 0 1,093,532 813,633 628,701 25,663 3,271,529

Executive Vice President

 2016 680,000 0 1,093,486 623,169 491,023 23,850 2,911,528

and Chief Operating

 2015 640,000 0 1,000,148 668,416 432,764 25,675 2,767,003

Officer of APS

                

(1)
ThisThe amounts in this column reflectsreflect the aggregate grantsgrant date fair value of performance shares and RSUs which are discussed under "2014 Compensation — Long-Term Incentives" in the CD&A and which are shown by individual grant on the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table. This column represents the grant date fair value computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. The assumptions made in our valuations are set forth in Note 15For performance shares, 50% of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statementsvalue reported is based on the probable outcome of the performance conditions as of the grant date using a Monte Carlo simulation model ($78.20) and 50% is based on the closing price on the date of grant ($79.77). The amounts in the Pinnacle West/APS Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (the "2014 Form 10-K"). These amountscolumn are allocated between the various equity grants as follows:

NAME
RSUs
($)

PERFORMANCE SHARES
($)

Mr. Brandt1,760,0452,614,088
Mr. Hatfield360,241534,728
Mr. Bement240,267356,538
Mr. Edington160,178237,745
Mr. Falck300,254445,633
Mr. Schiavoni440,011653,521
NAME
 RSUs
($)

 PERFORMANCE SHARES
($)

Mr. Brandt 1,890,006 2,309,970
Mr. Hatfield    337,814    412,506
Mr. Edington    225,063    274,968
Mr. Falck    337,814    412,506
Mr. Schiavoni    337,814    412,506

52     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

The aggregate grant date fair value of the performance shares grant in 2017 assuming the highest level of performance is achieved is as follows: Mr. Brandt — $5,228,175; Mr. Hatfield — $1,069,457; Mr. Bement — 

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 75


Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation


The amounts included in the Summary Compensation Table for the 2014 Performance Shares, based on the probable outcome at the time of the grant, assume that the 2014 Performance Shares will be paid at 100% of the Base Grant. The 2014 Performance Shares amounts are calculated as follows:

 NAME
 GRANT NUMBER OF
PERFORMANCE SHARES
(#)

 AWARD VALUE
REFLECTED IN TABLE
($)

 MAXIMUM
AWARD VALUE
($)

 
 Mr. Brandt 42,122 2,309,970 4,619,941
 Mr. Hatfield   7,522    412,506    825,013
 Mr. Edington   5,014    274,968    549,936
 Mr. Falck   7,522    412,506    825,013
 Mr. Schiavoni   7,522    412,506    825,013
 

$713,077; Mr. Edington — $475,490; Mr. Falck — $891,266; and Mr. Schiavoni — $1,307,044. There were no forfeitures in 2014.

2017.

(2)
These amounts represent the payments described under "2014"Executive Compensation Components — Annual Cash Incentives" in the CD&A, and, with respect to Mr.Messrs. Edington $1,800 forand Bement, incentive payments received in connection with the outage incentive plans as follows: for Mr. Edington, $200 in connection with the 2016 Fall refueling outage for Palo Verde Unit 2, and for Mr. Bement, $1,800 for the 2013 Fall and 20142016, 2017 Spring and 2017 Fall refueling outages for Palo Verde Units 3, 2, and 1 and 3, respectively (collectively, the "Refueling Outages").

(3)
The amounts in this column for 20142017 consist of: (i) the estimated aggregate change in the actuarial present value from December 31, 20132016 to December 31, 20142017 of each of the Named Executive Officer'sNEO's accumulated benefits payable under all defined benefit and actuarial pension plans (including supplemental plans and employment agreements) as follows: Mr. Brandt — $1,952,099$2,371,770 (Mr. Brandt is currently eligible for retirement at a reduced retirement benefit; however, this amount represents the amount he would be entitled to receive at age 65, at which time he would receive the full retirement benefit); Mr. Hatfield — $460,459;$591,114; Mr. Bement — $544,112; Mr. Edington — $1,981,827;$2,223,143; Mr. Falck — $399,451;$466,514; and Mr. Schiavoni — $411,891;$605,180; and (ii) the above-market portion of interest accrued under the deferred compensation plan as follows: Mr. Brandt — $56,912;$90,786; Mr. Hatfield — $4,684;$8,069; Mr. Bement — $118,336; Mr. Edington — $148,371;$367,720; Mr. Falck — $20,294;$27,793; and Mr. Schiavoni — $12,858.$23,521. We describe the special agreements we have with Mr. Edington regarding his benefits in the narrative disclosure accompanying this Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table. The actuarial present value provided in this footnote is comprised ofdriven by certain assumptions, two of which,including the discount rate and the mortality assumption, changed for the Company from December 31, 2013 to December 31, 2014. The effect of the change in discount rate and mortality assumption was to increase the actuarial present value from December 31, 2013 to December 31, 2014 of each of the Named Executive Officers by the following amounts: Mr. Brandt — $439,152; Mr. Hatfield — $35,175; Mr. Edington — $1,153,310; Mr. Falck — $56,400; and Mr. Schiavoni — $56,796.assumption.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 53

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
(4)
The amounts in this column include the following amounts for each of the Named Executive OfficersNEOs for 2014:2017:

 Mr. Brandt:    
 

Company's contribution under the 401(k) plan

 11,55612,150 
 

Perquisites and personal benefits consisting of a car allowance, annualexecutive physical and financial planning

  15,17315,260 
         
 Mr. Hatfield:    
 

Company's contribution under the 401(k) plan

 11,70012,150 
 

Perquisites and personal benefits consisting of a car allowance, annualexecutive physical and financial planning

  12,35016,027
Mr. Bement:

Company's contribution under the 401(k) plan

12,150

Perquisites and personal benefits consisting of a car allowance, executive physical and financial planning

22,958 
         
 Mr. Edington:    
 

Company's contribution under the 401(k) plan

 11,70012,150 
 

Perquisites and personal benefits consisting of a car allowance, executive physical and financial planning

  10,88612,874 
 

Vested 20122014 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits discussed in the narrative disclosure to the Summary Compensation Table and Grants of Plan-Based Awards table

 1,050,000500,000

Pursuant to a 2012 agreement discussed below, this amount reflects recovery of original purchase price of Arizona home ($295,000) plus associated tax liability ($256,299). No other current NEOs are eligible for similar benefits.

551,299 
         
 Mr. Falck:    
 

Company's contribution under the 401(k) plan

 11,70012,150 
 

Perquisites and personal benefits consisting of a car allowance, annualexecutive physical and financial planning

  17,291

Vested portion of the Falck DCP Discretionary Credits discussed under the heading "Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation"

250,00023,540 
         
 Mr. Schiavoni:    
 

Company's contribution under the 401(k) plan

 11,28412,150 
 

Perquisites and personal benefits consisting of a car allowance annualand executive physical and financial planning

  16,13513,513 
(5)
Mr. Edington retired from APS in March 2017.

76GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement

54     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

Grants of Plan-Based Awards
 

NAME

 GRANT
DATE(1)
 ESTIMATED POSSIBLE PAYOUTS
UNDER NON-EQUITY INCENTIVE
PLAN AWARDS(2)
 ESTIMATED FUTURE PAYOUTS
UNDER EQUITY INCENTIVE
PLAN AWARDS
 ALL
OTHER
STOCK
AWARDS:
NUMBER OF
SHARES OF
STOCK OR
UNITS
(#)
 GRANT DATE
FAIR VALUE
OF STOCK
AND OPTION
AWARDS(3)
($)
GRANT DATE(1)ESTIMATED POSSIBLE PAYOUTS
UNDER NON-EQUITY INCENTIVE
PLAN AWARDS(2)
ESTIMATED FUTURE PAYOUTS
UNDER EQUITY INCENTIVE
PLAN AWARDS
ALL
OTHER
STOCK
AWARDS:
NUMBER OF
SHARES OF
STOCK OR
UNITS
(#)
GRANT DATE
FAIR VALUE
OF STOCK
AND OPTION
AWARDS(3)
($)

 THRESHOLD
($)
 TARGET
($)
 MAXIMUM
($)
 THRESHOLD
(#)
 TARGET
(#)
 MAXIMUM
(#)
     THRESHOLD
($)
TARGET
($)
MAXIMUM
($)
THRESHOLD
(#)
TARGET
(#)
MAXIMUM
(#)
  

Donald E. Brandt

  620,000    1,240,000    2,480,000        677,5001,910,695   2,710,000   

 02/18/2014(4)    21,061 42,122 84,244  2,309,97002/21/2017(4)16,54833,09666,1922,614,088

 (PS)        (PS)

 02/18/2014(5)       34,464 1,890,00602/21/2017(5)22,0641,760,045

 (RSU)        (RSU)
03/29/2017(6)4,000,000

(Performance-
Contingent
Award)


  

James R. Hatfield

     1,710       342,000       684,000                  2,240  448,000     896,000        

 02/18/2014(4)         3,761   7,522 15,044      412,50602/21/2017(4)     3,385  6,77013,540    534,728

 (PS)                (PS)        

 02/18/2014(5)               6,160    337,81402/21/2017(5)        4,516   360,241

 (RSU)                (RSU)        

Randall K. Edington

      4,063       650,000    1,300,000        

Robert S. Bement

2,250  450,000   900,000   

 02/18/2014(4)      2,507   5,014 10,028     274,96802/21/2017(4)  2,257  4,5149,028  356,538

 (PS)        (PS)

 02/18/2014(5)         4,104    225,06302/21/2017(5)  3,012   240,267

 (RSU)        (RSU)

              1(6)    125,000(6)    125,000(6)            1,000(7)

          1,200(7)             1,000(7)

          1,200(7)      

David P. Falck

     1,566       313,200       626,400             

Randall K. Edington

     793  158,672     317,343        

 02/18/2014(4)         3,761   7,522 15,044      412,50602/21/2017(4)     1,505  3,0106,020    237,745

 (PS)                (PS)        

 02/18/2014(5)               6,160    337,81402/21/2017(5)        2,008   160,178

 (RSU)                (RSU)        1,000(7)      

Mark A. Schiavoni

      2,100       420,000       840,000        

David P. Falck

1,901   380,250      760,500   

 02/18/2014(4)      3,761   7,522 15,044     412,50602/21/2017(4)  2,821  5,64211,284   445,633

 (PS)        (PS)

 02/18/2014(5)         6,160    337,81402/21/2017(5)  3,764   300,254

 (RSU)        (RSU)

Mark A. Schiavoni

 2,663   532,500   1,065,000        

                02/21/2017(4)     4,137  8,27416,548   653,521

(PS)        

02/21/2017(5)        5,516   440,011

(RSU)        

         

(1)
In this column the abbreviation "PS" means performance share awards and "RSU" means restricted stock unit awards.

(2)
As required by SEC rules, the "Estimated Possible Payouts" represent the "threshold," "target," and "maximum" payouts the Named Executive OfficersNEOs were eligible to receive under the 20142017 Incentive Plans, although any awards were subject to the discretion of the Committee.Plans. The actual awards paid to the Named Executive OfficersNEOs under the 20142017 Incentive Plans are disclosed in the "Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation" column of the Summary Compensation Table. With respect to Messrs. Hatfield, Falck and Schiavoni, the minimum amount each officer would have been eligible to receive was calculated based on earnings achieving 1% and no achievement of any of the business unit performance metrics. The minimum amount Mr.amounts for Messrs. Edington and Bement would have been eligible to receive waswere calculated based on the business unit

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 77


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

    performance metrics achieving 1% and no achievement of the APS earnings metric.goals under the Palo Verde Plan. The CEO Incentive Plan does not specify a target opportunity. We calculated a representative target amount for Mr. Brandt by using the final results of the earnings and business unit components from 2016 (each of which were factors in Mr. Brandt's 2016 incentive award) to compute a hypothetical payout under the current 2017 CEO Incentive Plan. That hypothetical payout is used as a representative target amount. See "2014"Executive Compensation Components — Annual Cash Incentives" in the CD&A for additional information about the 20142017 Incentive Plans.

(3)
The amountamounts in this column representsreflect the fullaggregate grant date fair value for financial reporting purposs for the 2014 Performance Shares and RSUs. We describe the 2014 Performance Sharesof performance shares and RSUs under "2014 Compensation — Long-Term Incentives"computed in the CD&A.accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 55

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
(4)
This amount represents the 20142017 Performance Shares described under "2014"Executive Compensation Components — Long-Term Incentives — Performance Shares" in the CD&A. In accordance with SEC rules, we valuedFASB ASC Topic 718, 50% of the awardsvalue is based on the probable outcome atof the timeperformance conditions as of the grant which assumesdate using a Monte Carlo simulation model ($78.20), while the grant will be paid at 100% of the Base Grant and, in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718,other 50% is based on the closing stock price on the date of the grant.grant ($79.77). There were no forfeitures in 2014.2017.

(5)
This amount represents the 20142017 RSU awards described under "2014"Executive Compensation Components — Long-Term Incentives — RSUs" in the CD&A. In accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, we valued the RSUs using the number of RSUs awarded multiplied by the closing stock price on the date of the grant.grant ($79.77). There were no forfeitures in 2014.2017.

(6)
This amount represents the dollar value of the 2014 Palo Verde Specific Compensation Opportunity2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award described under "2014"Executive Compensation Components — Annual Cash Incentives"Long-Term Incentives — Supplemental Awards" in the CD&A. The actual amount paid to Mr. Edington is included in the "Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation" column of the Summary Compensation Table.

(7)
These amounts represent the payout opportunity under the outage incentive plans for the Refueling Outages. These incentive plans do not provide for a threshold or maximum payment.

Narrative Disclosure to Summary Compensation Table and Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table
 

See the CD&A for further information regarding the terms of awards reported in the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table, and for discussions regarding the formulas or criteria to be applied in determining the amounts payable, vesting schedules, and the treatment of dividends.

The Company does not have formal employment agreements with its Named Executive Officers;NEOs; however, we typically enter into offer letters with new executive officers. Deferred compensation credits granted

Mr. Edington joined APS as Chief Nuclear Officer ("CNO") in December 2006, relocating to Mr. Falck are discussed underArizona from Arkansas. He served as CNO through October 2016. At the heading "Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation."

APS andtime Mr. Edington joined APS, although the Palo Verde Generating Station was being operated safely, performance problems had been identified by the Company, and then later by the NRC, that needed to be corrected. Mr. Edington and his management team not only corrected those performance problems but led the plant to become one of the strongest performing plants in the United States.

Mr. Edington and APS executed an offer letter dated December 20, 2006.2006, and entered into three supplemental agreements, one in 2008 (the "2008 Agreement"), one in 2012 (the "2012 Supplemental Agreement") and one in 2014 (the "2014 Supplemental Agreement"). The remaining portions of these agreements that letterwere still in effect are lifetime medical coverage forat the time of Mr. Edington and his spouse and aEdington's retirement were:

A total pension benefit (including the benefit due under the Company's qualified plan generaland non-qualified plan, andplan) that increased over time pursuant to the 2008 Agreement discussed below) that will accrue at 10% per year, upterms of the various agreements with Mr. Edington, but which resulted in a total annual pension benefit equal to a maximum of 60%, and which benefit vested in January 2012. The percentage is69.3% applied to his final average wage (highest 3 years in the final 10 years of employment and includes both base salary and annual incentives) to determine his lifetime benefit. In addition, retention units granted to him in January 2007 are also included in the calculation of pension benefits. The vested pension benefit will be paid to Mr. Edington in two forms: one-half of the benefit will be paid to him in a lump sum; and the second half of the benefit will be paid in a 100% joint and survivor annuity. Mr. Edington's offer letter also provides that he will participate in specific Palo Verde annual incentive opportunities. The specific incentive opportunity for 2014 is set forth in the CD&A under "2014 Compensation — Annual Cash Incentives."

78GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement

In recognition of Mr. Edington's significant contributions to Palo Verde's improvement since he joined APS in early 2007 and his critical role in returning Palo Verde to long-term excellence, on July 18, 2008, APS and Mr. Edington entered into a letter agreement (the "2008 Agreement"). No part of that agreement is still in effect.

In December 2008, APS and Mr. Edington entered into a supplemental agreement further defining Mr. Edington's pension benefits as set forth in the December 20, 2006 letter.

56     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

    In June 2012, the Committee approved a supplemental agreement forvested pension benefit is payable to Mr. Edington in order to incentivizetwo forms: one-half in a lump sum at the retentiontime of his critical skillsretirement; and nuclear expertise (the "2012 Supplemental Agreement"). This agreement provides:the second half over time in a 100% joint and survivor annuity.

Mr. Edington's base salary increased to $900,000 effective January 1, 2012, increased to $925,000 effective January 1, 2013, and increased to $950,000 effective January 1, 2014;

the Company has provided interest-bearing, deferredDeferred compensation credits tothat Mr. Edington consisting ofreceived and that vested as follows: (a) $350,000 as of January 1, 2012;2012, $350,000 as of January 1, 2013;2013, and $350,000 as of January 1, 2014. The discretionary credits2014, all of which vested on December 31, 2014 and will be payable over a 10-year period following his termination of employment (the "2012 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits");

as of December 31, 2013, Mr. Edington's existing supplemental pension benefit set forth in the 2008 Agreement increased by an amount equal to 5% of the benefit otherwise payable; and as of December 31, 2014, the supplemental pension benefit increased by an amount equal to 10% (inclusive of the preceding 5% increase) of the benefit otherwise payable;

if Mr. Edington terminates his employment after December 31, 2014, within six months thereafter decides to relocate from Arizona, and is unable to recover the original purchase price on the sale of his residence in Arizona (after making reasonable efforts to do so), the Company will purchase his home for the original purchase price. The Company will then resell the home, so the Company's financial exposure, if any, will be the difference between the sales price and the original purchase price. The Company believes the terms of this home purchase arrangement, including its conditions, appropriately balance the desire to retain Mr. Edington's services compared to the modest economic exposure to the Company, if any; and

RSUs awarded to Mr. Edington in 2011 and 2012 were amended to provide that they will vest in full on Mr. Edington's retirement if it occurs on or after December 31, 2014.

Consistent with Mr. Edington's 2011 and 2012 RSU grants, the 2013 and 2014 RSU grants will vest in full upon Mr. Edington's retirement since he was employed with the Company on and after December 31, 2014.

In October 2014, the Committee approved a supplemental agreement for Mr. Edington that provides for additional compensation terms supplemental to those set forth in the 2012 Supplemental Agreement to incentivize the retention of his critical skills and nuclear expertise (the "2014 Supplemental Agreement"). This agreement provides:

Mr. Edington's base salary increased to $1,000,000 effective September 30, 2014, increased to $1,050,000 effective January 1, 2015 and will increase to $1,100,000 effective January 1, 2016;

the Company provided interest-bearing, deferred compensation credits to Mr. Edington consisting of (b) $200,000 as of July 1, 2014, and will provide interest-bearing, deferred compensation credits of $300,000 as of January 1, 2015, and $300,000 as of January 1, 2016. The discretionary credits will vest on2016, all of which vested June 30, 2016, if Mr. Edington is actively employed by the Company on that date, and will be payable over a 10-year period following his termination of employment. Additionally, the Company provided interest-bearing, deferred compensation credits to Mr. Edington consisting of $500,000 as of September 30, 2014. These discretionary credits will vest 180 days after Mr. Edington's termination of employment if such termination is after June2014, which vested September 30, 2016 and provided2017 because a requirement that certain key performance metrics for Palo Verde's key
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 57

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

    regulatory and oversight evaluations and assessments haveVerde did not declineddecline during the period beginning September 30, 2014 and ending as ofto the date 180 days after Mr. Edington's termination of employment. These credits will be payable over a 10-year period following his termination of employmentretirement from APS was met (collectively, the "2014 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits" and together with the 2012 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits, the "Edington DCP Discretionary Credits");

if Mr. Edington is actively employed with. All of the Company on June 30, 2016,deferred compensation credits are interest-bearing and will be paid over a 10 year period following Mr. Edington's existing supplemental pension benefit set forthretirement from APS in the 2008 Agreement as increased by the 2012 Supplemental Agreement, will increase by an amount equal to 5% of the benefit that would have otherwise been payable;March 2017.

In 2012, as part of the 2012 Supplemental Agreement, the Company entered into an agreement whereby the Company agreed to make Mr. Edington's award opportunity target forEdington whole in the Palo Verde Incentive Plan for 2014event that, following his retirement, he decided to relocate from Arizona back to Arkansas, where his family was increased from 50%located, and was not able to 65%recover the original purchase price of his base salary, dependinghome upon its sale. Following retirement Mr. Edington did relocate from Arizona back to Arkansas. After an active marketing period, the home sold for $495,000, which was its fair market value based on the achievement of the earnings and business unit performance goals, separately or in combination, and before adjustment for individual performance. Subject to the normal approval process by the Committee, the award opportunity target will be 65% of Mr. Edington's base salary under APS's Annual Incentive Award Plan for Palo Verde Employees for each of 2015 and 2016; and

Mr. Edington's equity awards that are expected to be granted byan independent, third-party appraisal. The amount the Company paid to Mr. Edington in February 2015consisted of $295,000, which was the difference between the sales price and February 2016 willthe original purchase price of $790,000, plus $256,299 to cover the associated tax liability on this payment that would not have a grant date fair value of $600,000been incurred if Mr. Edington had been able to sell the home for each year, subject to the normal approval process by the Committee. Mr. Edington's 2015 and 2016 RSU grants will vest in full on Mr. Edington's retirement if it occurs on or after June 30, 2016.its original purchase price.

APS pays 29.1% of Mr. Edington's compensation expense. The balance is reimbursed to APS by the other owners of Palo Verde.2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 79

58     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End
 

  STOCK AWARDS
NAME NUMBER OF
SHARES OR UNITS
OF STOCK THAT
HAVE NOT VESTED
(#)
 MARKET VALUE OF
SHARES OR UNITS
OF STOCK THAT
HAVE NOT VESTED
($)(1)
 EQUITY INCENTIVE
PLAN AWARDS:
NUMBER OF
UNEARNED SHARES,
UNITS OR OTHER
RIGHTS THAT HAVE
NOT VESTED
(#)
 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN
AWARDS: MARKET OR PAYOUT
VALUE OF UNEARNED
SHARES, UNITS OR OTHER
RIGHTS THAT HAVE NOT
VESTED
($)(1)
Donald E. Brandt 22,064(2)
(RSUs)

 
1,879,412 33,889(7)
(PS at target)

 
2,886,665
 20,177(3)
(RSUs)

 
1,718,677 82,904(8)
(PS at maximum)

 
7,061,763
 15,907(4)
(RSUs)

 
1,354,958 81,038(9)
(PS at maximum)

 
6,902,817
 9,132(5)
(RSUs)

 
   777,864  
James R. Hatfield 4,570(2)
(RSUs)
    389,273 6,932(7)
(PS at target)
 590,468
  3,898(3)
(RSUs)
    332,032 16,016(8)
(PS at maximum)
 1,364,243
  2,712(4)
(RSUs)
    231,009 13,815(9)
(PS at maximum)
 1,176,762
  1,724(5)
(RSUs)
    146,850    
Robert S. Bement 3,012(2)
(RSUs)

 
   256,562 4,622(7)
(PS at target)

 
   393,702
 1,835(3)
(RSUs)

 
   156,305 7,539(8)
(PS at maximum)

 
   642,172
 1,265(4)
(RSUs)

 
   107,753 6,449(9)
(PS at maximum)

 
   549,326
 653(5)
(RSUs)

 
   55,623  
Randall K. Edington 0(6)                 0(6)3,082(7)
(PS at target)
    262,525
      11,306(8)
(PS at maximum)
    963,045
      11,052(9)
(PS at maximum)
    941,410
David P. Falck 3,809(2)
(RSUs)

 
   324,451 5,777(7)
(PS at target)

 
   492,085
 3,442(3)
(RSUs)

 
   293,190 14,132(8)
(PS at maximum)

 
1,203,764
 2,712(4)
(RSUs)

 
   231,009 13,815(9)
(PS at maximum)

 
1,176,762
 1,632(5)
(RSUs)

 
   139,014  
Mark A. Schiavoni 5,516(2)
(RSUs)
    469,853 8,472(7)
(PS at target)
    721,645
  5,182(3)
(RSUs)
    441,402 20,729(8)
(PS at maximum)
 1,765,696
  3,768(4)
(RSUs)
    320,959 18,419(9)
(PS at maximum)
 1,568,931
  1,724(5)
(RSUs)
    146,850    
  STOCK AWARDS
NAME NUMBER OF
SHARES OR
UNITS OF STOCK
THAT HAVE NOT
VESTED
(#)
 MARKET VALUE OF
SHARES OR
UNITS OF STOCK
THAT HAVE NOT
VESTED
($)(1)
 EQUITY
INCENTIVE PLAN
AWARDS: NUMBER OF
UNEARNED SHARES,
UNITS OR
OTHER RIGHTS THAT
HAVE NOT VESTED
(#)
 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN
AWARDS: MARKET OR
PAYOUT VALUE OF
UNEARNED SHARES, UNITS OR
OTHER RIGHTS THAT HAVE NOT
VESTED
($)(1)
Donald E. Brandt 34,908(2)
(RSUs)

 
2,384,566 43,207(8)
(PS at target)

 
2,951,470
 73,110(3)
(Retention Grant)

 
4,994,145 84,856(9)
(PS at maximum)

 
5,796,514
 25,299(4)
(RSUs)

 
1,728,175 91,505(10)
(PS at maximum)

 
6,250,707
 6,314(5)
(Supp RSUs)

 
   431,309  
 17,906(6)
(RSUs)

 
1,223,159  
 9,581(7)
(RSUs)

 
   654,478  
James R. Hatfield 6,319(2)
(RSUs)
    431,651 7,716(8)
(PS at target)
    527,080
  4,555(4)
(RSUs)
    311,152 14,853(9)
(PS at maximum)
 1,014,608
  1,754(5)
(Supp RSUs)
    119,816 12,710(10)
(PS at maximum)
    868,220
  2,602(6)
(RSUs)
    177,743    
  1,696(7)
(RSUs)
    115,854    
Randall K. Edington 4,157(2)
(RSUs)

 
   283,964 5,143(8)
(PS at target)

 
   351,318
 3,257(4)
(RSUs)

 
   222,485 10,608(9)
(PS at maximum)

 
   724,632
 2,602(6)
(RSUs)

 
   177,743 12,710(10)
(PS at maximum)

 
   868,220
 1,696(7)
(RSUs)

 
   115,854  
David P. Falck 6,239(2)
(RSUs)
    426,186 7,716(8)
(PS at target)
    527,080
  4,426(4)
(RSUs)
    302,340 14,853(9)
(PS at maximum)
 1,014,608
  1,754(5)
(Supp RSUs)
    119,816 17,792(10)
(PS at maximum)
 1,215,372
  3,482(6)
(RSUs)
    237,855    
  2,374(7)
(RSUs)
    162,168    
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 59

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

  STOCK AWARDS
NAME NUMBER OF
SHARES OR
UNITS OF STOCK
THAT HAVE NOT
VESTED
(#)
  MARKET VALUE OF
SHARES OR
UNITS OF STOCK
THAT HAVE NOT
VESTED
($)(1)
 EQUITY
INCENTIVE PLAN
AWARDS: NUMBER OF
UNEARNED SHARES,
UNITS OR
OTHER RIGHTS THAT
HAVE NOT VESTED
(#)
 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN
AWARDS: MARKET OR
PAYOUT VALUE OF
UNEARNED SHARES, UNITS OR
OTHER RIGHTS THAT HAVE NOT
VESTED
($)(1)
Mark A. Schiavoni 6,319(2)
(RSUs)

 
431,651 7,716(8)
(PS at target)

 
   527,080
 4,469(4)
(RSUs)

 
305,278 14,853(9)
(PS at maximum)

 
1,014,608
 1,754(5)
(Supp RSUs)

 
119,816 10,169(10)
(PS at maximum)

 
   694,644
 1,991(6)
(RSUs)

 
136,005  
 1,356(7)
(RSUs)

 
92,629  

(1)
The amount in this column is calculated by multiplying the closing market price of our common stock at the end of 20142017 ($68.3185.18 per share as of December 31, 2014)29, 2017) by the number of RSUs, performance shares ("PS") and corresponding dividend rights (and interest thereon) that will be paid in stock to the extent the underlying RSU's and PS's actually vest, listed for the specified officer.

(2)
This amount represents (i) the RSUs awarded in 20142017 that are described, with their vesting and release schedule, under "2014"Executive Compensation Components — Long-Term Incentives — RSUs" in the CD&A as follows: Mr. Brandt — 34,464; 22,064;

80GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

    Mr. Hatfield — 6,160;4,516; Mr. EdingtonBement — 4,104;3,012; Mr. Falck — 6,160;3,764; and Mr. Schiavoni — 6,160;5,516; and (ii) accrued dividend rights (and interest thereon) that will be paid in stock to the extent the underlying RSU's actually vest, as follows: Mr. Brandt — 444; Mr. Hatfield — 159; Mr. Edington — 53;54 and Mr. Falck — 79; and Mr. Schiavoni — 159.

    45.

(3)
This amount represents the one-time special Retention Grant of RSUs to Mr. Brandt. Under the terms of this grant, Mr. Brandt may, depending upon Company performance, receive up to 84,362 RSUs if he is employed through December 31, 2016 (the "Receipt Date"). Mr. Brandt will receive 67,489 shares (the "Target Grant") if the Company's average return on equity over the period from December 19, 2012 until the Receipt Date (the "Performance Period") meets or exceeds 8.75% (the "Target ROE"). In addition, the Committee may, in its discretion award Mr. Brandt up to another 25% of the Target Grant (for a maximum total of 84,362 shares) based upon the Committee's evaluation of Mr. Brandt's overall leadership during the Performance Period. If the Company's average return on equity over the Performance Period is less than the Target ROE, Mr. Brandt will receive 75% of the Target Grant (50,617 shares). The table reflects the Target Grant amount plus 5,621 additional RSUs resulting from notional dividends that will be paid in stock.

(4)
This amount represents (i) the remaining RSUs awarded in 20132016 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 24,558;19,629; Mr. Hatfield — 4,296;3,792; Mr. EdingtonBement — 3,072;1,785; Mr. Falck — 4,296;3,348; and Mr. Schiavoni — 4,296;4,908; and (ii) accrued dividend rights (and interest thereon) that will be paid in stock to the extent the underlying RSU's actually vest, as follows: Mr. Brandt — 741;548; Mr. Hatfield — 259;106; Mr. EdingtonBement — 185;50; Mr. Falck — 130;94; and Mr. Schiavoni — 173.274. The 20132016 RSUs vest and are released in 25% increments beginning on February 20, 2014,17, 2017, so they will be fully vested on February 17, 2017.20, 2020.

(5)
This amount represents (i) the Supplemental RSUs awarded in 2011 that have not yet vested as follows: Mr. Brandt — 5,395; Mr. Hatfield — 1,499; Mr. Falck — 1,499; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,499; and (ii) additional Supplemental RSUs resulting from notional dividends as follows: Mr. Brandt — 919; Mr. Hatfield — 255; Mr. Falck — 255; and Mr. Schiavoni — 255. The Supplemental RSUs vested 50% on February 15, 2013 and 25% on February 14, 2014, and the remaining Supplemental RSUs in the table will vest 25% on February 13, 2015, provided the recipient is employed by the Company or one of its subsidiaries on the applicable vesting date. The Supplemental RSUs are not released to the recipient until the recipient's retirement, death, disability or separation of employment from the Company.

(6)(4)
This amount represents (i) the remaining RSUs awarded in 20122015 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 17,092;15,238; Mr. Hatfield — 2,376;2,598; Mr. EdingtonBement — 2,376;1,212; Mr. Falck — 3,324;2,598; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,900; and (ii) accrued
60     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

    dividend rights (and interest thereon) that will be paid in stock as follows: Mr. Brandt — 814; Mr. Hatfield — 226; Mr. Edington — 226; Mr. Falck — 158; and Mr. Schiavoni — 91. The 2012 RSUs vest and are released in 25% increments beginning on February 20, 2013, so they will be fully vested on February 19, 2016.

(7)
This amount represents (i) the remaining RSUs awarded in 2011 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 8,991; Mr. Hatfield — 1,499; Mr. Edington — 1,499; Mr. Falck — 2,098; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,199;3,464; and (ii) accrued dividend rights (and interest thereon) that will be paid in stock to the extent the underlying RSU's actually vest, as follows: Mr. Brandt — 590;669; Mr. Hatfield — 197;114; Mr. EdingtonBement — 197;53; Mr. Falck — 276;114; and Mr. Schiavoni — 157.304. The 20112015 RSUs vest and are released in 25% increments beginning on February 17, 2012,19, 2016, so they will be fully vested on February 20, 2015.2019.

(8)(5)
This amount represents (i) the remaining RSUs awarded in 2014 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 8,616; Mr. Hatfield — 1,540; Mr. Bement — 616; Mr. Falck — 1,540; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,540; and (ii) accrued dividend rights (and interest thereon) that will be paid in stock to the extent the underlying RSU's actually vest, as follows: Mr. Brandt — 516; Mr. Hatfield — 184; Mr. Bement — 37; Mr. Falck — 92; and Mr. Schiavoni — 184. The 2014 RSUs vest and are released in 25% increments beginning on February 20, 2015, so they fully vested on February 20, 2018.

(6)
Mr. Edington retired in March 2017. Upon his retirement, he became fully vested in all outstanding RSU grants.

(7)
This amount represents: (i) the 20142017 Performance Shares — SEC rules require us to assume a number of shares equal to the target (100% of Base Grant) payout level of these performance shares, although the actual number of shares awarded, if any, will not be determined until after the end of the performance period, which ends on December 31, 2016;2019; and (ii) accrued dividend rights (and interest thereon) that will be paid in stock to the extent the underlying performance shares actually vest and are paid out, as follows: Mr. Brandt — 1,085;793; Mr. Hatfield — 194;162; Mr. Bement — 108; Mr. Edington — 129;72; Mr. Falck — 194;135; and Mr. Schiavoni — 194.198. The 20142017 Performance Shares are described with their vesting schedule under "2014"Executive Compensation Components — Long-Term Incentives — Performance Shares" in the CD&A. If the 2014 Performance Share grant pays at target (100% of Base Grant) level, including dividends and interest thereon payable in stock, the amounts would be as follows:

NAME
 UNITS AT
TARGET
(#)

 PAYOUT
VALUE
($)

Donald E. Brandt

 43,207 2,951,470

James R. Hatfield

   7,716    527,080

Randall K. Edington

   5,143    351,318

David P. Falck

   7,716    527,080

Mark A. Schiavoni

   7,716    527,080
(9)(8)
This amount represents: (i) the performance shares issued in 20132016 — SEC rules require us to assume a number of shares equal to the maximum (200% of the Base Grant) payout level of these performance shares, although the actual number of shares awarded, if any, will not be determined until after the end of the performance period, which ends on December 31, 2015;2018; and (ii) accrued dividend rights (and interest thereon) that will be paid in stock to the extent the underlying performance shares actually vest and are paid out, as follows: Mr. Brandt — 4,828;4,388; Mr. Hatfield — 845;848; Mr. Bement — 399; Mr. Edington — 604;598; Mr. Falck — 845;748; and Mr. Schiavoni — 845.1,097. If the 20132016 performance share grant pays at the target (100% of Base Grant) level, including dividends and interest thereon payable in stock, the amounts would be as follows:

NAME
 UNITS AT
TARGET
(#)

 PAYOUT
VALUE
($)

Donald E. Brandt

 42,428 2,898,256

James R. Hatfield

   7,427    507,338

Randall K. Edington

   5,304    362,317

David P. Falck

   7,427    507,338

Mark A. Schiavoni

   7,427    507,338

NAME
UNITS AT
TARGET
(#)

PAYOUT
VALUE
($)

Donald E. Brandt

41,4523,530,881

James R. Hatfield

8,008682,121

Robert S. Bement

3,769321,044

Randall K. Edington

5,653481,523

David P. Falck

7,066601,882

Mark A. Schiavoni

10,365882,891

    The 20132016 performance shares have a performance period beginning on January 1, 20132016 and ending on December 31, 2015;2018; however, the payout, if any, will not be determined until February 20162019 for the portion tied to TSR and October 20162019 for the portion tied to the six operational performance metrics. These are the dates the Company anticipates that we will have the information necessary to determine whether, and to what extent, these metrics have been met.

(10)(9)
This amount represents the performance shares issued in 2012.2015. The performance period for these performance shares ended December 31, 2014;2017; however, the payout was not determined until February 20152018 for the portion tied to TSR and the payout, if any, for the portion tied to the six operational performance metrics will not be determined until October 2015,2018, which is when the Company anticipates that we will have the information necessary to determine whether, and to what extent, the six performance metrics were met.
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 61

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

    SEC rules require us to (i) assume a number of shares equal to the maximum (200% of Base Grant) payout level for the 20122015 performance shares; and (ii) accrued dividend rights (and interest thereon) that will be paid in stock to the extent the underlying performance shares actually vest and are paid out, as follows: Mr. Brandt — 7,961;6,542; Mr. Hatfield — 1,106;1,115; Mr. Bement — 521; Mr. Edington — 1,106;892; Mr. Falck — 1,548;1,115; and

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 81


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

    Mr. Schiavoni — 885.1,487. If the 20122015 performance share grant pays at the target (100% of Base Grant) level, including dividends and interest thereon payable in stock, the amounts would be as follows:

NAME
 UNITS AT
TARGET
(#)

 PAYOUT
VALUE
($)

Donald E. Brandt

 45,752 3,125,319

James R. Hatfield

   6,355    434,110

Randall K. Edington

   6,355    434,110

David P. Falck

   8,896    607,686

Mark A. Schiavoni

   5,084    347,288
NAME
UNITS AT
TARGET
(#)

PAYOUT
VALUE
($)

Donald E. Brandt

40,5193,451,409

James R. Hatfield

6,908588,423

Robert S. Bement

3,224274,621

Randall K. Edington

5,526470,704

David P. Falck

6,908588,423

Mark A. Schiavoni

9,209784,423

Option Exercises and Stock Vested
 

 STOCK AWARDSSTOCK AWARDS

NAME

 NUMBER OF SHARES
ACQUIRED ON VESTING
(#)(1)
 VALUE REALIZED
ON VESTING
($)(2)
NUMBER OF SHARES
ACQUIRED ON VESTING
(#)(1)
VALUE REALIZED
ON VESTING
($)(2)

Donald E. Brandt

 93,745 5,274,993109,9709,020,587

James R. Hatfield

 16,218    911,60019,7571,620,485
​​​​

Robert S. Bement

8,200672,897

Randall K. Edington

 21,893 1,274,80221,4931,774,574
​​​​

David P. Falck

 22,239 1,250,83619,4351,595,145

Mark A. Schiavoni

 14,106    791,48620,6401,689,979

(1)
The amount in this column consists of: (i) RSUs that were granted to all of the Named Executive OfficersNEOs in February 2016 that vested and were released in part on February 17, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 6,543; Mr. Hatfield — 1,264; Mr. Bement — 595; Mr. Edington — 893; Mr. Falck — 1,116; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,636; dividend rights (and interest thereon) payable in stock earned on RSUs granted in February 2016 and released in part on February 17, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 108; Mr. Hatfield — 21; Mr. Bement — 10; Mr. Edington — 15; Mr. Falck — 19; and Mr. Schiavoni — 27; (ii) RSUs that were granted to all of the NEOs in February 2015 that vested and were released in part on February 17, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 7,619; Mr. Hatfield — 1,299; Mr. Bement — 606; Mr. Edington — 1,039; Mr. Falck — 1,299; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,732; dividend rights (and interest thereon) payable in stock earned on RSUs granted in February 2015 and released in part on February 17, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 253; Mr. Hatfield — 43; Mr. Bement — 20; Mr. Edington — 34; Mr. Falck — 43; and Mr. Schiavoni — 115; (iii) RSUs that were granted to all of the NEOs in February 2014 that vested and were released in part on February 17, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 8,616; Mr. Hatfield — 1,540; Mr. Bement — 616; Mr. Edington — 1,026; Mr. Falck — 1,540; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,540; dividend rights (and interest thereon) payable in stock earned on RSUs granted in February 2014 and released in part on February 17, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 429; Mr. Hatfield — 153; Mr. Bement — 31; Mr. Edington — 51; Mr. Falck — 77; and Mr. Schiavoni — 153; (iv) RSUs that were granted to all of the NEOs in February 2013 that vested and were released in part on February 20, 201417, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 8,186; Mr. Hatfield — 1,432; Mr. Bement — 614; Mr. Edington — 1,024; Mr. Falck — 1,432; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,432; dividend rights (and interest thereon) payable in stock earned on RSUs granted in February 2013 and released in part on February 20, 201417, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 169;545; Mr. Hatfield — 59;191; Mr. Bement — 41; Mr. Edington — 42;136; Mr. Falck — 29;95; and Mr. Schiavoni — 29; (ii)191; (v) 2,008 RSUs that were granted to all of the Named Executive OfficersMr. Edington in February 2012 that vested and were released in part on February 20, 2014 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 8,546; Mr. Hatfield — 1,188;2017; 2,679 RSUs granted to Mr. Edington — 1,188;in February 2016; 2,078 RSUs granted to Mr. Falck — 1,662; andEdington in February 2015; 1,026 RSUs granted to Mr. Schiavoni — 950;Edington in February 2014; dividend rights (and interest thereon) payable in stock earned on those RSUs grantedconsisting of 84 on the 2016 RSUs, 130 on the 2015 RSUs; and 97 on the 2014 RSUs, in February 2012 and released in part on February 20, 2014 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 354; Mr. Hatfield — 98; Mr. Edington — 98; Mr. Falck — 69; and Mr. Schiavoni — 39; (iii) RSUs that were granted to all of the Named Executive Officers in February 2011cases that vested and were released in part on February 20, 2014 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 8,991; Mr. Hatfield — 1,499; Mr. Edington — 1,499; Mr. Falck — 2,098; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,199; dividend rights (and interest thereon) payable in stock earned on RSUs granted in February 2011 and released on February 20, 2014 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 565; Mr. Hatfield — 189; Mr. Edington — 189; Mr. Falck — 264; and Mr. Schiavoni — 151; (iv) RSUs that were granted to the named Executive Officers in January 2010, that vested and were released in part on February 20, 2014 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 7,825; Mr. Hatfield — 1,066; Mr. Edington — 1,665; Mr. Falck — 2,331; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,299; dividend rights (and interest thereon) payable in stock earned on RSUs granted in January 2010 and released on February 20, 2014 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 713; Mr. Hatfield — 194; Mr. Edington — 303; Mr. Falck — 425; and Mr. Schiavoni — 237; (v) Supplemental RSUs that were granted to all of the Named Executive Officers in February 2011 and that vested in part on February 14, 2014 (but were not released) (the "February Supplemental RSUs") as follows: Mr. Brandt — 5,395; Mr. Hatfield —
62     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

    1,499; Mr. Edington — 2,997; Mr. Falck — 1,499; and Mr. Schiavoni — 1,499; Mr. Edington also vested in 2,997 on December 31, 2014;March 22, 2017 (vi) additional RSUs resulting from notional dividends on the Supplementalone-time award of supplemental grants of RSUs that were granted in February 2011 for performance prior to

82GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

    2011 and further described below (the "Supplemental RSUs"), that vested, but were not released, on the following dates in 2014:2017:

NAME
 FEBRUARY 14
 MARCH 3
 JUNE 2
 SEPTEMBER 2
 DECEMBER 1
 DECEMBER 31

Donald E. Brandt

 671 188 189 188 176     0

James R. Hatfield

 187   52   53   52   49     0

Randall K. Edington

 371 104 105 105   97 508

David P. Falck

 187   52   53   52   49     0

Mark A. Schiavoni

 187   52   53   52   49     0
NAME
MARCH 1
JUNE 1
SEPTEMBER 1
DECEMBER 1

Donald E. Brandt

216201201212

James R. Hatfield

60565660

Robert S. Bement

60565660

Randall K. Edington

120

David P. Falck

60565660

Mark A. Schiavoni

60565660

    (The Supplemental RSUs vested 50% on February 15, 2013, 25% on February 14, 2014, and 25% on February 13, 2015. The Supplemental RSUs are not released to the recipient until the recipient's retirement, death, disability or separation of employment from the Company. Mr. Edington's vested Supplemental RSUs were released in March 2017 when he retired); (vii) performance shares that were granted to all of the Named Executive OfficersNEOs in February 2011,2014, which were based on a performance period of January 1, 20112014 to December 31, 2013,2016, and which were released in 20142017 when the Company had the information needed to determine whether, and to what extent, the applicable performance criteria were met, as follows: performance shares related to TSR were released on February 18, 201421, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 17,118;38,036; Mr. Hatfield — 2,854;6,792; Mr. Bement — 2,718; Mr. Edington — 2,854;4,527; Mr. Falck — 3,994;6,792; and Mr. Schiavoni — 2,282;6,792; dividend rights (and interest thereon) payable in stock on the performance shares released on February 18, 201421, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 2,163;3,738; Mr. Hatfield — 361;668; Mr. Bement — 267; Mr. Edington — 361;445; Mr. Falck — 505;668; and Mr. Schiavoni — 288;668; and performance shares related to the six operational performance metrics were released on October 22, 201417, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 28,303;30,959; Mr. Hatfield — 4,718;5,528; Mr. Bement — 2,212; Mr. Edington — 4,718;3,685; Mr. Falck — 6,604;5,528; and Mr. Schiavoni — 3,774;5,528; and dividend rights (and interest thereon) payable in stock on the performance shares released on October 22, 201417, 2017 as follows: Mr. Brandt — 4,005;3,327; Mr. Hatfield — 668;594; Mr. Bement — 238; Mr. Edington — 668;396; Mr. Falck — 934;594; and Mr. Schiavoni — 534.

594; and (vii) accrued notional dividends on the 2012 special performance-linked retention grant of RSUs granted to Mr. Brandt (the "2012 Brandt RSU Award") — 781 in respect of the February 1, 2017 record date that were paid on March 1, 2017.

(2)
The values realized for the RSUs, Supplemental RSUs and the performance shares are calculated by multiplying the number of shares of stock or units released or vested by the market value of the common stock on the release or vesting date, which: (i) for the RSUs released on February 20, 201417, 2017 was $55.10;$78.70; (ii) for the Supplemental RSUs vested on February 14, 2014March 1, 2017 was $54.39;$82.40; (iii) for the Supplemental RSUs vested on March 3, 201422, 2017 was $55.07;$83.66; (iv) for the Supplemental RSUs vested on June 2, 20141, 2017 was $55.09;$89.03; (v) for the Supplemental RSUs vested on September 2, 20141, 2017 was $56.15;$89.86; (vi) for the Supplemental RSUs vested on December 1, 20142017 was $63.60;$91.01; (vii) for the Supplemental RSUs vestedperformance shares released on December 31, 2014February 21, 2017 was $69.72;$79.77; (viii) for the performance shares released on February 18, 2014October 17, 2017 was $54.84;$87.76; and (ix) for the performance shares releasedaccrued notional dividends on October 22, 2014the 2012 Brandt RSU Award paid on March 1, 2017 was $58.73.$82.40.
2015

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 83

|GRAPHIC 63

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

Pension Benefits
 

The Pension Benefits table below includes estimates of the potential future pension benefits for each Named Executive OfficerNEO based on the actuarial assumptions used for financial reporting purposes, such as the life expectancy of each Named Executive OfficerNEO and his spouse and "discount rates."

NAME
 PLAN NAME
 NUMBER OF YEARS
CREDITED SERVICE
(#)

 PRESENT VALUE OF
ACCUMULATED
BENEFITS
($)(1)

 PAYMENTS
DURING LAST
FISCAL YEAR
($)

PLAN NAME
NUMBER OF YEARS
CREDITED SERVICE
(#)

PRESENT VALUE OF
ACCUMULATED
BENEFITS
($)(1)

PAYMENTS
DURING LAST
FISCAL YEAR
($)

Donald E. Brandt(2) Retirement Plan 12       348,413 0Retirement Plan15474,5510
 Supplemental Plan 12   7,678,357 0Supplemental Plan1513,546,4650
James R. Hatfield(3) Retirement Plan   7       124,820 0Retirement Plan10202,4640
 Supplemental Plan   7   1,749,605 0Supplemental Plan103,256,4970
Randall K. Edington(4) Retirement Plan   8       155,229 0
Robert S. Bement(4)Retirement Plan11234,2060
 Supplemental Plan   8   3,707,596 0Supplemental Plan112,517,9430
 Employment Agreements N/A 10,473,204 0
David P. Falck(5) Retirement Plan   6       109,226 0
Randall K. Edington(5)Retirement Plan100249,490(8)
Supplemental Plan102,864,7892,904,156(8)
 Supplemental Plan   6   1,341,428 0Employment AgreementsN/A6,688,8358,017,441(8)
Mark A. Schiavoni(6) Retirement Plan   6       111,246 0
David P. Falck(6)Retirement Plan9194,9410
 Supplemental Plan   6   1,241,592 0Supplemental Plan92,431,9140
Mark A. Schiavoni(7)Retirement Plan9192,3880
Supplemental Plan92,651,6780

(1)
See Note 7 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2014Pinnacle West/APS Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 for additional information about the assumptions used by the Company in calculating pension obligations.

(2)
The amounts shown are the present values of Mr. Brandt's accumulated benefits to be paid as an annuity and lump sum for the Retirement Plan and as an annuity to be paid under the Supplemental Plan, both at age 65, which is the earliest Mr. Brandt could retire with no reduction in benefits. See the following "Discussion of Pension Benefits."

(3)
The amounts shown are the present values of Mr. Hatfield's accumulated benefits to be paid as an annuity and lump sum for the Retirement Plan and as an annuity to be paid under the Supplemental Plan.

(4)
The amounts shown are the present values of Mr. Edington'sBement's accumulated benefits to be paid as an annuity and lump sum for the Retirement Plan and as an annuity to be paid under the Supplemental Plan.

(5)
The amounts shown are the present values of Mr. Edington's accumulated benefits to be paid as an annuity for the Retirement Plan, his employment agreements, and as an annuity for the Supplemental Plan. Mr. Edington's employment agreements are described in the narrative disclosure accompanying the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table.

(5)(6)
The amounts shown are the present values of Mr. Falck's accumulated benefits to be paid as an annuity and lump sum for the Retirement Plan and as an annuity to be paid under the Supplemental Plan.

(6)(7)
The amounts shown are the present values of Mr. Schiavoni's accumulated benefits to be paid as an annuity and lump sum for the Retirement Plan and as an annuity to be paid under the Supplemental Plan.

(8)
The amounts shown reflect the following payments made to Mr. Edington during 2017: (i) a lump sum payment of $249,490 for the Retirement Plan on April 1, 2017; (ii) an annuity payment of $129,003 for the Supplemental Plan on October 1, 2017; (iii) a lump sum payment of $2,775,153 for the Supplemental Plan on October 1, 2017; (iv) an annuity payment of $301,202 for his employment agreements on October 1, 2017 and (v) a lump sum payment of $7,716,239 for his employment agreements on October 1, 2017. Mr. Edington's employment agreements are described in the narrative disclosure accompanying the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table.
64     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

84GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

Discussion of Pension Benefits
 

Retirement Plan and Supplemental Plan.    The Company's Retirement Plan is a tax-qualified, non-contributory retirement plan for salaried and hourly employees. The Supplemental Plan provides retirement benefits for key salaried employees, in addition to those provided under the Retirement Plan. The Supplemental Plan pays only the difference between the total benefit payable under the Supplemental Plan and the benefit payable under the Retirement Plan. As a result, an executive who participates in the Supplemental Plan does not receive duplicative benefits.

Prior to April 1, 2003, benefits under the Retirement Plan and the Supplemental Plan (the "Traditional Formula Benefit") accrued in accordance with a traditional retirement plan formula based on average annual compensation and years of service (the "Traditional Formula"). Effective April 1, 2003, the Company changed the benefit accrual formula for both the Retirement Plan and the Supplemental Plan (the "Account Balance Benefit") to a retirement account balance formula (the "Account Balance Formula"). As part of the modification, all then current participants were able to elect to either (1) continue to earn benefits calculated under the Traditional Formula, or (2) earn benefits calculated (a) under the Traditional Formula for service through March 31, 2003, and (b) under the Account Balance Formula for service after that date. Mr. Brandt's benefits are calculated under the combined Traditional Formula/Account Balance Formula. Messrs. Hatfield's, Bement's, Edington's, Falck's and Schiavoni's benefits are calculated under the Account Balance Formula. Mr. Edington's benefits under the Supplemental Plan are calculated in accordance with his employment agreements with the Company, which are described in the narrative disclosure accompanying the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table.

Under the Traditional Formula of the Supplemental Plan, a participant's monthly benefit for life beginning at normal retirement age (age 65 or age 60 with 20 years of service) is equal to the following:

3% of the participant's average monthly compensation multiplied by the participant's first 10 years of service, plus

2% of the participant's average monthly compensation multiplied by the participant's next 15 years of service, minus

benefits payable under the Retirement Plan.

A participant's Traditional Formula Benefit under the Retirement Plan is a monthly benefit for life beginning at normal retirement age and is equal to the participant's average monthly compensation multiplied by 1.65% for the first 33 years of service, plus 1% of average monthly compensation for each year of service credited in excess of 33 years. A participant's Traditional Formula Benefit begins when the participant reaches age 65 with 5 years of service or age 60 with 33 years of service. The maximum Traditional Formula Benefit a participant may receive under both the Retirement Plan and the Supplemental Plan is a monthly benefit of 60% of the participant's average monthly compensation.

Under both the Supplemental Plan and the Retirement Plan, a participant may elect to begin receiving the Traditional Formula Benefit after attaining early retirement age, which is defined as age 55 with 10 years of service. The Traditional Formula Benefit of an individual who makes this election is reduced to reflect the early commencement of benefits. Under the Supplemental Plan, the reduction equals 3% per year for each year for which the individual receives benefits prior to normal retirement and under the Retirement Plan, if the individual has more than

2015

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 85

|GRAPHIC 65

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

20 years of service, the reduction equals 3% per year for each year for which the individual receives benefits prior to normal retirement, and if the individual has less than 20 years of service, the benefit is actuarially reduced for each year for which the individual receives benefits prior to normal retirement. Mr.Messrs. Brandt, Hatfield and Bement currently qualifiesqualify for early retirement, but not normal retirement, under the Retirement Plan and the Supplemental Plan. Messrs. Hatfield, Edington,Mr. Falck currently qualifies for normal retirement under the Retirement Plan and the Supplemental Plan. Mr. Schiavoni dodoes not currently qualify for early or normal retirement under either the Supplemental Plan or the Retirement Plan.

Under the Account Balance Formula, a notional account is established for each eligible participant and benefits are generally payable at termination of employment. The Company credits monthly amounts to a participant's account.

Under the Supplemental Plan, Company credits are based on the following formula:

AGE AT END OF PLAN YEAR
PERCENT OF MONTHLY
COMPENSATION CONTRIBUTION RATE
(%)

Less than 35

12

35-39

14

40-44

16

45-49

20

50-54

24

55 and over

28

Company credits under the Supplemental Plan stop at the end of the year in which a participant attains 25 years of service (the "25-Year Cap").

Under the Retirement Plan, Company credits are based on the following formula:

AGE PLUS WHOLE YEARS OF SERVICE AT
END OF PLAN YEAR

PERCENT OF MONTHLY
COMPENSATION CONTRIBUTION RATE
(%)

Less than 40

4

40-49

5

50-59

6

60-69

7

70-79

9

80 and over

11

In addition, participants in the Retirement Plan on December 31, 2002 are eligible for up to 10 years of transition credits based on age and years of service (with the maximum transition credit being equal to 2.75% of average monthly compensation).

For purposes of calculating the Traditional Formula Benefit and the Account Balance Benefit under the Retirement Plan, compensation consists solely of base salary up to $260,000,$270,000, including any employee contributions under the Company's 401(k) plan, flexible benefits plan and qualified transportation arrangement under Section 132(f) of the Code. Amounts voluntarily

86GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

deferred under other deferred compensation plans, bonuses, and incentive pay and long-term equity awards are not taken into account under the Retirement Plan. The Supplemental Plan takes these amounts into

66     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

account (with certain exceptions) plus base salary beyond the $260,000$270,000 limit. In addition, retention units are included in compensation under the Supplemental Plan.

For purposes of the Traditional Formula under the Retirement Plan, the average monthly compensation is the average of the highest 36 consecutive months of compensation in the final 10 years of employment; under the Supplemental Plan, the average monthly compensation is the average of the highest 36 consecutive months of compensation during employment. For purposes of the Account Balance Formula, contributions are based on the participant's then current monthly compensation calculated as described above.

A participant's years of service begin accruing on the date of employment. However, benefits do not vest until the completion of three yearsthree-years of service. Under both the Retirement Plan and the Supplemental Plan, benefits are generally payable, as the participant elects, in the form of a level annuity, with or without survivorship, or a lump sum. However, Traditional Formula Benefits generally are not available as a lump sum, but are paid in the form of an annuity. Optional benefit forms are of relatively equal actuarial value under the Retirement Plan. Under the Supplemental Plan, the 50% joint and survivor benefit form is fully subsidized, and the other benefit forms are partially subsidized. The Supplemental Plan offers an optional five-year certain form of payment (payable in 60 monthly installments).

Effective January 1, 2011, the Supplemental Plan was amended to reduce the Company credits for individuals who became participants on or after January 1, 2011 to the levels listed in the following table:

AGE AT END OF PLAN YEAR
PERCENT OF MONTHLY
COMPENSATION CONTRIBUTION RATE
(%)

Less than 35

8

35-39

9

40-44

10

45-49

12

50-54

15

55 and over

18

In addition, individuals who became participants in the Supplemental Plan on or after January 1, 2011 are no longer entitled to receive a fully subsidized 50% joint and survivor annuity form of benefit, but the 25-Year Cap has been eliminated. Prior to the amendment, participants who were promoted to officer status were entitled to retroactive treatment as an officer for their entire period of employment. This feature has been eliminated for individuals promoted to officer status on or after January 1, 2011.

Pursuant to Mr. Edington'sThe 2008 Agreement, the 2012 Supplemental Agreement as of December 31, 2013, the supplemental pension benefit amount calculated in accordance with the 2008 Agreement was increased by an amount equal to 5% of the benefit that would have otherwise been payable and as of December 31, 2014, the supplemental pension benefit amount was increased by an amount equal to 10% (inclusive of the preceding 5% increase) of the benefit that would have otherwise been payable. Pursuant to the 2014 Supplemental Agreement if Mr. Edington is actively employed withresulted in a total pension benefit (including the Company on June 30, 2016,benefit due under the Company's qualified plan and non-qualified plan) equal to 69.3% applied to Mr. Edington's existing supplemental pension benefit set forthfinal average wage to determine his lifetime benefit. These agreements are discussed in the 2008 Agreement as increased bynarrative disclosure accompanying the 2012 Supplemental Agreement, will increase by an amount equal to 5%Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of the benefit that would have otherwise been payable.Plan-Based Awards table.

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 67

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Benefits under the Retirement Plan are paid from a tax-exempt trust. Benefits under the Supplemental Plan are paid from the general assets of the Company.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 87


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Nonqualified Deferred Compensation
 

NAME
 EXECUTIVE
CONTRIBUTIONS
IN LAST
FISCAL YEAR
($)(1)

 REGISTRANT
CONTRIBUTIONS
IN LAST
FISCAL YEAR
($)

 AGGREGATE
EARNINGS
IN LAST
FISCAL YEAR
($)(2)

 AGGREGATE
WITHDRAWALS/
DISTRIBUTIONS
($)

 AGGREGATE
BALANCE
AT LAST
FISCAL YEAR
END
($)(3)

EXECUTIVE
CONTRIBUTIONS
IN LAST
FISCAL YEAR
($)(1)

REGISTRANT
CONTRIBUTIONS
IN LAST
FISCAL YEAR
($)

AGGREGATE
EARNINGS
IN LAST
FISCAL YEAR
($)(2)

AGGREGATE
WITHDRAWALS/
DISTRIBUTIONS
($)

AGGREGATE
BALANCE
AT LAST
FISCAL YEAR
END
($)(3)

Donald E. Brandt:

               

DCP & 2005 Plan

            0               0 101,401 0 1,453,651326,4160158,62802,305,512

Supplemental RSUs(4)

            0               0            0 0 1,293,51800002,386,403

James R. Hatfield:

               

2005 Plan

            0               0     8,346 0    119,64431,962014,4750217,194

Supplemental RSUs(4)

            0               0            0 0    359,4470000663,467

Robert S. Bement:

     

2005 Plan

140,6220119,35301,682,375

Supplemental RSUs(4)

0000663,467

Bement DCP Discretionary
Credits(5)


075,00081,62301,133,799

Randall K. Edington:

               

2005 Plan

 377,694               0 191,276 0 2,743,390269,0190327,0221,393,6383,476,770

Supplemental RSUs(4)

            0               0            0 0    957,9110001,322,0310

Edington DCP Discretionary Credits(5)

            0 1,050,000 101,291 0 1,932,010

Edington DCP Discretionary
Credits(6)

00219,589398,0652,730,943

RSUs(7)

0000677,812

David P. Falck:

               

Supplemental RSUs(4)

            0               0            0 0    359,4470000663,467

Falck DCP Discretionary Credits(6)

            0               0   36,152 0    518,173

Falck DCP Discretionary Credits(8)

0046,8770650,794

Mark A. Schiavoni:

               

2005 Plan

   95,131               0   22,936 0    329,24793,475040,5720580,148

Supplemental RSUs(4)

            0               0            0 0    359,4470000663,467

(1)
The amount of the executive contribution is solely from the voluntary deferral by the executive of the executive's designated compensation and does not include any separate Company contribution. These deferred amounts are included in the "Salary" and "Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation" columns in the Summary Compensation Table.

(2)
A portion of the amounts reported in this column is alsothe above-market portion of interest accrued under the deferred compensation plan (also reported as compensation in the Summary Compensation Table,Table), including: Mr. Brandt — $56,912;$90,786; Mr. Hatfield — $4,684;$8,069; Mr. Bement — $118,336; Mr. Edington — $148,371;$367,720; Mr. Falck — $20,294;$27,793; and Mr. Schiavoni — $12,858. See clause (ii) of the first sentence of footnote 3 to the Summary Compensation Table.$23,521.

(3)
The historical contributions of each Named Executive OfficerNEO to his aggregate balance at December 31, 2014,2017, including "market rate" interest (as defined by the SEC) from the date of each contribution, is as follows: Mr. Brandt — $1,130,909;$1,711,974; Mr. Hatfield — $103,311;$178,706; Mr. Bement — $1,334,579; Mr. Edington — $2,370,564;$2,502,104; Mr. Falck — $0; and Mr. Schiavoni — $298,952.$484,114. Of the totals in this column, the following amounts have been reported in the Summary Compensation Table in this Proxy Statement or in the Company's prior Proxy Statements: Mr. Brandt — $1,095,102;$1,787,539; Mr. Hatfield — $105,350;$188,408; Mr. Bement — $258,958; Mr. Edington — $2,488,149;$4,681,860; Mr. Falck — $86,671;$168,746; and Mr. Schiavoni — $175,777.

$386,315.

88GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation
(4)
Supplemental RSUs were granted to each of the Named Executive OfficersNEOs in 2011 and vestvested over a four-year period. The amounts in this table representperiod and earned additional Supplemental RSUs that vested in February 2014, and additional vested Supplemental RSUs through December 2014RSU's resulting from notional dividends on the vested Supplemental RSUs. See footnote 5 to the Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End table and footnote 1 to the Option Exercises and Stock Vested table for additional information.underlying awards. The amount in the "Aggregate Balance at Last Fiscal Year End" column is calculated by multiplying
68     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

    the closing market price of our common stock at the end of 20142017 ($68.3185.18 per share as of December 31, 2014)29, 2017) by the number of vested Supplemental RSUs. Mr. Edington's vested Supplemental RSUs were released in 2017, the year he retired. The amount in the "Aggregate Withdrawals/Distributions "column is the number of vested Supplemental RSUs released multiplied by the closing price of our common stock on the date of release ($86.85 per share as of September 25, 2017).The following table shows historical vesting by year:

 
 SUPPLEMENTAL RSUs
 NOTIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL RSUs
 
 2013
 2014
 2013
 2014

Donald E. Brandt

 10,790 5,395 1,339 1,412

James R. Hatfield

   2,998 1,499    372    393

Randall K. Edington

   5,994 5,994    745 1,290

David P. Falck

   2,998 1,499    372    393

Mark A. Schiavoni

   2,998 1,499    372    393
 
SUPPLEMENTAL
RSUs

NOTIONAL
SUPPLEMENTAL
RSUs

 
 
2013
2014
2015
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017

Donald E. Brandt

10,7905,3955,3951,3391,4121,926929830

James R. Hatfield

2,9981,4991,499372393536260232

Robert S. Bement

2,9981,4991,499372393536260232

Randall K. Edington

5,9945,99407451,290561518120

David P. Falck

2,9981,4991,499372393536260232

Mark A. Schiavoni

2,9981,4991,499372393536260232
(5)
Pursuant toThe terms of the 2012 Supplemental Agreement, the Company granted the 2012 EdingtonBement DCP Discretionary Credits to Mr. Edington. The full amountare discussed under "Discussion of the 2012 EdingtonNonqualified Deferred Compensation — DCP Discretionary Credits ($1,050,000) has been included in the Summary Compensation Table since the performance condition was met. and 2005 Plan" below.

(6)
The terms of the 2012 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits are also discussed under the narrative disclosure accompanying the Summary Compensation Table and Grants of Plan-Based Awards table.

    Pursuant to the 2014 Supplemental Agreement, the Company granted the 2014 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits to Mr. Edington. Amounts paid to Mr. Edington underThe $500,000 of the 2014 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits will bethat vested 180 days after Mr. Edington's retirement from APS in March 2017 have been included in the Summary Compensation Table whensince the performance condition iswas met. The terms of the 2014 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits are also discussed in the narrative disclosure accompanying the Summary Compensation Table and Grants of Plan-Based Awards table.



    (7)
    Mr. Edington's RSUs vested in March 2017 when he retired. These RSUs will be released in accordance with the vesting schedule associated with each RSU grant. The amount in the "Registrant Contributions in"Aggregate Balance at Last Fiscal Year"Year End" column is calculated by multiplying the closing market price of this table for Mr. Edington represents $350,000our common stock on March 22, 2017 ($83.66 per share) by the number of the 2012 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits that were provided to Mr. Edington as of January 1, 2014, $200,000 of the 2014 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits that were provided to Mr. Edington as of July 1, 2014, and $500,000 of the 2014 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits that were provided to Mr. Edington as of September 30, 2014.

vested RSUs.

(6)(8)
Pursuant to Mr. Falck's offer letter, the terms of which are described under "Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation — DCP and 2005 Plan" below, the Company granted the Falck DCP Discretionary Credits to Mr. Falck. The first $250,000 of the Falck DCP Discretionary Credits vested on July 29, 2014 and have been included in the Summary Compensation Table since the performance condition was met. The remaining $100,000 of the Falck DCP Discretionary Credits will be included in the Summary Compensation Table when the performance condition is met.

Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation
 

DCP and 2005 Plan.    Effective January 1, 1992, the Company established The Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, Arizona Public Service Company, SunCor Development Company, and El Dorado Investment Company Deferred Compensation Plan (the "DCP"). Under the DCP, a participant who is an employee is allowed to defer up to 50% of annual base salary and up to 100% of year-end bonus, which would include awards under regular annual incentive plans, but not special incentive payments. A participant who is a member of the Board is allowed to defer up to 100% of the annual cash fees payable to the participant. Amounts deferred by participants are credited with interest at various rates in substantially the same manner as interest is credited pursuant to the 2005 Plan, as described below. Distributions may be made (1) within 60 days after the fifth year an amount was deferred, (2) on account of an unforeseen emergency, (3) on account of retirement after attaining age 65 with five years of service or after attaining age 55 with 10 years of service ("Retirement Benefit"), (4) on account of termination prior to retirement ("Termination Benefit"), (5) on account of disability, or (6) on account of death before termination of employment.

The Retirement Benefit and Termination Benefit are payable in a lump sum or in 5, 10, or 15 equal annual installments, as elected by the participant. Other benefits are generally paid in a lump sum. The method of crediting interest on lump sum and installment payments under the DCP is substantially the same as the method used in the 2005 Plan, as described below.

2015

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 89

|GRAPHIC 69

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

On December 15, 2004, the Board authorized the adoption of a new nonqualified deferred compensation plan for post-2004 deferrals (the "2005 Plan"). No future deferrals will be permitted under the DCP. The 2005 Plan, effective as of January 1, 2005, is based in large part on the DCP as described above. The 2005 Plan was adopted to comply with the requirements of Section 409A of the Code.

Under the 2005 Plan, a participant who is an employee is allowed to defer up to 50% of the participant's base salary and up to 100% of the participant's bonus, including regular awards under annual incentive plans, but not special awards. A participant who is a member of the Board is allowed to defer up to 100% of the annual cash fees payable to the participant. Amounts deferred by participants are credited with interest at various rates, as described below. Deferral elections of base salary and director's fees must be made prior to the calendar year in which such base salary or director's fees will be paid. A deferral election with respect to a bonus must be made before the first day of the calendar year in which the bonus is earned. When making a deferral election, a participant also makes an election regarding the time and form of the participant's distributions from the 2005 Plan. Distributions from the 2005 Plan must be made in accordance with Section 409A of the Code. Distributions may be made (1) in January of the fifth year following the year in which an amount was deferred, (2) on account of an unforeseeable financial emergency, (3) either (i) termination of employment or (ii) the later of termination of employment or attainment of age 55, or (4) on account of death before termination of employment.

In the event of termination of employment, attainment of age 55 or death, the benefit is payable in a lump sum or in 5, 10 or 15 equal annual installments, as elected by the participant. Benefits in the other circumstances are generally paid in a lump sum.

The 2005 Plan provides for a single rate of interest that will be determined by the plan committee, but which rate shall in no event be less than the rate of interest equal to the 10-year U.S. Treasury Note rate as published on the last business day of the first week of October preceding a plan year. The plan committee set the rate at 7.5% for 2014.2017.

Effective January 1, 2009, the Company amended the 2005 Plan to permit the Company, in its discretion, to award discretionary credits to participants. Discretionary credits generally will be paid at the time and in the form provided in the written award agreement.

The Company agreed in Mr. Falck's offer letter to make a $350,000 discretionary credit award to Mr. Falck in 2009, pursuant to the 2005 Plan (the "Falck DCP Discretionary Credits"). The first $250,000 vested on July 29, 2014 and the remaining $100,000 will vestvested on July 29, 2016. The $350,000 discretionary credit award earns interest in accordance with the 2005 Plan. The full amount of the discretionary credit award vests and becomes payable if the Company terminates Mr. Falck's employment without cause within two years following a change of control, or in the event of his death. If Mr. Falck terminates employment, for any reason other than those discussed above, prior to July 29, 2016, he forfeits the $100,000 discretionary credit award.

The Company agreed in Mr. Edington's 2008 Agreement to the Deferred Compensation Account. The Company further agreed in Mr. Edington's 2012 Supplemental Agreement to the 2012 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits. All of the 2012 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits vested on December 31, 2014. The Company also agreed in Mr. Edington's 2014 Supplemental Agreement to the 2014 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits. The full amount of the 2014 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits vest and become payable if the Company terminates

70     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Mr. Edington's employment without cause, or in the event of his death or disability. If Mr. Edington terminates employment, for any reason other than those discussed above, prior to June 30, 2016, he forfeits the 2014 Edington DCP Discretionary Credits. These awards are also described in the narrative disclosure accompanying the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table.

The Company made a discretionary credit award to Mr. Bement in 2008 pursuant to the 2005 Plan consisting of $350,000 as of December 17, 2008, $70,000 as of January 1, 2010 and an additional $70,000 on January 1 of each of the next four years thereafter (the "2008 Bement DCP Discretionary Credits"). The 2008 Bement DCP Discretionary Credits earn interest in accordance with the 2005 Plan. The 2008 Bement DCP Discretionary Credits vested on December 31, 2014 and will be payable to Mr. Bement following his termination from the Company in such form as elected by Mr. Bement.

90GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

Additionally, the Company made a discretionary credit award to Mr. Bement in 2014 pursuant to the 2005 Plan consisting of $75,000 as of January 1, 2015 and an additional $75,000 on January 1 of each of the next four years thereafter (the "2014 Bement DCP Discretionary Credits" and together with the 2008 Bement DCP Discretionary Credits, the "Bement DCP Discretionary Credits"). The 2014 Bement DCP Discretionary Credits earn interest in accordance with the 2005 Plan. The full amount of the 2014 Bement DCP Discretionary Credits vest and become payable if, prior to December 31, 2018, the Company terminates Mr. Bement's employment without cause, or in the event of his death or disability. If Mr. Bement terminates employment, for any reason other than those discussed above, prior to December 31, 2018, he forfeits the 2014 Bement DCP Discretionary Credits.

Participation in both the DCP and the 2005 Plan is limited to officers, the Company's senior management group and directors of the Company and participating affiliates. The Company's obligations under the DCP and the 2005 Plan are unfunded (except in the limited change of control circumstance discussed below) and unsecured.

Potential Payments upon Termination or Change of Control
 

This section describes the potential payments that each of the Named Executive OfficersNEOs could receive following termination of employment, including through death, disability, retirement, resignation, involuntary termination (with or without cause) or a change of control of the Company (each, a "Termination Event"). We describe plans, agreements, or arrangements under which each Named Executive OfficerNEO could receive payments following a Termination Event, excluding those that do not discriminate in favor of our executive officers and that are available generally to all salaried employees and awards that are already vested ("Termination Plans"). The description of payments to the Named Executive OfficersNEOs under the various Termination Event scenarios described in this section are not intended to affect the Company's obligations to the Named Executive Officers.NEOs. Those obligations are subject to, and qualified by, the contracts or arrangements giving rise to such obligations. Unless we note otherwise, the discussion below assumes that any Termination Event took place on December 31, 20142017 for each Named Executive Officer.NEO.

The Company does not have a severance plan that covers the Named Executive Officers.NEOs. We also do not have traditional severance agreements or arrangements with our Named Executive Officers.NEOs. We do have Change of Control Agreements, which are discussed below.

In addition to the termination payments set forth below, the Named Executive OfficersNEOs would also receive a full distribution under the 2005 Plan (except in the case of the Falck DCP Discretionary Credits and the Edington DCP Discretionary Credits, which are discussed separately below) and pension benefits. Amounts payable to Messrs. Brandt, Hatfield, Bement, Edington, Falck and Schiavoni under the 2005 Plan are set forth in the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation table, which also shows which part of the payment is interest paid by the Company and which part is the executive's contribution.

With respect to pension benefits, the amounts that each of the Named Executive OfficersNEOs would receive under the Supplemental Plan in the event of a Termination Event are set forth in the Pension Benefits table; however, assuming that the Named Executive OfficerNEO (excluding Mr. Edington who retired in March 2017) had died on December 31, 2014,2017, the amounts payable under the Supplemental Plan, (and in the case of Mr. Edington, under the Supplemental Plan and his employment agreements), would have been as follows: Mr. Brandt — $7,230,075;$11,379,622; Mr. Hatfield — $1,471,093;$2,662,223; Mr. EdingtonBement — $13,368,177;$2,056,350; Mr. Falck — $1,232,491;$2,258,009; and Mr. Schiavoni — $1,111,888.$2,379,438. These amounts are based on the following assumptions: (1) the Traditional Formula Benefit is paid in the form of a monthly annuity to the Named Executive Officer'sNEO's spouse for life following his death and benefit payments commence immediately;immediately and (2) the Account Balance Benefit is paid in the form of an immediate lump sum to his spouse; and (3) in the case of Mr. Edington, 50% of the benefit is

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 71

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 91


Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

paid as an annuity and 50% of the benefit is paid as aimmediate lump sum to his spouse as provided in his employment agreements. Mr.spouse. Messrs. Brandt, Hatfield and Bement would have received $8,714,228$13,988,527, $3,256,497 and $2,517,943, respectively, in the event of a Termination Event other than death due to histheir qualification for early retirement on December 31, 2014,2017, and this amount isthese amounts are based on the assumption that the benefit would be payable as a monthly annuity beginning on January 1, 2015.2018.

The Falck DCP Discretionary Credits and theunvested 2014 EdingtonBement DCP Discretionary Credits would trigger a payment in connection with certain Termination Events, which are identified below. The agreements areagreement is discussed in the narrative disclosure accompanying the Summary Compensation Table and the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table and in the Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation.

With respect to the performance share awards, the recipient must remain employed with the Company throughout the performance period, unless the recipient meets any of the following exceptions, which would trigger a payment in connection with those certain Termination Events. In the case of the recipient's retirement while qualifying for Early Retirement or Normal Retirement (the "Retirement Qualified Employee") under the Retirement Plan, the employee is deemed to have been employed through the end of the performance period (with payout based on actual performance results). In the case of the recipient's retirement after reaching age 60 with five years of service, but not otherwise qualifying for Early Retirement or Normal Retirement under the Retirement Plan (a "Late Career Employee"), any performance share payout will vest pro-rata based on the number of days the recipient was employed during the performance period compared to the total number of days in the period. In the event the recipient is terminated for cause (regardless of the recipient's retirement date), the recipient shall not be deemed to have been employed through the end of the performance period and will forfeit the right to receive any payout. In the event of the death or disability of a Retirement Qualified Employee or a Late Career Employee, the employee is deemed to have been employed through the end of the performance period (with payout based on actual performance results). In the event the recipient's employment is terminated without cause during the performance period, the CEO in his discretion and with the Committee's approval may determine if, to what extent, and when, any unvested portion of the grant may vest. The 2017 Performance Shares contain confidentiality protections that apply during employment and survive termination, and non-competition and employee solicitation restrictions that survive for a period of one year following termination of employment.

With respect to RSUs, the recipient must remain employed with the Company through the applicable vesting date, unless the recipient meets any of the following exceptions, which would trigger a payment in connection with those certain Termination Events. If a Retirement Qualified Employee retires, the RSUs will fully vest and will be payable on the dates and in the percentages specified in the vesting schedule. If a Retirement Qualified Employee or a Late Career Employee dies or becomes disabled before the end of the vesting period, any outstanding RSUs will fully vest and will be payable no later than March 15 of the year following the year in which the event occurs. If a Late Career Employee retires, the recipient will receive a pro-rata payout of the portion that would have released on the next vesting date based on the number of days the recipient was employed from the last vesting date. In the event a recipient is terminated for cause, any award the recipient would otherwise be entitled to receive following the date of termination is forfeited. In the event a recipient is terminated without cause, the CEO in his discretion and with the Committee's approval may determine if, and to what extent, any unvested portion of the grant will vest. The RSUs contain confidentiality protections that apply during employment and survive termination, and non-competition and employee solicitation restrictions that survive for a period of one year following termination of employment.

92GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

As described in the next paragraph, if a recipient's rights are adequately protected, a change of control will not result in any acceleration of a recipient's performance shares or RSUs. However, if a change of control occurs and the conditions of the following paragraph are not met, immediately prior to the change of control, the RSUs and performance shares will convert to either cash or stock, at the election of the recipient, and shall immediately vest. In converting the performance shares, the recipient will receive the number of shares of stock or the cash equivalent that would have been earned at the target level of performance, unless the Committee determines that a higher level of attained performance is reasonably ascertainable as of a specified date prior to the closing of the change of control transaction. The dividend equivalent awards will be paid in cash or stock as determined in accordance with the applicable award agreement.

Prior to a change of control, the Board may determine that no change of control shall be deemed to have occurred or that some or all of the enhancements to the rights of the recipient shall not apply to specified awards. The Board may exercise such override authority only if, before or immediately upon the occurrence of the specified event that would otherwise constitute a change of control, the Board reasonably concludes in good faith, that: (1) recipients holding awards affected by action of the Board override shall be protected by legally binding obligations of the Company or the surviving entity or the parent thereof because such awards (A) shall remain outstanding following consummation of all transactions involved in or contemplated by such change of control, (B) shall be assumed and adjusted by the surviving entity resulting from such transactions or the parent thereof, or (C) shall be exchanged for new awards issued by the surviving entity resulting from such transaction or the parent thereof; and (2) changes in the terms of the award resulting from such transactions will not materially impair the value of the awards to the participants or their opportunity for future appreciation in respect of such awards.

The Company has entered into identical Change of Control Agreements with each of its executive officers, including each of the Named Executive Officers.NEOs. The Company believes that these agreements provide stability for its key management in the event the Company experiences a change of control. The agreements contain a "double-trigger" that provides for certain payments if, during the two-year period following a change of control of the Company (the "first trigger"), the Company terminates the officer's employment for any reason other than death, disability or cause or the executive terminates his or her own employment following a significant and detrimental change in the executive's employment (the "second trigger"). In case of an officer's retirement, death or disability, no payments are made under the officer's Change of Control Agreement, except for the payment of accrued benefits; however, if the officer dies following the officer's receipt of a second trigger termination notice, the officer's estate will receive the change of control payments the officer would have received if the officer had survived. Pursuant to the Change of Control Agreement, each of the Named Executive OfficersNEOs is obligated to hold in confidence any and all information in his possession as a result of his employment, during and after the Named Executive Officer'sNEO's employment with the Company is terminated.

The termination payment, if required, is an amount equal to 2.99 times the sum of the executive's annual salary at the time of the change of control plus the annual bonus (including incentive plan payments), as determined by an average over the last four yearsfour-years preceding termination. In addition, the executive is entitled to continued medical, dental, and group life insurance benefits at a shared cost until the end of the second year following the calendar year of termination. Outplacement services are also provided. The executive officer may also be entitled to the acceleration of benefits as set forth in the 2012 Plan, the 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan, or any related award agreement. If the limitations described in Section 280G of

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 93


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation

the Code are exceeded, the Company will not be able to deduct a portion of its payments. In addition, if these limitations are exceeded, Section 4999 of the Code imposes an excise tax on all or part of the total payments. In certain of the agreements, an additional gross-up payment equal to the excise tax (plus any penalties and interest) imposed on or with respect to the total payments is provided.

In May 2009, the Company determined that, on a going-forward basis, it would no longer provide excise tax gross-up payments in new and materially amended agreements with its Named Executive Officers.NEOs. In unusual circumstances where the Company believes that accommodations have to be made to recruit a new executive to the Company, limited reimbursement for taxes payable may be included in an executive's contract; but even in those circumstances, the excise tax gross-ups will be subject to a three-year sunset provision.

72     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

A change of control under the Change of Control Agreement includes: (1) an unrelated third-party's acquisition of 20% or more of the Company's or APS's voting stock; (2) a merger or consolidation where either the Company or APS combines with any other corporation such that the Company's or APS's outstanding voting stock immediately prior to merger or consolidation represents less than 60% of the voting stock of the Company or APS immediately after the merger or consolidation, but excluding a merger or consolidation effected to implement a recapitalization in which no unrelated third-party acquires more than 20% of the voting stock of the Company or APS; (3) a sale, transfer, or other disposition of all or substantially all of the assets of the Company or APS to an unrelated third-party; or (4) the case where the composition of either the Board of the Company or of APS changes such that the members of the Board of the Company (the "Company Incumbent Board") or of APS (the "APS Incumbent Board"), as of July 31, 2007 (and with respect to Messrs. Hatfield, Falck, and Schiavoni as of July 31, 2008) no longer comprises at least two-thirds of the Company's or APS's Board of Directors. For purposes of this later provision, a person elected to either Board is treated as a member of the Company Incumbent Board or APS Incumbent Board if his or her nomination or election by shareholders was approved by a two-thirds vote of the members then comprising the Company Incumbent Board or APS Incumbent Board, and it does not include anyone who became a director in an actual or threatened election contest relating to the election of directors.

Each of the agreements terminates on December 31st of each year upon six months advance notice by the Company to the executive officer; if the six months advance notice is not given, the agreements will continue for successive one-year periods until the notice is given. The Company is required to deposit into a trust sufficient funds to pay obligations under the DCP, 2005 Plan and the Supplemental Plan in the case of an actual or potential change of control.

The following tables quantify the amounts that would have been payable to each Named Executive OfficerNEO if the indicated Termination Event had taken place on December 31, 2014.2017, and with respect to Mr. Edington, the table reflects amounts resulting from his retirement in March 2017. In the tables:

We assume full vesting of outstanding performance shares (at the target level), RSUs and a pro-rata portion of the Retention Grant (in the case of Mr. Brandt)2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award upon a change of control. The performance shares, RSUs and RSUs (excluding the Retention Grant)2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award for the named Executive OfficersNEOs vest upon a change of control whether or not there is a subsequent termination of employment (subject however, to the Board's ability to override the vesting), plus, where applicable, dividend equivalents. We also assume full vesting

94GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of $100,000 plus interest of the Falck DCP Discretionary Credits because the Falck DCP Discretionary Credits vest and become payable if the Company terminates Mr. Falck's employment without cause within two years following a change of control.Contents



Executive Compensation
Retirement benefits payable to Mr.Messrs. Brandt, Hatfield and Bement include full vesting of outstanding performance shares (at the target level) and RSUs, (excluding the Supplemental RSUs and the Retention Grant), retirement benefits payable to Mr. Falck and Mr. Schiavoni include a pro-rata vesting of his 2013 and 2014outstanding performance shares (at the target level) and RSUs, and retirement benefits payable to Mr. Edington include a pro-rata vesting of his 2013 and 2014 performance shares (at the target level) and full vesting of outstanding RSUs, plus, in all cases where applicable, dividend equivalents. Mr. Edington retired in March 2017 so this reflects actual amounts that were triggered upon his retirement.

Death or disability benefits payable to Mr.Messrs. Brandt, Hatfield, Bement, Falck and Schiavoni include full vesting of the 2013 and 2014 outstanding performance shares (at the target level) and 2013 and 2014 RSUs, (excluding the Supplemental RSUs) and a pro-rata portion$300,000 of the Retention Grant; and death or disability
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 73

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

    benefits payable to Messrs. Edington and Falck include full vesting of the 2013 and 2014 outstanding performance shares (at the target level), the 2013 and 2014 RSUs and $100,000 plus interest of the Falck DCP Discretionary Credits and the 2014 EdingtonBement DCP Discretionary Credits plus interest.

interest and the 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award for Mr. Brandt.

The amounts in the "All Other Termination Events" columns consist of payments(i) a payment upon termination without cause for Mr. Brandt andof $300,000 of the 2014 EdingtonBement DCP Discretionary Credits plus interest for Mr. EdingtonBement because the full amountremaining unvested $300,000 of the 2014 EdingtonBement DCP Discretionary Credits vestvests and become payable if the Company terminates Mr. Edington'sBement's employment without cause.cause; and (ii) a payment upon termination without cause of $2,000,000 of the 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award for Mr. Brandt because $2,000,000 of the performance cash award becomes payable if the Company terminates Mr. Brandt's employment without cause prior to March 1, 2018, subject to the Committee determining that the ROE condition was met.

Subject to the foregoing, the following tables describe the amounts that would have been payable to each Named Executive OfficerNEO if a Termination Event had taken place on December 31, 2014:2017:

Donald E. Brandt:

COMPONENT OF PAY
QUALIFYING
TERMINATION
OF EMPLOYMENT
IN CONNECTION
WITH A CHANGE
OF CONTROL
($)

DEATH OR
DISABILITY
($)

RETIREMENT
($)

ALL OTHER
TERMINATION
EVENTS
($)

Performance Shares

9,868,897(1)6,855,2996,855,2990

RSUs

5,923,602(1)5,923,6026,160,5220

2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award

4,000,000(1)4,000,000(2)0(2)2,000,000(2)

Severance Benefits

9,824,718000

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

34,444000

Outplacement Services

10,000000

TOTAL:

29,661,66116,778,90113,015,8212,000,000
(1)
The Performance Shares, RSUs and the 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award are accelerated upon a change of control only if the Board does not exercise its override authority.

(2)
The terms of the 2017 CEO Performance-Contingent Award are discussed under "Executive Compensation Components — Long-Term Incentives — Supplemental Awards" in the CD&A.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 95


Table of Contents

COMPONENT OF PAY
 CHANGE OF
CONTROL
($)

 DEATH OR
DISABILITY
($)

 RETIREMENT
($)

 ALL OTHER
TERMINATION
EVENTS
($)

Performance Shares

   8,975,040   6,287,161   9,469,874               0

RSUs

   9,114,229   6,709,271   6,447,405 2,515,652

Severance Benefits

   8,765,391                  0                  0               0

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

         20,289                  0                  0               0

Outplacement Services

         10,000                  0                  0               0

Excise Tax Gross-Up

   8,656,731                  0                  0               0

TOTAL:

 35,541,680 12,996,432 15,917,279 2,515,652

Executive Compensation

James R. Hatfield:

COMPONENT OF PAY
QUALIFYING
TERMINATION
OF EMPLOYMENT
IN CONNECTION
WITH A CHANGE
OF CONTROL
($)

DEATH OR
DISABILITY
($)

RETIREMENT
($)

ALL OTHER
TERMINATION
EVENTS
($)

Performance Shares

1,860,975(1)1,360,0451,360,0450

RSUs

1,122,554(1)1,122,5541,168,7510

Severance Benefits

3,459,042000

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

38,380000

Outplacement Services

10,000000

Excise Tax Gross-Up

2,219,089000

TOTAL:

8,710,0402,482,5992,528,7960
(1)
The Performance Shares and RSUs are accelerated upon a change of control only if the Board does not exercise its override authority.

Robert S. Bement:

COMPONENT OF PAY
 CHANGE OF
CONTROL
($)

 ALL OTHER
TERMINATION
EVENTS
($)

Performance Shares

 1,468,466 0

RSUs

 1,156,220 0

Severance Benefits

 2,865,156 0

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

       36,134 0

Outplacement Services

       10,000 0

Excise Tax Gross-Up

 2,019,123 0

TOTAL:

 7,555,099 0
74     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement
COMPONENT OF PAY
QUALIFYING
TERMINATION
OF EMPLOYMENT
IN CONNECTION
WITH A CHANGE
OF CONTROL
($)

DEATH OR
DISABILITY
($)

RETIREMENT
($)

ALL OTHER
TERMINATION
EVENTS
($)

Performance Shares

989,441(1)766,140766,1400

RSUs

594,308(1)594,308620,6600

Severance Benefits

3,020,242000

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

38,156000

Outplacement Services

10,000000

Bement DCP Discretionary Credits

093,172093,172

Excise Tax Gross-Up

1,831,273000

TOTAL:

6,483,4201,453,6201,386,80093,172
(1)
The Performance Shares and RSUs are accelerated upon a change of control only if the Board does not exercise its override authority.

96GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

Randall K. Edington:

COMPONENT OF PAY
RETIREMENT
($)

Performance Shares

792,253

RSUs

677,812

Severance Benefits

0

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

0

Retiree Medical Benefits

0

Outplacement Services

0

Edington DCP Discretionary Credits

0

TOTAL:

1,470,065
COMPONENT OF PAY
 CHANGE OF
CONTROL
($)

 DEATH OR
DISABILITY
($)

 RETIREMENT
($)

 ALL OTHER
TERMINATION
EVENTS
($)

Performance Shares

 1,147,796    766,737     382,955               0

RSUs

    803,687    520,336      838,522               0

Severance Benefits

 4,833,010               0                0               0

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

       30,475               0                 0               0

Retiree Medical Benefits

       66,123       51,922
   100,079

 
(Death)
(Disability)

 
              0    100,079

Outplacement Services

       10,000               0                 0               0

Edington DCP Discretionary Credits

               0 1,306,500                0 1,306,500

TOTAL:

 6,891,091 2,645,495
2,693,652
 (Death)
(Disability)
 1,221,477 1,406,579

David P. Falck:

COMPONENT OF PAY
 CHANGE OF
CONTROL
($)

 DEATH OR
DISABILITY
($)

 RETIREMENT
($)

 ALL OTHER
TERMINATION
EVENTS
($)

Performance Shares

 1,642,046 1,111,916  548,781 0

RSUs

 1,273,440    742,789   183,729 0

Severance Benefits

 2,656,158               0             0 0

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

       31,488               0              0 0

Outplacement Services

       10,000               0             0 0

Falck DCP Discretionary Credits

    107,500    107,500
              0
 (Death)
(Disability)
            0 0

TOTAL:

 5,720,632 1,962,205
1,854,705

 
(Death)
(Disability)

 
732,510 0
2015
COMPONENT OF PAY
QUALIFYING
TERMINATION
OF EMPLOYMENT
IN CONNECTION
WITH A CHANGE
OF CONTROL
($)

DEATH OR
DISABILITY
($)

RETIREMENT
($)

ALL OTHER
TERMINATION
EVENTS
($)

Performance Shares

1,682,365(1)1,168,605600,6230

RSUs

1,017,031(1)1,017,031390,4110

Severance Benefits

3,094,469000

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

27,175000

Outplacement Services

10,000000

TOTAL:

5,831,0402,185,636991,0340
(1)
The Performance Shares and RSUs are accelerated upon a change of control only if the Board does not exercise its override authority.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 97

|GRAPHIC 75

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATIONExecutive Compensation

Mark A. Schiavoni:

COMPONENT OF PAY
QUALIFYING
TERMINATION
OF EMPLOYMENT
IN CONNECTION
WITH A CHANGE
OF CONTROL
($)

DEATH OR
DISABILITY
($)

RETIREMENT
($)

ALL OTHER
TERMINATION
EVENTS
($)

Performance Shares

2,388,969(1)1,713,967881,1410

RSUs

1,390,390(1)1,390,390499,0260

Severance Benefits

3,839,037000

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

36,922000

Outplacement Services

10,000000

Excise Tax Gross-Up

2,848,361000

TOTAL:

10,513,6793,104,3571,380,1670
COMPONENT OF PAY
 CHANGE OF
CONTROL
($)

 ALL OTHER
TERMINATION
EVENTS
($)

Performance Shares

 1,381,676 0

RSUs

 1,097,422 0

Severance Benefits

 2,737,287 0

Present Value of Medical, Dental, and Life Insurance Benefits

       36,524 0

Outplacement Services

       10,000 0

Excise Tax Gross-Up

 2,015,440 0

TOTAL:

 7,278,349 0

(1)
The Performance Shares and RSUs are accelerated upon a change of control only if the Board does not exercise its override authority.

Pay Ratio

As required by Item 402(u) of Regulation S-K, we are providing the annual disclosure of the ratio of the median employee's annual total compensation to the total annual compensation of Mr. Brandt, our CEO. For 2017 the median of the annual total compensation of all employees of our Company (other than our CEO) was $128,140 and the annual total compensation of our CEO, as reported in the Summary Compensation Table in this Proxy Statement, was $10,533,439. Based on this information and using the required calculation methodology defined in Item 402(u) of Regulation S-K, for 2017, the ratio of the annual total compensation of our CEO to our median employee's annual total compensation was 82 to 1.

To identify the median employee from our employee population, as well as to determine the annual total compensation of our median employee and our CEO, we took the following steps:

We determined that, as of December 31, 2017, our employee population consisted of approximately 6,303 individuals, all of which were located in the United States. This population consisted of our full-time, part-time, temporary and seasonal employees.

To identify the median employee from our employee population, we compared the total amount of salary, wages, overtime and premium pay, and an estimated cash incentive assuming a target payout under the APS Incentive Plans of our employees as reflected in our payroll records on December 31, 2017.

We identified our median employee using this compensation measure, which was consistently applied to all our employees included in the calculation. Since all our employees are located in the United States, as is our CEO, we did not make any cost-of living adjustments in identifying the median employee.

98GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Executive Compensation
Once we identified our median employee, we combined all of the elements of such employee's compensation for 2017 in accordance with the requirements of Item 402(c)(2)(x) of Regulation S-K, resulting in annual total compensation of $128,140. The difference between such employee's salary, wages, overtime and premium pay, and an estimated cash incentive assuming a target payout under the APS Incentive Plan and the employee's annual total compensation includes the amount the Company contributed under the 401(k) plan for the employee, the actual amount paid under the APS Incentive Plans and the estimated aggregate change in the actuarial present value from December 31, 2016 to December 31, 2017 of the employee's accumulated benefits payable under all defined pension plans.

With respect to the annual total compensation of our CEO, we used the amount reported in the "Total" column of our 2017 Summary Compensation Table included in this Proxy Statement.

Human Resources Committee Interlocks
and Insider Participation

The members of the Human Resources Committee in 20142017 were Ms. Munro, Drs. Cortese and Herberger and Mr.Messrs. Fox and Lopez. None of the members of the Human Resources Committee is or has been an officer or employee of the Company or any of its subsidiaries and no executive officer of the Company served on the compensation committee or board of any company that employed, or had as an officer, any member of the Human Resources Committee or the Board.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 99

76     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

Directors' Compensation

Compensation of the directors for 20142017 was as follows:

NAME
 FEES EARNED
OR PAID
IN CASH
($)

 STOCK
AWARDS
($)(1)

 CHANGE IN
PENSION
VALUE AND
NONQUALIFIED
DEFERRED
COMPENSATION
EARNINGS
($)(2)

 ALL OTHER
COMPENSATION
($)

 TOTAL
($)

FEES EARNED
OR PAID
IN CASH
($)

STOCK
AWARDS
($)(1)

CHANGE IN
PENSION
VALUE AND
NONQUALIFIED
DEFERRED
COMPENSATION
EARNINGS
($)(2)

ALL OTHER
COMPENSATION
($)

TOTAL
($)

Donald E. Brandt(3)

            0            0          0 0            000000

Susan Clark-Johnson

   90,000   99,953          0 0 189,953

Denis A. Cortese, M.D.

   90,000   99,953          0 0 189,953100,000110,25500210,255

Richard P. Fox

   79,057 127,929          0 0 206,986100,000110,2555,4550215,710

Michael L. Gallagher

 102,500   99,953 80,532 0 282,985112,500110,25597,3840320,139

Roy A. Herberger, Jr., Ph.D.

 102,500   99,953 40,437 0 242,890112,500110,25547,6260270,381

Dale E. Klein, Ph.D.

   90,000   99,953          0 0 189,953100,000110,25500210,255

Humberto S. Lopez

 102,500   99,953 92,240 0 294,693112,500110,255112,1370334,892

Kathryn L. Munro

 110,000   99,953 17,897 0 227,850125,000110,25519,6670254,922

Bruce J. Nordstrom

 102,500   99,953 41,653 0 244,106112,500110,25554,1340276,889

Paula J. Sims

100,000110,25500210,255

David P. Wagener

   79,057 127,929          0 0 206,986100,000110,25500210,255

(1)
In accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, this amount reflects the aggregate grant date fair value of the stock awards. On May 21, 2014,17, 2017, all of the directors at thethat time received a grant of either common stock or stock units ("SUs"), based on an election previously delivered to the Company. All directors received common stock except for Mr.Messrs. Fox and Gallagher, Drs. Herberger and Klein, and Ms. Munro, who each received SUs. Under the terms of the SUs, Mr. GallagherDr. Klein will receive 100% of the SUs in cash and the other directors will receive 50% of the SUs in cash and 50% of the SUs in common stock and Dr. Klein and Ms. Munro will receive one share of common stock for each SU, in all cases, on the last business day of the month following the month in which they separate from service on the Board. Dr. Herberger will receive 50% of the SUs in cash and 50% of the RSUs in common stock on January 2, 2016. The number of shares of common stock or SUs granted was 1,834,1,311, and the grant date fair value of each share of common stock or SU is $54.50,$84.10, which was the closing stock price on May 21, 2014.16, 2017. As of December 31, 2014,2017, the following directors had the following outstanding RSU or SU awards: Mr. Fox — 2,820; Mr. Gallagher — 8,773;13,238; Dr. Herberger — 8,773;9,888; Dr. Klein — 8,824;13,289; and Ms. Munro — 6,779. In addition, on March 3, 2014, Messrs. Fox and Wagener each received a pro-rata grant of common stock based on their service on the Board from February 2014 to May 2014 in the amount of 508 shares; the shares have a grant date fair value of $55.07.11,244.

(2)
The Company does not have a pension plan for directors. The amount in this column consists solely of the above-market portion of annual interest accrued under a deferred compensation plan pursuant to which directors may defer all or a portion of their Board fees. See the discussion of the rates of interest applicable to the deferred compensation program under "Discussion of Nonqualified Deferred Compensation."Compensation".

(3)
Mr. Brandt is a Named Executive OfficerNEO and his compensation is set forth in the Summary Compensation Table. Only non-management directors are compensated for Board service.
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 77

100GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

DIRECTORS' COMPENSATIONDirectors' Compensation

Discussion of Directors' Compensation
 

The Human Resources Committee makes recommendations to the Board for compensation, equity participation, and other benefits for directors. The director compensation program consists of the following components:

COMPENSATION COMPONENT
 AMOUNT
($)

Annual Retainer

 95,000100,000

Audit Committee, Human Resources Committee, Finance Committee, and Nuclear and Operating Committee Chairs Annual Retainers

 12,500

Lead Director Annual Retainer (Lead Director serves as Chair of Corporate Governance Committee for no additional compensation)

 20,00025,000

Annual Equity Grant

 Shares with a value of approximately $100,000$110,000 on the grant date

Directors had an option to either receive the stock grant on May 21, 201417, 2017 or defer the receipt until a later date. A director who elected to defer his or her receipt of stock received SUs in lieu of the stock grant. Those directors who elected to receive SUs were able to elect to receive payment for the SUs in either (1) stock or (2) 50% in stock and 50% in cash. The directors also elected whether to receive these payments either (1) as of the last business day of the month following the month in which the director separates from service on the Board, or (2) as of a date specified by the director, which date must be after December 31 of the year in which the grant was received. The SUs accrue dividend rights equal to the amount of dividends the director would have received if the director had directly owned one share of our common stock for each SU held, plus interest at the rate of 5% per annum, compounded quarterly. The manner of payment for the dividends and interest will be based on the director's election for payment of the SUs.

Directors of Pinnacle West also serve on the APS Board of Directors for no additional compensation. The Company reimburses Board members for expenses associated with Board meetings and director education programs.

The 2012 Plan was amended in 2017 to add an overall limit to non-employee directors' compensation. The value of equity grants (based on the grant date value) plus the aggregate amount of cash fees earned or paid is limited to $500,000 per calendar year.

A comparison against the compensation programs of our currenta peer group is generally performed every two years, and a study was last performed in December 2013,2017 using the peer group that we used in setting 2018 executive compensation, at which time the Board approved increasing the value of the annual retainer from $100,000 to $105,000, the annual equity grant from $110,000 to $100,000$120,000, the committee chair retainers from $12,500 to $15,000 including instituting a committee chair retainer for the chair of the Corporate Governance Committee, and the Lead Director annual retainer from $25,000 to $95,000.$30,000. These changes wentwill go into effect in May of 2014.2018. The Consultant reviewed the study, validated the methodology, and concluded that the new amounts were within the competitive range.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 101

78     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

DIRECTORS' COMPENSATIONDirectors' Compensation

Director Stock Ownership Policy
 

The Company believes that directors should have a meaningful financial stake in the Company to align their personal financial interests with those of the Company's shareholders.

In January 2010, the Board adopted a revised stock ownership policy for non-management directors. Each director is required to hold or control Company common stock, RSUs, or SUs with a value of at least three times the annual cash retainer fee paid to directors. Directors will have until the later of January 2013 or three yearsthree-years following the date they become a director to reach the required ownership level. A director may not pledge, margin, hypothecate, hedge, or otherwise grant an economic interest in any shares of Company stock while serving as a director whether or not his or her ownership requirement is met. This restriction shall extend to the purchase or creation of any short sales, zero-cost collars, forward sales contracts, puts, calls, options or other derivative securities in respect of any shares of Company stock. The Corporate Governance Committee may grant exceptions to this policy for hardship or other special circumstances.

All of the directors are in compliance with the Director Stock Ownership Policy.

102GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 79

Table of Contents

Proposal 2 — Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation

Section 14A of the Exchange Act requires U.S. public corporations to provide for an advisory (non-binding) vote on executive compensation ("Say-on-Pay").

compensation. As discussed in more detail in our CD&A and the accompanying tables and narrative, the Company has designed its executive compensation program to align executives' interests with those of our shareholders, make executives accountable for business and individual performance by putting pay at risk, and attract, retain and reward the executive talent required to achieve our corporate objectives and to increase long-term shareholder value. We believe that our compensation policies and practices promote a pay at risk philosophy and, as such, are aligned with the interests of our shareholders.

In deciding how to vote on this say-on-pay proposal, the Board points out the following factors, many of which are more fully discussed in the CD&A:

ourOur Human Resources Committee has designed the compensation packages for our Named Executive OfficersNEOs to depend significantly on putting pay at risk tiedby tying pay to the achievement of goals that the Human Resources Committee believes drive long-term shareholder value;

theThe Company had a highly successful year in 2014,2017, as discussed under "Overview of 2014 Company Performance";in the Proxy Statement Summary;

ourOur pay practices are designed to encourage management to not take unacceptable risks;

weWe engage in continual benchmarking in order to confirm thatperiodic structural reviews of our compensation programs are comparable to the companies in our Peer Group;and policies; and

weWe believe that the Company's executive compensation program is well suited to promote the Company's objectives in both the shortshort- and long-term.

The Board strongly endorses the Company's executive compensation program and recommends that the shareholders vote in favor of the following resolution:

      RESOLVED, that the compensation paid to the Company's Named Executive Officers as disclosed in this Proxy Statement in the CD&A, the compensation tables and the narrative discussion, is hereby approved.

Because your vote is advisory, it will not be binding upon the Human Resources Committee or the Board. However, we value our shareholders' opinions, and we will consider the outcome of the vote when determining future executive compensation arrangements.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS
A VOTEFOR THE APPROVAL OF THE COMPANY'S EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

80     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 103


Table of Contents

ProposalPROPOSAL 3 — Ratification of the Appointment of DeloitteRATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF DELOITTE & ToucheTOUCHE LLP as the Independent Accountants
for the Company
AS THE INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS FOR THE COMPANY

The Audit Committee has appointed D&T as the Company's independent accountants for the year ending December 31, 20152018 and, as a matter of good corporate governance, has directed management to submit such appointment for ratification by the shareholders at the Annual Meeting. In the event the shareholders fail to ratify the appointment, the Audit Committee may reconsider this appointment. Even if the appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee, in its discretion, may direct the appointment of a different independent accounting firm at any time during the year if the Audit Committee determines that such a change would be in the Company's and the shareholders' best interests.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS
A VOTEFOR RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
AS THE COMPANY'S INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
FOR THE YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 20152018

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 81

104GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

Accounting and Auditing Matters

The Independent Accountants
 

The Audit Committee evaluates the selection of the independent accountants each year, and has appointed D&T, independent accountants, to examine the Company's financial statements for the year ending December 31, 20152018, and, pursuant to Proposal 3, has requested shareholder ratification of this appointment. The Audit Committee has discussed the qualifications and performance of D&T and believes that the continued retention of D&T to serve as the Company's independent accountants is in the best interest of the Company and its shareholders.

In making the determination to retain D&T for 2018, the Audit Committee considered, among other things:

D&T's technical expertise, particularly with respect to the complex area of utility regulatory accounting;

Management's and D&T's review of D&T's historical and recent performance;

The quality and candor of D&T's communications with the Audit Committee and management;

D&T's independence and tenure as our auditor, including the benefits and independence risks of having a long-tenured auditor and controls and processes that help ensure D&T's independence (see the additional information below);

How effectively D&T demonstrated its independent judgment, objectivity, and professional skepticism;

External data on audit quality and performance, including the annual Public Company Accounting Oversight Board ("PCAOB") report on D&T, which is reported on by D&T, and reviewed by the Audit Committee; and

The fees paid to D&T, which are reviewed and approved by the Audit Committee and then monitored by the Audit Committee throughout the year.

D&T served as the Company's independent registered public accountants for the year endingended December 31, 2014.2017. Representatives of that firm will be present atare expected to participate in the Annual Meeting. These representatives will have an opportunity to make a statement if they so desire and will be available to respond to appropriate questions.

Audit FeesBenefits of a Long-Tenured Independent Accountant
 

D&T has served as the independent accountant for Pinnacle West since its inception in 1985, and APS since 1932. The Committee carefully considered the tenure of D&T as our

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 105


Table of Contents

Accounting and Auditing Matters

independent accountants in making its decision to select D&T as the independent accountant for 2018, including the following benefits that come with long-tenure:

Through more than 80 years of experience with the Company and APS, Deloitte has gained institutional knowledge of and deep expertise regarding our business operations, including the complexities of a business that is highly regulated at both the state and federal level, our accounting policies and practices and our internal controls over financial reporting; and

Bringing on a new auditor requires a significant time commitment that could result in additional costs to the Company as well as distract management's focus on financial reporting and internal controls.

Accountant's Independence Controls

In further making its selection of D&T as the independent accountant for 2018, the Committee took into account the following controls over D&T:

The following fees were paidAudit Committee's oversight of D&T, which included meeting with D&T at every regular in-person meeting in 2017, private meetings from time to time as requested by the Audit Committee members, and a committee-directed process for selecting the lead partner;

Pre-approval policies of all services performed by D&T for the last two fiscal years:Company, and allowing the engagement of D&T only when the Audit Committee or its Chair believes D&T is best suited for the job;

D&T conducts periodic internal quality reviews of its audit work and rotates lead partners every five years; and

As an independent public accounting firm, D&T is subject to PCAOB inspections, independent peer reviews, and PCAOB and SEC oversight.

TYPE OF SERVICE
 2013
($)

 2014
($)

 

Audit Fees(1)

 2,266,625 2,484,480 

Audit-Related Fees(2)

  236,850  265,100 

Tax Fees(3)

 35,000 1,857 

All Other Fees

  0  0 
(1)
The aggregate fees billed for services rendered for the audit of annual financial statements and for review of financial statements included in Reports on Form 10-Q.

(2)
The aggregate fees billed for assurances services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of the financial statements that are not included in the Audit Fees reported above, which primarily consist of fees for employee benefit plan audits performed in 2013 and 2014.

(3)
The aggregate fees billed for tax service consultation regarding tangible property regulations.

Pre-Approval Policies
 

TheAs part of its oversight responsibility with respect to the independent accountants and in order to assure that the services provided by the independent accountants do not impair the independent accountants' independence, the Audit Committee has established pre-approval policies with respect to work performed by D&T for the Company. Under that policy, the Audit Committee pre-approves each audit service and non-audit service to be provided by D&T. The Audit Committee has delegated to the Chair of the Audit Committee the authority to pre-approve audit and non-audit services to be performed by D&T if the services are not expected to cost more than $50,000. Each audit and non-audit service presented to the Chair for pre-approval must be described in sufficient detail so that the Chair knows precisely what services the Chair is being asked to pre-approve so that he can make a well-reasoned assessment of the impact of the service on the independent accountants' independence. The Chair must report any pre-approval decisions to the Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting. All of the services performed by D&T in 20142017 for the Company were pre-approved by either the Audit Committee or by the Chair of the Audit Committee consistent with the pre-approval policy.

106GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement

82     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

Accounting and Auditing Matters

Audit Fees

The following fees were paid to D&T for the last two fiscal years:

TYPE OF SERVICE
 2016
($)

 2017
($)

 

Audit Fees(1)

 2,687,407 2,813,182 

Audit-Related Fees(2)

  351,121  366,083 

Tax Fees

 0 0 

All Other Fees

  0  0 
(1)
The aggregate fees billed for services rendered for the audit of annual financial statements and for review of financial statements included in Reports on Form 10-Q.

(2)
The aggregate fees billed for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of the financial statements and are not included in Audit Fees reported above, which primarily consist of fees for employee benefit plan audits performed in 2017 and 2016.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 107


Table of Contents

Report of the Audit Committee

The Audit Committee is comprised solely of independent directors. Each member meets the NYSE financial literacy requirements, and Messrs. Fox and Nordstrom are "audit committee financial experts" under the SEC rules.

In accordance with its written charter adopted by the Board, the primary function of the Audit Committee is to assist Board oversight of: (a) the integrity of the Company's financial statements; (b) the independent accountants' qualifications and independence; (c) the performance of the Company's internal audit function and independent accountants; and (d) general compliance by the Company with legal and regulatory requirements.

The Audit Committee*Committee reports as follows:

1.
The Audit Committee has discussed and reviewed the audited financial statements of the Company as of and for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014,2017, with the Company's management and the independent accountants, D&T. The Audit Committee is directly responsible for the oversight of the Company's independent accountants. Management is responsible for the Company's financial reporting process, including the Company's system of internal controls and for the preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The independent accountants are responsible for auditing and rendering an opinion on those financial statements, as well as auditing certain aspects of the Company's internal controls. The Audit Committee's responsibility is to monitor these processes.

2.
The Audit Committee has discussed with D&T all communicationsthe matters required to be discussed by auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and SEC regulations, including those described in Statementstatement on Auditing Standards No. 61,1301, Communications with Audit Committees, as amended, and as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board in Rule 3200T.PCAOB.

3.
The Audit Committee has obtained from D&T and reviewed the written disclosures and the letter required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight BoardPCAOB regarding the independent accountants' communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence. The Committee discussed with D&T any relationships that may impact D&T's objectivity and independence and satisfied itself as to the accountants' independence.

4.
Based on the foregoing, the Audit Committee has recommended to the Board that the Company's audited financial statements be included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014,2017, for filing with the SEC.

AUDIT COMMITTEE CHAIR
Bruce J. Nordstrom
 AUDIT COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Denis A. Cortese, M.D.
Richard P. Fox
Dale E. Klein, Ph.D.
Humberto S. Lopez
David P. Wagener
*
Mr. Wagener joined the Audit Committee after this report was approved by the Audit Committee.

108GRAPHIC |      2018 Proxy Statement

2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 83

Table of Contents

Proposal 4 — Shareholder Proposal Regarding a Report on LobbyingHELPFUL RESOURCES

The proponents of the shareholder proposal described below notified the Company of their intention to present the proposal for consideration and action at the Annual Meeting. The names and addresses of the proponents and the number of shares held by the proponents will be furnished by the Secretary of the Company upon receipt of any oral or written request for such information. The Company is not responsible for the accuracy or content of the proposal and supporting statement provided below, which following SEC rules, are reproduced as received from the proponents.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OPPOSES THE FOLLOWING PROPOSAL FOR THE REASONS STATED AFTER THE PROPOSAL.

SHAREHOLDER PROPOSAL:

Whereas, corporate lobbying exposes our company to risks that could adversely affect the company's stated goals, objectives, and ultimately shareholder value, and

Whereas, shareholders rely on the information provided by the company to evaluate its goals and objectives. Shareholders seek disclosure of our company's lobbying activities to assess whether these undertakings comport with the long term best interests of the company, its shareholders, and its stakeholders.

Resolved:    the shareowners of Pinnacle West Capital request the Board authorize the preparation of a report, updated annually, disclosing:

    1.
    Company policy and procedures governing lobbying, both direct and indirect, and grassroots lobbying communications.
    2.
    Payments by Pinnacle West Capital or its subsidiaries used for (a) direct or indirect lobbying or (b) grassroots lobbying communications, in each case including the amount of the payment and the recipient.
    3.
    Pinnacle West Capital membership in and payments to any tax-exempt organization that writes and endorses model legislation.
    4.
    Description of the decision making process and oversight by management and the Board for making payments described in sections 2 and 3 above.

For purposes of this proposal, a "grassroots lobbying communication" is a communication directed to the general public that (a) refers to specific legislation or regulation, (b) reflects a view on the legislation or regulation and (c) encourages the recipient of the communication to take action with respect to the legislation or regulation. "Indirect lobbying" is lobbying engaged in by a trade association or other organization of which Pinnacle West Capital is a member. Both "direct and indirect lobbying" and "grassroots lobbying communications" include efforts at the local, state and federal levels.

The report shall be presented to the Audit Committee or other relevant oversight committees and posted on Pinnacle West Capital's website.

Our Company
84     Pinnacle West Capital Corporation:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com


GRAPHIC APS:


http://www.APS.com


Annual Meeting


|Annual meeting online:

http://www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/PNW


2015 Proxy Statementmaterials:


http://www.proxyvote.com


Board of Directors


Pinnacle West Board:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/about-us/corporate-governance/board-of-directors/


Board Committees:


Audit Committee Charter:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/about-us/corporate-governance/committee-summary/audit-committee/

Corporate Governance Committee Charter:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/about-us/corporate-governance/committee-summary/corporate-governance-committee

Finance Committee Charter:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/about-us/corporate-governance/committee-summary/finance-committee

Human Resources Committee Charter:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/about-us/corporate-governance/committee-summary/human-resources-committee/

Nuclear and Operating Committee Charter:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/about-us/corporate-governance/committee-summary/nuclear-and-operating-committee/


Governance Documents


Code of Ethics and Business Practices:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/about-us/corporate-governance/code-of-ethics-and-business-practices/


Code of Ethics for Financial Executives:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/about-us/corporate-governance/code-of-ethics-for-financial-executives/


Corporate Governance Guidelines:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/about-us/corporate-governance/corporate-governance-guidelines/


Other


Corporate Responsibility Report:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/corporate-responsibility/


Political Participation Policy:

http://www.pinnaclewest.com/about-us/corporate-governance/Political-Participation-Policy

The information contained in these documents and websites are not incorporated by reference.

2018 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 109


Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 4 — SHAREHOLDER PROPOSAL REGARDING A REPORT ON LOBBYING

Supporting Statement:    Shareholders encourage transparency and accountability in the use of staff time and corporate funds to influence legislation and regulation, directly and indirectly. Pinnacle West Capital does not comprehensively disclose its trade association memberships, nor payments to special interests groupsThis Proxy Statement contains forward-looking statements based on its website. Absent a system of accountability, company assets could be used for objectives contrary to the long term interests of the company.

Pinnacle West Capital spent approximately $800,000 on federal lobbying in 2013. (openscerets.org) This figure excludes spending on memberships or contributions to organizations that write and endorse model legislation,current expectations. These forward-looking statements are often identified by words such as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), where Pinnacle West Capital serves"estimate," "predict," "may," "believe," "plan," "expect," "require," "intend," "assume" and similar words. Because actual results may differ materially from expectations, we caution you not to place undue reliance on the Energy, Environmentthese statements. A number of factors could cause future results to differ materially from historical results, or from outcomes currently expected or sought by us. A discussion of some of these risks and Agriculture Task Force. It also excludes contributions to trade groups such as the Edison Electric Institute, where Pinnacle Capital West [sic]uncertainties is a member. Additionally,contained in 2013 Pinnacle West Capital's subsidiary Arizona Public Service donated $4 million to nonprofits that executed an anti-renewable power advertising campaign which created national controversy. (Berman, "Why the Dark Money Debate Matters", AZCentral.com, April 5, 2014)

We encourage our Board to require comprehensive disclosure related to direct, indirectAnnual Report on Form 10-K and grassroots lobbying.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS RESPONSE:

YOUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE "AGAINST" PROPOSAL 4.

Pinnacle West is committed to complying with the law, our policies and our values when engaging in any type of lobbying or political activity. Pinnacle West's Political Participation Policy (the "Policy") is set forthavailable on our website inat pinnaclewest.com, which you should review carefully before placing any reliance on our section on Corporate Governance (available atforward-looking statements or disclosures. We assume no obligation to update any forward-looking statements, even if our internal estimates change, except as may be required by applicable law.

110www.pinnaclewest.comGRAPHIC |).      2018 Proxy Statement


VIEW MATERIALS & VOTE SCAN TO PINNACLE WEST CAPITAL CORPORATION ATTN: JACQUE PATTERSON 400 NORTH FIFTH STREET, STA 8602 PHOENIX, AZ 85004 VOTE BY INTERNET Before The Policy providesMeeting - Go to www.proxyvote.com or scan the QR Barcode above Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you access the web site and follow the instructions to obtain your records and to create an electronic voting instruction form. During The Meeting - Go to www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/PNW You may attend the Meeting via the Internet and vote during the Meeting. Have the information that our Company and our subsidiaries participateis printed in the democratic process to advance our long-term business interests and the interests of our customers, employees, shareholders and other stakeholders.

Political interaction is important to shareholder value. As a vertically integrated utility, APS is highly regulated and its operations are significantly affectedbox marked by the actionsarrow available and follow the instructions. VOTE BY PHONE - 1-800-690-6903 Use any touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you call and then follow the instructions. VOTE BY MAIL Mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it in the postage-paid envelope we have provided or return it to Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717. TO VOTE, MARK BLOCKS BELOW IN BLUE OR BLACK INK AS FOLLOWS: E36330-P01184-Z71649 KEEP THIS PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS DETACH AND RETURN THIS PORTION ONLY THIS PROXY CARD IS VALID ONLY WHEN SIGNED AND DATED. PINNACLE WEST CAPITAL CORPORATION The Board of elected officials atDirectors recommends you vote FOR the local, statefollowing: For Withhold For All AllAllExcept To withhold authority to vote for any individual nominee(s), mark "For All Except" and national levels, includingwrite the rates it can charge customers, its profitability, and the recoverynumber(s) of the costsnominee(s) on the line below. ! ! ! 1. Election of its investments in infrastructure. When it isDirectors Nominees: 01) 02) 03) 04) 05) Donald E. Brandt Denis A. Cortese, M.D. Richard P. Fox Michael L. Gallagher Dale E. Klein, Ph.D. 06) 07) 08) 09) 10) Humberto S. Lopez Kathryn L. Munro Bruce J. Nordstrom Paula J. Sims David P. Wagener For Against Abstain The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR proposal 2: ! For ! Against ! Abstain 2. Advisory vote to approve executive compensation as disclosed in the Company's best interest,2018 Proxy Statement. The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR proposal 3: ! ! ! 3. Ratify the Company has a responsibility to our customers, shareholders and other stakeholders to be an active participant in the political process, to inform policy and decision makers of our views on issues, and to develop and maintain strong working relationships with governmental decision makers. While the proponent claims that lobbying exposes our Company to risks, we believe that the failure to engage in critical public policy developments that impact our business would represent a far greater risk to shareholders' interests.

Our Policy provides that:

we support candidates, causes or organizations that share an interest in public policy that furthers our business objectives and promotes our mission of creating a sustainable energy future for Arizona;
2015 Proxy Statement     |GRAPHIC 85

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 4 — SHAREHOLDER PROPOSAL REGARDING A REPORT ON LOBBYING
the Company discloses all political contributions as required by law. In addition, we provide a voluntary annual report listing contributions in excess of $25,000 made to political parties and associations operating under Section 527appointment of the Internal Revenue Code,independent accountants for the year ending December 31, 2018. ! For address changes and/or comments, please check this box and ofwrite them on the portion of our trade association dues used for lobbying purposes, when those groups provide that information to us; and

we actively promote the economic health of the Arizona jurisdictions we serve through our activities with local chambers of commerce. Depending on their roles, these organizations may be subject to lobbyist registration and disclosure reporting obligations, with their reports being made available to the publicback where indicated. Please sign exactly as your name(s) appear(s) hereon. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, or other fiduciary, please give full title as such. Joint owners should each sign personally. All holders must sign. If a corporation or partnership, please sign in full corporate or partnership name by the governmental agencies overseeing lobbying activities.

The Company already fully complies with all laws governing its lobbying activities. Federal political activity is subject to comprehensive regulation by the federal government, including detailed disclosure requirements. Our political action committee files regular reports of receipts and disbursements with the Federal Election Commission ("FEC"), all of which are disclosed to the public in the reports filed with the FEC which can be accessed through our Policy. These reports include identification of all individuals who contributed $200 or more as well as all candidates or committees that receive a political contribution. We also comply with all obligations with regard to our state and local political activities, including reporting and disclosure requirements. The Board believes these requirements provide transparency of our lobbying activities to the general public, including our shareholders.

The Company and APS participate from time to time in various industry and trade associations to further our business interests. The primary purpose of our membership in these trade associations is the general business, technical and industry expertise provided by these organizations — not political advocacy. For example, we have been long-time members of Edison Electric Institute and Nuclear Energy Institute.authorized officer. Signature [PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX] Date Signature (Joint Owners) Date

For the reasons set forth above, the Board believes that the adoption of the proposal is unnecessary and would not provide any meaningful benefit to shareholders. Accordingly, the Board unanimously recommends that you vote "AGAINST" this proposal.

86     GRAPHIC |2015 Proxy Statement

001CSN1A55


www.envisionreports.com/PNW Step 1: Go to www.envisionreports.com/PNW to view the materials. Step 2: Click on Cast Your Vote or Request Materials. Step 3: Follow the instructions on the screen to log in. Vote by Internet • Go to www.envisionreports.com/PNW • Or scan the QR code with your smartphone • Follow the steps outlined on the secure website Shareholder Meeting Notice 01ZLJA + + Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Shareholder Meeting to be Held on May 20, 2015 Under Securities and Exchange Commission rules, you are receiving this notice that the proxy materials for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders are available on the Internet. Follow the instructions below to view the materials and vote online or request a copy. The items to be voted on and location of the Annual Meeting are on the reverse side. Your vote is important! This communication presents only an overview of the more complete proxy materials that are available to you on the Internet. We encourage you to access and review all of the important information contained in the proxy materials before voting. The Company’s 2015 Proxy Statement and Annual Report and Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 are available at: Easy Online Access — A Convenient Way to View Proxy Materials and Vote When you go online to view materials, you can also vote your shares. Step 4: Make your selection as instructed on each screen to select delivery preferences and vote. When you go online, you can also help the environment by consenting to receive electronic delivery of future materials. Obtaining a Copy of the Proxy Materials – If you want to receive a copy of these documents, you must request one. There is no charge to you for requesting a copy. Please make your request for a copy as instructed on the reverse side on or before May 6, 2015 to facilitate timely delivery. . IMPORTANT ANNUAL MEETING INFORMATION 1234 5678 9012 345 NNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNN NNNNNN C 1234567890 C O Y 000004 MR A SAMPLE DESIGNATION (IF ANY) ADD 1 ADD 2 ADD 3 ADD 4 ADD 5 ADD 6 ENDORSEMENT_LINE  SACKPACK

 


Dear Shareholders, The 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Pinnacle West Capital Corporation will be held on May 16, 2018, at 10:30 a.m., Mountain Standard Time. Shareholders may participate in the Annual Meeting by logging into the following web site www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/PNW. At the meeting, shareholders will be asked to: (i) elect ten (10) directors to serve on the Board until the 2019 Annual Meeting; (ii) vote on an advisory resolution to approve executive compensation as disclosed in the 2018 Proxy Statement; and (iii) ratify the appointment of the independent accountants for the year ending December 31, 2018. Your vote is important and you may vote this proxy in one of three ways - by Internet, by telephone, or by mail. The reverse side of this letter provides voting information for all three methods. Sincerely, Diane Wood Corporate Secretary IF YOU HAVE NOT VOTED VIA THE INTERNET OR TELEPHONE, FOLD ALONG THE PERFORATION, DETACH AND RETURN THE BOTTOM PORTION IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE. E36331-P01184-Z71649 P_R_O_X_Y — P_in_n_a_cl_e_W_e_s_t_C_a_p_it_al_C_o_r_p_o_ra_t_io_n Notice of the 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders Proxy Solicited on behalf of the Board of Directors for the Annual Meeting on May 16, 2018 The undersigned hereby appoints Donald E. Brandt and Jeffrey B. Guldner, individually and together, as proxies for the undersigned, each with full power of substitution, to attend the Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Pinnacle West Capital Corporation (the "Company") to be held on May 16, 2018 at ten-thirty a.m. (10:30 a.m.), Mountain Standard Time, and at any adjournment or postponement thereof, and to vote as specified in this proxy all the shares of stock of the Company which the undersigned would be entitled to vote if personally present. The proxies of the undersigned may vote according to their discretion on any other matter that may properly come before the meeting. If the undersigned has voting rights with respect to shares of Company common stock under the Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Savings Plan (the "Plan"), then the undersigned hereby directs the trustee of the Plan to vote the shares equal to the number of share equivalents allocated to the undersigned's account under the Plan on all matters properly coming before the Annual Meeting, and at any adjournment or postponement thereof, in accordance with the instructions given herein. Shares under the Plan for which instructions are not received by midnight on May 13, 2018, will be voted by the trustee in accordance with the plan and trust documents. This proxy will be considered to be confidential voting instructions to the Plan trustee and to any entity acting as tabulating agent for the Plan trustee. ALL SHARES OF COMMON STOCK REPRESENTED HEREBY WILL BE VOTED AS SPECIFIED. IF NO SPECIFICATION IS MADE, THOSE SHARES WILL BE VOTED FOR THE NOMINEES LISTED IN PROPOSAL 1 AND FOR PROPOSALS 2 AND 3. In their discretion, the proxies are authorized to vote on such other matters as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof. (If you noted any Address Changes/Comments above, please mark corresponding box on the reverse side.) (Items to be voted appear on reverse side.) Address Changes/Comments:

Here’s how to order a copy of the proxy materials and select a future delivery preference: Paper copies: Current and future paper delivery requests can be submitted via the telephone, Internet or e-mail options below. E-mail copies: Current and future e-mail delivery requests must be submitted via the Internet following the instructions below. If you request an e-mail copy of current materials you will receive an e-mail with a link to the materials. PLEASE NOTE: You must use the number in the shaded bar on the reverse side when requesting a set of proxy materials. g Internet – Go to www.envisionreports.com/PNW and click Cast Your Vote or Request Materials. Follow the instructions to log in and order a copy of the current meeting materials and submit your preference for e-mail or paper delivery of future meeting materials. g Telephone – Call us free of charge at 1-866-641-4276 and follow the instructions to log in and order a paper copy of the materials by mail for the current meeting. You can also submit a preference to receive a paper copy for future meetings. g E-mail – Send e-mail to investorvote@computershare.com with “Proxy Materials Pinnacle West Capital Corporation” in the subject line. Include in the message your full name and address, plus the number located in the shaded bar on the reverse, and state in the e-mail that you want a paper copy of current meeting materials. You can also state your preference to receive a paper copy for future meetings. To facilitate timely delivery, all requests for a paper copy of the proxy materials must be received by May 6, 2015. Light rail station located NW corner of Central and Encanto. Directions to the Pinnacle West Capital Corporation’s 2015 Annual Meeting . Shareholder Meeting Notice Pinnacle West Capital Corporation’s 2015 Annual Meeting of Shareholders will be held on May 20, 2015, 10:30 a.m. Mountain Standard Time, at the Heard Museum, 2301 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Proposals to be voted on at the meeting are listed below along with the Board of Directors’ recommendations. The Board recommends a vote FOR all nominees, FOR Proposals 2 and 3, and AGAINST Proposal 4. 1. Election of Directors: 01 - Donald E. Brandt, 02 - Denis A. Cortese, M.D., 03 - Richard P. Fox, 04 - Michael L. Gallagher, 05 - Roy A. Herberger, Jr., Ph.D., 06 - Dale E. Klein, Ph.D., 07 - Humberto S. Lopez, 08 - Kathryn L. Munro, 09 - Bruce J. Nordstrom, 10 - David P. Wagener; 2. Vote on an advisory resolution to approve executive compensation as disclosed in the 2015 Proxy Statement; 3. Ratify the appointment of the Company’s independent accountants for the year ending December 31, 2015; 4. Vote on the approval of a shareholder proposal regarding a lobbying report, if properly presented at the meeting. PLEASE NOTE – YOU CANNOT VOTE BY RETURNING THIS NOTICE. To vote your shares you must vote online or request a paper copy of the proxy materials to receive a proxy card. If you wish to attend and vote at the meeting, please bring this notice with you. This document, together with a valid picture identification, is your ticket to gain admission to the meeting. 01ZLJA

Using a black ink pen, mark your votes with an X as shown in this example. Please do not write outside the designated areas. X 01ZLHA 1 U P X + Annual Meeting Proxy Card . Authorized Signatures — This section must be completed for your vote to be counted — Date and Sign Below C Please sign exactly as name(s) appears hereon. Joint owners should each sign. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, corporate officer, trustee, guardian, or custodian, please give full title. Signature 1 — Please keep signature within the box. Signature 2 — Please keep signature within the box. Date (mm/dd/yyyy) — Please print date below. + Change of Address — Please print your new address below. Comments — Please print your comments below. B Non-Voting Items A Proposals — The Board recommends a vote FOR all nominees, FOR Proposals 2 and 3, and AGAINST Proposal 4. For Against Abstain 2. Vote on an advisory resolution to approve executive compensation as disclosed in the 2015 Proxy Statement. For Against Abstain 4. Vote on the approval of a shareholder proposal regarding a lobbying report, if properly presented at the meeting. Meeting Attendance Mark the box to the right if you plan to attend the Annual Meeting. 01 - Donald E. Brandt 04 - Michael L. Gallagher 07 - Humberto S. Lopez 02 - Denis A. Cortese, M.D. 05 - Roy A. Herberger, Jr., Ph.D. 08 - Kathryn L. Munro 03 - Richard P. Fox 06 - Dale E. Klein, Ph.D. 09 - Bruce J. Nordstrom 1. Election of Directors: For Withhold For Withhold For Withhold IMPORTANT ANNUAL MEETING INFORMATION 10 - David P. Wagener 3. Ratify the appointment of the Company’s independent accountants for the year ending December 31, 2015. MMMMMMMMMMMM MMMMMMMMMMMMMMM 000000000.000000 ext 000000000.000000 ext 000000000.000000 ext 000000000.000000 ext 000000000.000000 ext 000000000.000000 ext 000004 MR A SAMPLE DESIGNATION (IF ANY) ADD 1 ADD 2 ADD 3 ADD 4 ADD 5 ADD 6 ENDORSEMENT_LINE  SACKPACK 1234 5678 9012 345 MMMMMMM 2 2 1 2 4 7 1 MR A SAMPLE (THIS AREA IS SET UP TO ACCOMMODATE 140 CHARACTERS) MR A SAMPLE AND MR A SAMPLE AND MR A SAMPLE AND MR A SAMPLE AND MR A SAMPLE AND MR A SAMPLE AND MR A SAMPLE AND MR A SAMPLE AND MMMMMMMMM C 1234567890 J N T C123456789 qIF YOU HAVE NOT VOTED VIA THE INTERNET OR TELEPHONE, FOLD ALONG THE PERFORATION, DETACH AND RETURN THE BOTTOM PORTION IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE.q Electronic Voting Instructions Available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week! Instead of mailing your proxy, you may choose one of the voting methods outlined below to vote your proxy. VALIDATION DETAILS ARE LOCATED BELOW IN THE TITLE BAR. Proxies submitted by the Internet or telephone must be received by 1:00 a.m., Central Time, on May 20, 2015. Vote by Internet • Go to www.envisionreports.com/PNW • Or scan the QR code with your smartphone • Follow the steps outlined on the secure website Vote by telephone • Call toll free 1-800-652-VOTE (8683) within the USA, US territories & Canada on a touch tone telephone • Follow the instructions provided by the recorded message

 


. Notice of the 2015 Annual Meeting of Shareholders Proxy Solicited on behalf of the Board of Directors for the Annual Meeting on May 20, 2015 The undersigned hereby appoints Donald E. Brandt and David P. Falck, individually and together, as proxies for the undersigned, each with full power of substitution, to attend the Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Pinnacle West Capital Corporation (the "Company") to be held on May 20, 2015, at ten-thirty a.m. (10:30 a.m.), Mountain Standard Time, and at any adjournment or postponement thereof, and to vote as specified in this proxy all the shares of stock of the Company which the undersigned would be entitled to vote if personally present. The proxies of the undersigned may vote according to their discretion on any other matter that may properly come before the meeting. If the undersigned has voting rights with respect to shares of Company common stock under the Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Savings Plan (the "Plan"), then the undersigned hereby directs the trustee of the Plan to vote the shares equal to the number of share equivalents allocated to the undersigned's account under the Plan on all matters properly coming before the Annual Meeting, and at any adjournment or postponement thereof, in accordance with the instructions given herein. Shares under the Plan for which instructions are not received by midnight on May 17, 2015, will be voted by the trustee in accordance with the plan and trust documents. This proxy will be considered to be confidential voting instructions to the Plan trustee and to any entity acting as tabulating agent for the Plan trustee. ALL SHARES OF COMMON STOCK REPRESENTED HEREBY WILL BE VOTED AS SPECIFIED. IF NO SPECIFICATION IS MADE, THOSE SHARES WILL BE VOTED FOR THE NOMINEES LISTED IN PROPOSAL 1, FOR PROPOSALS 2 AND 3, AND AGAINST PROPOSAL 4. In their discretion, the proxies are authorized to vote on such other matters as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof. (Items to be voted appear on reverse side.) Proxy — Pinnacle West Capital Corporation 2015 Annual Meeting 2015 Annual Meeting of Pinnacle West Capital Corporation Shareholders May 20, 2015, 10:30 a.m. Mountain Standard Time Heard Museum 2301 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Upon arrival, please present the top portion of this proxy and photo identification. Dear Shareholders, The 2015 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Pinnacle West Capital Corporation will be held at the Heard Museum, at 2301 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004 on May 20, 2015, at 10:30 a.m., Mountain Standard Time. At the meeting, shareholders will be asked to: (i) elect ten (10) directors to serve on the Board until the 2016 Annual Meeting; (ii) vote on an advisory resolution to approve executive compensation as disclosed in the 2015 Proxy Statement; (iii) ratify the appointment of the Company's independent accountants for the year ending December 31, 2015; and (iv) vote on the approval of a shareholder proposal regarding a lobbying report, if properly presented at the meeting. Your vote is important and you may vote this proxy in one of three ways - by Internet, by telephone, or by mail. The reverse side of this letter provides voting information for all three methods. We encourage you to attend the Annual Meeting and have provided a map for your reference. Sincerely, Diane Wood Corporate Secretary Light rail station located NW corner of Central and Encanto. qIF YOU HAVE NOT VOTED VIA THE INTERNET OR TELEPHONE, FOLD ALONG THE PERFORATION, DETACH AND RETURN THE BOTTOM PORTION IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE.q