The following is a summary of the components of deferred taxes as reported in Central Hudson’s Consolidated Balance Sheet:
During the year ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, Griffith acquired fuel distribution companies as follows (In Millions):
Twelve of the above noted acquisition transactions have agreements containing clauses (known as “earn out provisions”) for a possible additional payment provided certain conditions are met. These provisions increase the purchase price if certain
sales volumes are attained. An additional $129,700 was paid in 2006 as a result of these provisions. The amount of this additional payment was added to goodwill. 2008 and 2007 payments were not material.
In 2008, Griffith acquired four fuel distribution and service companies consisting of one each located in Connecticut and Delaware and two located in Pennsylvania for a total of $9.3 million.
On April 12, 2006, CHEC purchased a 75% interest in Lyonsdale from Catalyst Renewables Corporation (“Catalyst”) for $10.8 million, including a working capital adjustment of $1.0 million. CHEC allocated the total purchase price based on the fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed as follows: Current Assets of $1.3 million, Other Property and Plant of $9.6 million, and Current Liabilities of $0.1 million. Catalyst remains the owner of a minority share of Lyonsdale and will provide asset management services to Lyonsdale under a contract expiring April 12, 2009. Lyonsdale owns and operates a 19-megawatt, wood-fired, biomass electric generating plant, which began operation in 1992. The plant is located in Lyonsdale, New York. The energy and capacity of the plant is being sold at a fixed price to an investment grade rated counter-party pursuant to a contract beginning May 1, 2006, and ending December 31, 2014. For the period April 12, 2006 through December 31, 2008, the operating results of Lyonsdale have been consolidated in the Consolidated Financial Statements of CH Energy Group.
Investments
In the fourth quarter of 2004, CHEC acquired a 12% interest in preferred units issued by Cornhusker Holdings for $2.7 million and also agreed to acquire $8.0 million of subordinated notes issued by Cornhusker Holdings. As of December 31, 2008, CHEC had acquired all of these subordinated notes. Cornhusker Holdings is the owner of Cornhusker Energy Lexington, LLC, a fuel ethanol production facility located in Nebraska that began operation as of the end of January 2006. This investment is accounted for under the equity method. As of December 31, 2008, CHEC’s total investment in Cornhusker consisted of subordinated notes totaling $9.5 million, including interest, and an equity investment of $3.0 million.
On March 10, 2006, CHEC closed on a $4.9 million investment in CH-Community Wind Energy, LLC, a joint venture between CHEC and Community Energy, Inc. that owns an 18% interest in two wind farm projects in the Mid-Atlantic region. Located near Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, the 24 MW Bear Creek wind project, and the 7.5 MW Jersey Atlantic project, built at a wastewater treatment plant in Atlantic City, New Jersey, are both commercially operational. CHEC’s ownership represents a minority interest in each project. This investment is accounted for under the equity method.
In the fourth quarter of 2007, CHEC’s subsidiary, CH-Auburn Energy LLC (“CH-Auburn”), entered into a 15-year Energy Services Agreement (“ESA”) to supply the City of Auburn, NY (the “City”) with a portion of its electricity needs by constructing and
- 138 -
operating a 3-megawatt electric generating plant in Auburn that will burn gas derived from wastewater sludge and a landfill to generate renewable power. As of December 31, 2008, CH-Auburn has incurred approximately $2.9 million of design and construction costs related to this investment. CH-Auburn is consolidated in the Consolidated Financial Statements of CH Energy Group.
Under its agreement with the City, CH-Auburn will sell electricity and hot water to the City at a rate that is a function of the project’s actual capital costs and operating costs. The rate charged to the City is capped at a budgeted maximum value. Currently, the rate has reached its cap under the ESA, and, in accordance with the ESA, CH-Auburn has stopped work, pending decision by the parties. If the City does not increase the cap, or if certain schedule-related criteria are not met, CH-Auburn may terminate the agreement and recover its full investment in the project.
NOTE 6 - GOODWILL AND OTHER INTANGIBLE ASSETS
Goodwill, customer relationships, trademarks and covenants not to compete associated with acquisitions are included in intangible assets. Goodwill represents the excess of cost over the fair value of the net tangible and identifiable intangible assets of businesses acquired as of the date of acquisition. The balances reflected on CH Energy Group’s Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2008, and 2007, for “Goodwill” and “Other intangible assets – net” relate to Griffith. In July 2001, the FASB issued SFAS No. 142, which requires that goodwill and other intangible assets that have indefinite useful lives no longer be amortized to expense, but instead be periodically reviewed for impairment. Annually, Griffith tests the goodwill and intangible assets remaining on the balance sheet for impairment for all periods presented. No impairment existed. Impairment testing compares the fair value of Griffith to its carrying amount. Fair value of the reporting unit is estimated using a discounted cash flow measurement. The carrying amount for goodwill was $67.5 million as of December 31, 2008 and $63.4 million as of December 31, 2007. For tax purposes, goodwill is amortized ratably over a 15-year period, beginning in the month of acquisition.
Intangible assets include separate, identifiable, intangible assets such as customer relationships, trademarks, and covenants not to compete. Intangible assets with finite lives are amortized over their useful lives. The estimated useful life for customer relationships is 15 years, which is believed to be appropriate in view of average historical customer attrition. The estimated useful lives of trademarks range from 10 to 15 years and are based upon management’s assessment of several variables such as brand recognition, management’s plan for the use of the trademark, and other factors that will affect the duration of the trademark’s life. The useful life of a covenant not to compete is based on the expiration date of the covenant, generally between three and ten years. Intangible assets with indefinite useful lives and goodwill are no longer amortized, but instead are periodically reviewed for impairment. Griffith tests the goodwill and intangible assets remaining on the balance sheet for impairment annually in the fourth quarter, and retests between annual tests if an event should occur
- 139 -
or circumstances arise that would more likely than not reduce the fair value below its carrying amount.
The weighted average amortization periods for customer relationships, trademarks and covenants not to compete are 15 years, 11 years, and 8.9 years, respectively. The weighted average amortization period for all amortizable intangible assets is 14.6 years.
The components of amortizable intangible assets of CH Energy Group are summarized as follows (In Thousands):
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | December 31, 2008 | | December 31, 2007 | |
| |
| |
| |
| | Gross Carrying Amount | | Accumulated Amortization | | Gross Carrying Amount | | Accumulated Amortization | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Customer Relationships | | $ | 55,171 | | $ | 22,248 | | $ | 51,451 | | $ | 18,593 | |
Trademarks | | | 2,956 | | | 372 | | | 2,490 | | | 101 | |
Covenants Not to Compete | | | 1,605 | | | 983 | | | 1,420 | | | 947 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Total Amortizable Intangibles | | $ | 59,732 | | $ | 23,603 | | $ | 55,361 | | $ | 19,641 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Amortization expense was $4.1 million $3.4 million and $2.9 million for each of the year ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. The estimated annual amortization expense for each of the next five years, assuming no new acquisitions, is approximately $4 million.
NOTE 7 - SHORT-TERM BORROWING ARRANGEMENTS
CH Energy Group maintains a $150 million revolving credit agreement with several commercial banks to provide committed liquidity. This agreement’s term expires in February 2013. For the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, there were no borrowings under this agreement. The notes payable balances reported in the CH Energy Group Consolidated Balance Sheet reflect the borrowings of CH Energy Group’s subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, as discussed below.
Central Hudson maintains a revolving credit agreement with several commercial banks, pursuant to PSC authorization, in the amount of $125 million, for a five-year term ending January 2, 2012. As of December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007, there were no borrowings under Central Hudson’s revolving credit agreement.
Both the CH Energy Group and Central Hudson credit agreements reflect commitments from JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Bank of America, N.A., HSBC Bank USA, N.A. and Keybank National Association. The availability of these facilities is contingent upon the ability of the lenders to fulfill their commitments.
Central Hudson also maintains certain uncommitted lines of credit that diversify its sources of cash and provide competitive options to minimize its cost of short-term
- 140 -
debt. As of December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007, Central Hudson’s outstanding balance on these lines of credit, in aggregate was $25.5 million and $42.5 million, respectively.
As of December 31, 2008, Central Hudson had $20 million in current maturities of long-term debt in addition to the $25.5 million in total short-term notes payable discussed above.
On January 18, 2008, Griffith established an uncommitted line of credit of up to $25 million with a commercial bank for the purpose of funding seasonal working capital, and for general corporate purposes. Under the terms of the line, the maximum borrowing amount is $25 million during the period between December 1st of each year and May 31st of each following year, and $15 million during the period between June 1st and November 30th of each year. As of December 31, 2008 there were $10 million in borrowings under this agreement. The obligations of Griffith under the line of credit are guaranteed by CH Energy Group and CHEC.
Debt Covenants
CH Energy Group’s $150 million credit facility and Central Hudson’s $125 million credit facility both require the satisfaction of certain restrictive covenants, including a ratio of total debt-to-total capitalization of no more than 0.65 to 1.00. Currently, both CH Energy Group and Central Hudson are in compliance with all of these debt covenants.
Griffith’s credit facility requires CH Energy Group to be in compliance with certain restrictive covenants as set forth in CH Energy Group’s $150 million credit facility.
NOTE 8 - CAPITALIZATION - COMMON AND PREFERRED STOCK
For a schedule of activity related to common stock, paid-in capital, and capital stock, see the Consolidated Statements of Shareholders’ Equity for CH Energy Group and Central Hudson.
Cumulative Preferred Stock: Central Hudson, $100 par value; 210,300 shares authorized, not subject to mandatory redemption:
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Shares Outstanding | |
| | Redemption Price 12/31/08 | |
| |
| | | December 31, | |
Series | | | 2008 | | 2007 | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
4.50% | | | 107.00 | | | 70,285 | | | 70,285 | |
4.75% | | | 106.75 | | | 19,980 | | | 19,980 | |
4.35% | | | 102.00 | | | 60,000 | | | 60,000 | |
4.96% | | | 101.00 | | | 60,000 | | | 60,000 | |
| | | | |
|
| |
|
| |
| | | | | | 210,265 | | | 210,265 | |
| | | | |
|
| |
|
| |
- 141 -
There were no repurchases in 2006, 2007 or 2008.
In the event of a liquidation of the Company, the holders of the Cumulative Preferred Stock are entitled to receive the redemption price (in the case of a voluntary liquidation) or the par value (in the case of an involuntary liquidation) plus, in either case, accrued dividends.
Capital Stock Expense: Expenses incurred on issuance of capital stock are accumulated and reported as a reduction in common equity.
Repurchase Program: On July 25, 2002, the Board of Directors of CH Energy Group authorized a Common Stock Repurchase Program (“Repurchase Program”) to repurchase up to 4 million shares, or approximately 25% of its outstanding Common Stock, over the five year period ending July 31, 2007. On July 27, 2007, the Board of Directors of CH Energy Group extended and amended the Repurchase Program, effective July 31, 2007. As amended, the Repurchase Program authorizes the repurchase of up to 2,000,000 shares (excluding shares purchased before July 31, 2007) or approximately 13% of the Company’s outstanding common stock, from time to time, over the five year period ending July 31, 2012. No shares were repurchased under the Repurchase Program during the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006. CH Energy Group reserves the right to modify, suspend, renew, or terminate the Repurchase Program at any time without notice.
- 142 -
NOTE 9 - CAPITALIZATION - LONG-TERM DEBT
Details of Central Hudson’s long-term debt are as follows:
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | December 31, | |
Series | | Maturity Date | | 2008 | | 2007 | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | | | (In Thousands) | |
Promissory Notes: | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
1999 Series C (6.00%) | | Jan. 15, 2009 | | $ | 20,000 | | $ | 20,000 | |
2003 Series D (4.33%)(d) | | Sep. 23, 2010 | | | 24,000 | | | 24,000 | |
2002 Series D (6.64%)(d) | | Mar. 28, 2012 | | | 36,000 | | | 36,000 | |
2008 Series F (6.854%) (b) | | Nov. 01, 2013 | | | 30,000 | | | — | |
2004 Series D (4.73%)(d) | | Feb. 27, 2014 | | | 7,000 | | | 7,000 | |
2004 Series E (4.80%)(e) | | Nov. 05, 2014 | | | 7,000 | | | 7,000 | |
2007 Series F (6.028%)(b) | | Sep. 01, 2017 | | | 33,000 | | | 33,000 | |
2004 Series E (5.05%)(e) | | Nov. 04, 2019 | | | 27,000 | | | 27,000 | |
1999 Series A (5.45%)(a) | | Aug. 01, 2027 | | | 33,400 | | | 33,400 | |
1999 Series C (a)(c) | | Aug. 01, 2028 | | | 41,150 | | | 41,150 | |
1999 Series D (a)(c) | | Aug. 01, 2028 | | | 41,000 | | | 41,000 | |
1998 Series A (6.50%)(a) | | Dec. 01, 2028 | | | 16,700 | | | 16,700 | |
2006 Series E (5.76%)(e) | | Nov. 17, 2031 | | | 27,000 | | | 27,000 | |
1999 Series B (a)(c) | | July 01, 2034 | | | 33,700 | | | 33,700 | |
2005 Series E (5.84%)(e) | | Dec. 05, 2035 | | | 24,000 | | | 24,000 | |
2007 Series F (5.804%)(b) | | Mar. 23, 2037 | | | 33,000 | | | 33,000 | |
| | | |
|
| |
|
| |
| | | | | 433,950 | | | 403,950 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Unamortized Discount on Debt | | | | | (56 | ) | | (58 | ) |
| | | |
|
| |
|
| |
Total Long-term debt | | | | $ | 433,894 | | $ | 403,892 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Less: Current Portion | | | | | (20,000 | ) | | — | |
| | | |
|
| |
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | |
Net Long-term debt | | | | $ | 413,894 | | $ | 403,892 | |
| | | |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
(a) | Promissory Notes issued in connection with the sale by NYSERDA of tax-exempt pollution control revenue bonds. |
| |
(b) | Issued under Central Hudson’s medium-term note program, described below. |
| |
(c) | Variable rate notes. |
| |
(d) | Issued pursuant to a 2001 PSC Order approving the issuance by Central Hudson prior to June 30, 2004, of up to $100 million of unsecured medium-term notes. |
| |
(e) | Issued pursuant to a 2004 PSC Order approving the issuance by Central Hudson prior to December 31, 2006, of up to $85 million of unsecured medium-term notes. |
On September 21, 2006, the PSC issued an Order authorizing issuance of securities, in response to a financing petition Central Hudson filed on July 3, 2006. The Order authorizes Central Hudson to issue and sell up to $140 million of medium-term notes through December 31, 2009, and to enter into revolving credit agreements in an
- 143 -
amount not to exceed $125 million and for periods not to exceed five years. On March 23, 2007, Central Hudson issued $33 million of 30-year, 5.80% Series F notes. The proceeds were used to redeem at maturity $33 million of 5-year, 5.87% Series D Notes, on March 28, 2007. On September 14, 2007, Central Hudson issued $33 million of 10-year 6.028% Series F Notes and on November 18, 2008, Central Hudson issued an additional $30 million of 5-year, 6.854% Series F Notes. The proceeds from these two issuances were used to finance Central Hudson’s capital expenditures.
Griffith had no third-party long-term debt outstanding as of December 31, 2008, or 2007.
Long-Term Debt Maturities
All of CH Energy Group’s outstanding long-term debt has been issued by Central Hudson. See Note 15 - “Financial Instruments” for a schedule of long-term debt maturing or to be redeemed during the next five years and thereafter.
NYSERDA
Central Hudson has five debt series that were issued in conjunction with the sale of tax-exempt pollution control revenue bonds by NYSERDA. These NYSERDA bonds, totaling $166 million, are insured by Ambac Assurance Corporation (“Ambac”). During 2008, Ambac’s financial strength ratings were downgraded by Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s. Standard & Poor’s current rating is ‘A’ with a negative outlook4 and Moody’s is ‘Baa1’ with a developing outlook5. These rating actions apply to Central Hudson’s five Ambac-insured issues. The underlying rating and outlook on these bonds and Central Hudson’s other senior unsecured debt is ‘A’/stable by Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Ratings and ‘A2’/negative by Moody’s.6
Central Hudson’s 1998 NYSERDA Series A Bonds, totaling $16.7 million, were re-marketed on December 1, 2008. Under the terms of the applicable indenture, Central Hudson converted the bonds to a fixed rate of 6.5% which will continue until their maturity in December 2028. Prior to the December 1, 2008 re-marketing, the bonds bore interest at 3.0%.
Central Hudson’s 1999 NYSERDA Series A Bonds, totaling $33.4 million, have an interest rate that is fixed to maturity in 2027 at 5.45%.
Central Hudson’s 1999 NYSERDA Bonds, Series B, C, and D, totaling $115.9 million, are multi-modal bonds that are currently in auction rate mode. Beginning in 1999 when the bonds were issued, the bonds’ interest rate has been reset every 35
| |
|
4 | Issued November 19, 2008 |
| |
5 | Issued November 5, 2008 |
| |
6 | These ratings reflect only the views of the rating agency issuing the rating, are not recommendations to |
buy, sell, or hold securities of Central Hudson and may be subject to revision or withdrawal at any time by the rating agency issuing the rating. Each rating should be evaluated independently of any other rating. |
- 144 -
days in a Dutch auction. Auctions in the market for municipal auction rate securities have experienced widespread failures since early in 2008. Generally, an auction failure occurs because there is an insufficient level of demand to purchase the bonds and the bondholders who want to sell must hold the bonds for the next interest rate period. Since February 2008, all auctions for Central Hudson’s three series of auction rate bonds have failed. As a consequence, the interest rate paid to the bondholders has been set to the then prevailing maximum rate defined in the trust indenture. Central Hudson’s maximum rate results in interest rates that are generally higher than expected results from the auction process. For the foreseeable future, Central Hudson expects the maximum rate, determined on the date of each auction, to be 175% of the yield on an index of tax-exempt short-term debt, or its approximate equivalent. Since the first auction failure in February, the applicable rate for Central Hudson’s bonds has ranged from 0.84% to 9.01% and averaged 3.68% for 2008. In its Orders, the PSC has authorized deferral accounting treatment for the interest costs from Central Hudson’s three series of variable rate 1999 NYSERDA Bonds. As a result, variations in interest rates on these bonds are deferred for future recovery from or refund to customers and Central Hudson does not expect the auction failures to have a material impact on earnings. To mitigate the potential impact of unexpected increases in short-term interest rates, Central Hudson purchases interest rate caps based on an index for short-term tax-exempt debt. A two-year, 4.5% cap on $115.9 million of debt expired March 31, 2008. Central Hudson replaced the expiring cap, effective April 1, 2008, with a one-year cap set at 3.0%. The interest rate cap is evaluated quarterly and Central Hudson would receive a payout under the terms of the cap if the index for short-term tax-exempt debt exceeds an average of 3.0% for the quarter. During 2008, the average for any quarter did not exceed the cap rate and therefore no payments were received in the current year.
Central Hudson is currently evaluating what actions, if any, it may take in the future in connection with its 1999 NYSERDA Bonds, Series B, C and D. Potential actions may include converting the debt from auction rate to another interest rate mode or refinancing with taxable bonds.
Debt Expense
Expenses incurred in connection with Central Hudson’s debt issuance and any discount or premium on debt are deferred and amortized over the lives of the related issues. Expenses incurred on debt redemptions prior to maturity have been deferred and are usually amortized over the shorter of the remaining lives of the related extinguished issues or the new issues, as directed by the PSC.
NOTE 10 - POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS
Pension Benefits
Central Hudson has a non-contributory Retirement Income Plan (“Retirement Plan”) covering substantially all of its employees hired before January 1, 2008. The
- 145 -
Retirement Plan is a defined benefit plan, which provides pension benefits based on an employee’s compensation and years of service. In 2007, Central Hudson amended the Retirement Plan to eliminate these benefits for managerial, professional, and supervisory employees hired on or after January 1, 2008. The Retirement Plan for unionized employees was similarly amended for all employees hired on or after May 1, 2008. The Retirement Plan’s assets are held in a trust fund (“Trust Fund”). Central Hudson has provided periodic updates to the benefit formulas stated in the Retirement Plan.
In accordance with the measurement date provisions of SFAS 158, Central Hudson changed its measurement date for its pension plan (the “Retirement Plan”) from September 30 to December 31 for its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2008. Central Hudson elected the “15-month-transition approach” and recorded an adjustment in the first quarter of 2008 to recognize the effects of the change in measurement date. This adjustment represents 3/15ths of the net periodic pension cost determined for the period from October 1, 2007 to December 31, 2008; the remaining 12/15ths of the net periodic pension cost was recorded over the twelve months ended December 31, 2008. The recording of this adjustment increased Central Hudson’s pension liability by $0.4 million, comprised of the following components (In Thousands):
| | | | |
Adjustment for 3/15ths of net periodic pension costs | | $ | 2,788 | |
Adjustment for amortization of prior service costs and actuarial losses (a) | | | (2,426 | ) |
| |
|
| |
Net increase to pension liability | | $ | 362 | |
| |
|
| |
| |
(a) | Liability recognized previously on Consolidated Balance Sheet upon initial implementation of SFAS 158 |
Decisions to fund Central Hudson’s Retirement Plan are based on several factors, including the value of plan assets relative to plan liabilities, legislative requirements, regulatory considerations, and available corporate resources. As a result of recent market conditions, Central Hudson’s Retirement Plan assets have significantly decreased during 2008 relative to the plan liabilities. The liabilities are affected by the discount rate used to determine benefit obligations and the accruing of additional benefits. Central Hudson considers the provisions of the Pension Protection Act of 2006 to determine funding requirements for the near-term and future periods.
Central Hudson contributed $12.5 million and $5.8 million to the Retirement Plan in 2008 and 2007, respectively. As noted above, the value of the plan assets have decreased and contributions for 2009 are expected to range from $10-$20 million. The actual contributions could vary significantly based upon corporate resources, projected investment returns, actual investment returns, inflation, and interest rate assumptions.
In accordance with the provisions of SFAS 158, which was effective for the year ended December 31, 2006, Central Hudson’s pension liability balance (i.e., the funded status) at December 31, 2008 was $162.2 million and at December 31, 2007, was $11.7 million, including recognition for the difference between the projected benefit obligation
- 146 -
(“PBO”) for pensions and the market value of the pension assets. These balances include consideration for non-qualified executive plans.
The following reflects the impact of the recording of SFAS 158 adjustments on the Consolidated Balance Sheets of CH Energy Group and Central Hudson:
| | | | | | | |
| | December 31, | |
| | 2008 | | 2007 | |
| |
| |
| |
| | (In Thousands) | |
| | | |
Prefunded (accrued) pension costs prior to SFAS 158 adjustment | | $ | 29,884 | | $ | 36,697 | |
Additional liability required | | | (192,084 | ) | | (48,426 | ) |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Accrued pension liability per SFAS 158 | | $ | (162,200 | ) | $ | (11,729 | ) |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| | | | | | | |
Total offset to additional liability - Regulatory assets - Retirement Plan | | $ | 192,084 | | $ | 48,426 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Pursuant to SFAS 158, gains or losses and prior service costs or credits that arise during the period but are not recognized as components of net periodic pension cost would typically be recognized as a component of other comprehensive income, net of tax. However, Central Hudson records regulatory assets rather than adjusting comprehensive income to offset the additional SFAS 158 liability. The recording of a regulatory asset is consistent with the PSC’s 1993 Statement of Policy regarding pensions and OPEB (“1993 PSC Policy”). Under the 1993 PSC Policy, differences between pension expense and rate allowances covering these costs are deferred for future recovery from or return to customers with carrying charges accrued on cash differences.
The valuation of the PBO was determined as of the measurement date of December 31, 2008, using a 6.2% discount rate (as determined using the Citigroup Pension Discount Curve reflecting projected pension cash flows). The discount rate on the prior measurement date of September 30, 2007 was 6.2%. Declines in the market value of the Trust Fund’s investment portfolio, which occurred from 2000 through 2002, and a reduction in the discount rate during that period used to determine the benefit obligation for pensions have resulted in a significant increase in pension costs since 2001. Declines in the market value of the Trust Fund’s investment portfolio in 2008 are expected to result in significant future increases in pension costs. The 2006 Rate Order includes an increase in the rate allowances for pension expense and OPEB expense which more closely approximate the recent cost of providing these benefits. However, due to the volatility of these costs, authorization remains in effect for the deferral of any differences between rate allowances and actual costs under the 1993 PSC Policy. The 2006 Rate Order also authorized Central Hudson to offset significant deferred balances for pension expense and OPEB expense for the electric department with available deferred credit balances due to customers. Deferred pension and OPEB balances
- 147 -
accumulated through June 30, 2006, for the natural gas department are being recovered via a seven-year amortization that began on July 1, 2007.
Central Hudson accounts for pension activity in accordance with PSC-prescribed provisions, which among other things, require a ten-year amortization of actuarial gains and losses.
In addition to the Retirement Plan, CH Energy Group’s and Central Hudson’s executives are covered under a non-qualified Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan.
Estimates of Long-Term Rates of Return
The expected long-term rate of return on Retirement Plan assets is 8.0%, net of investment expense. In determining the expected long-term rate of return on these assets, Central Hudson considered the current level of expected returns on risk-free investments (primarily United States government bonds), the historical level of risk premiums associated with other asset classes, and the expectations of future returns over a 20-year time horizon on each asset class, based on the views of leading financial advisors and economists. The expected return for each asset class was then weighted based on the Retirement Plan’s target asset allocation. Central Hudson monitors actual performance against target asset allocations and adjusts actual allocations and targets as deemed appropriate in accordance with the Retirement Plan strategy.
Retirement Plan Policy and Strategy
The Retirement Plan seeks to match the long-term nature of its funding obligations with investment objectives for long-term growth and income. Retirement Plan assets are invested in accordance with sound investment practices that emphasize long-term investment fundamentals. The Retirement Plan recognizes that assets are exposed to risk and the market value of assets may vary from year to year. Potential short-term volatility, mitigated through a well-diversified portfolio structure, is acceptable in accordance with the objective of capital appreciation over the long-term.
The asset allocation strategy employed in the Retirement Plan reflects Central Hudson’s return objectives and risk tolerance. Asset allocation targets, expressed as a percentage of the market value of the Retirement Plan, are summarized in the table below:
| | | |
Asset Class | | 2008 Target Average |
|
|
|
Equity Securities | | 60 | % |
Debt Securities | | 35 | % |
Alternative Investments | | 5 | % |
| | | |
Total | | 100 | % |
- 148 -
Due to the dynamic nature of market value fluctuations, Retirement Plan assets will require rebalancing from time-to-time to maintain the target asset allocation. The Retirement Plan recognizes the importance of maintaining a long-term strategic allocation and does not intend any tactical asset allocation or market timing asset allocation shifts.
The Retirement Plan seeks to earn a return commensurate with the risk of its underlying assets. The benchmark index is currently comprised of 33% Russell 1000 Stock Index; 12% Russell 2500 Stock Index; 15% Morgan Stanley Capital International Europe, Australasia and Far East (MSCI EAFE) International Stock Index (Net); 5% Russell Open-End Real Estate Mean; and 35% LB Aggregate Bond Index. The Retirement Plan seeks to exceed the average annual return of this benchmark over a three to five year rolling time period and a full market cycle. It is understood that there can be no guarantees about the attainment of the Retirement Plan’s return objectives.
The Retirement Plan uses outside consultants and outside investment managers to aid in the determination of asset allocation and the management of actual plan assets, respectively.
Other Post-Retirement Benefits
Central Hudson provides certain health care and life insurance benefits for retired employees through its post-retirement benefit plans. Substantially all of Central Hudson’s unionized employees and managerial, professional and supervisory employees (“non-union”) hired prior to January 1, 2008, may become eligible for these benefits if they reach retirement age while employed by Central Hudson. Central Hudson amended its OPEB programs for existing non-union, and certain retired employees effective January 1, 2008. Benefit plans for non-union active employees were similarly amended. Programs were also amended to eliminate post-retirement benefits for non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2008. In order to reduce the total costs of these benefits, plan changes were negotiated with the IBEW Local 320 for unionized employees and certain retired employees effective May 1, 2008. Plans were also amended to eliminate post-retirement benefits for union employees hired on or after May 1, 2008. Benefits for retirees and active employees are provided through insurance companies whose premiums are based on the benefits paid during the year.
The significant assumptions used to account for these benefits are the discount rate, the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets and the health care cost trend rate. Central Hudson selects the discount rate using the Citigroup Pension Discount Curve reflecting projected cash flows. The estimates of long-term rates of return and the investment policy and strategy for these plan assets are similar to those used for pension benefits previously discussed in this Note. The estimates of health care cost trend rates are based on a review of actual recent trends and projected future trends.
Central Hudson fully recovers its net periodic post-retirement benefit costs in accordance with the 1993 PSC Policy. Under these guidelines, the difference between
- 149 -
the amounts of post-retirement benefits recoverable in rates and the amounts of post-retirement benefits determined by an actuarial consultant under SFAS No. 106, titled Employers Accounting for Post-retirement Benefits Other Than Pensions, as amended by SFAS No. 158, is deferred as either a regulatory asset or a regulatory liability, as appropriate.
The effect of the Medicare Act of 2003 was reflected in 2008 and 2007 assuming Central Hudson will continue to provide a prescription drug benefit to retirees that are at least actuarially equivalent to Medicare Act of 2003 and that Central Hudson will receive the federal subsidy.
In accordance with the provisions of SFAS 158, Central Hudson’s liability (i.e. the funded status) for OPEB at December 31, 2008 was $52.6 million and $55.6 million at December 31, 2007 including recognition for the difference between the Accumulated Benefit Obligation (“ABO”) and the market value of other post-retirement assets. The additional liability for the difference between the ABO and the market value of other post-retirement assets at December 31, 2008 and 2007 of $10.4 million and $15.6 million, respectively, was offset by recording a regulatory asset in accordance with the 1993 PSC Policy. Central Hudson and Griffith each participate in a 401(k) retirement plan for their employees. Griffith also provides a discretionary profit-sharing benefit for their employees. The 401(k) plans provide for employee tax-deferred salary deductions for participating employees and their respective employer matches contributions made by participating employees. The matching benefit varies by employer and employee group. For Central Hudson, the cost of its matching contributions was $1.7 million for 2008, $1.6 million for 2007, and $1.5 million for 2006. For Griffith, the cost of its matching contributions was $869,000 in 2008, $783,000 in 2007, and $605,000 in 2006. Profit sharing contributions made by Griffith were $557,000, $665,000, and $591,000, for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.
- 150 -
Reconciliations of Central Hudson’s pension and other post-retirement plans’ benefit obligations, plan assets, and funded status, as well as the components of net periodic pension cost and the weighted average assumptions are reported on the following chart.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Pension Benefits | | Other Benefits | |
| |
| |
| |
| | 2008 | | 2007 | | 2008 | | 2007 | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | (Dollars In Thousands) | |
| |
| |
Change in Benefit Obligation: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Benefit obligation at beginning of year | | $ | 408,886 | | $ | 414,474 | | $ | 148,215 | | $ | 156,520 | |
Service cost | | | 9,645 | * | | 7,908 | | | 2,415 | | | 3,788 | |
Interest cost | | | 31,109 | * | | 23,711 | | | 7,547 | | | 9,806 | |
Participant contributions | | | — | * | | — | | | 492 | | | 391 | |
Plan amendments | | | 1,371 | * | | — | | | (25,771 | ) | | (27,392 | ) |
Benefits paid | | | (30,157 | )* | | (23,103 | ) | | (6,216 | ) | | (6,482 | ) |
Actuarial (gain) loss | | | 2,684 | * | | (14,104 | ) | | (7,681 | ) | | 11,584 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Benefit Obligation at End of Plan Year | | $ | 423,538 | | $ | 408,886 | | $ | 119,001 | | $ | 148,215 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Change in Plan Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fair Value of plan assets at beginning of year | | $ | 397,157 | | $ | 359,627 | | $ | 92,655 | | $ | 87,702 | |
Adjustment / other | | | — | * | | — | | | 36 | | | 221 | |
Actual return on plan assets | | | (116,020 | )* | | 49,552 | | | (24,576 | ) | | 4,201 | |
Employer contributions | | | 13,027 | * | | 13,347 | | | 4,200 | | | 6,547 | |
Participant contributions | | | — | * | | — | | | 492 | | | 391 | |
Net transfer in / (out) | | | — | * | | — | | | — | | | 186 | |
Benefits paid | | | (30,157 | )* | | (23,103 | ) | | (6,216 | ) | | (6,482 | ) |
Administrative expenses | | | (2,669 | )* | | (2,266 | ) | | (235 | ) | | (111 | ) |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Fair Value of Plan Assets at End of Plan Year | | $ | 261,338 | | $ | 397,157 | | $ | 66,356 | | $ | 92,655 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
* | Due to measurement date change for pension benefits to December 31 from September 30, amount reflects 15 months of activity. |
- 151 -
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Pension Benefits | | Other Benefits | |
| |
| |
| |
| | 2008 | | 2007 | | 2008 | | 2007 | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | (Dollars In Thousands) | |
| |
| |
Reconciliation of Funded Status: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Funded Status at end of year | | $ | (162,200 | ) | $ | (11,729 | ) | $ | (52,645 | ) | $ | (55,560 | ) |
Employer Contributions between measurement date and fiscal year-end | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | |
|
Amounts Recognized on Consolidated Balance Sheet: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Noncurrent assets | | $ | — | | $ | — | | $ | — | | $ | — | |
Current liabilities | | | (526 | ) | | (527 | ) | | — | | | — | |
Noncurrent liabilities | | | (161,674 | ) | | (11,202 | ) | | (52,645 | ) | | (55,560 | ) |
Net amount recognized on Consolidated Balance Sheet (after FAS 158) | | | (162,200 | ) | | (11,729 | ) | | (52,645 | ) | | (55,560 | ) |
Regulatory asset: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
-Net loss | | | 177,342 | | | 32,397 | | | 57,439 | | | 39,338 | |
-Prior service costs (credit) | | | 14,742 | | | 16,029 | | | (57,240 | ) | | (36,569 | ) |
-Transition obligation | | | — | | | — | | | 10,250 | | | 12,816 | |
|
Components of Net Periodic Benefit Cost: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Service cost | | $ | 9,645 | | $ | 7,908 | | $ | 2,415 | | $ | 3,788 | |
Interest cost | | | 31,109 | | | 23,711 | | | 7,547 | | | 9,806 | |
Expected return on plan assets | | | (37,889 | ) | | (27,997 | ) | | (7,006 | ) | | (6,778 | ) |
Amortization of prior service cost (credit) | | | 2,658 | | | 1,976 | | | (5,100 | ) | | (2,217 | ) |
Amortization of transitional obligation | | | — | | | — | | | 2,566 | | | 2,566 | |
Amortization of net (gain) loss | | | 14,318 | | | 13,377 | | | 5,723 | | | 6,521 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net Periodic Benefit Cost | | $ | 19,841 | | $ | 18,975 | | $ | 6,145 | | $ | 13,686 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
- 152 -
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Pension Benefits | | Other Benefits | |
| |
| |
| |
| | 2008 | | 2007 | | 2008 | | 2007 | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | (Dollars In Thousands) | |
| |
| |
Other Changes in Plan Assets and Benefit Obligation Recognized in Regulatory Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net loss (gain) | | $ | 159,262 | | $ | (33,393 | ) | $ | 23,824 | | $ | 13,737 | |
Amortization of net (loss) gain | | | (14,318 | ) | | (13,377 | ) | | (5,723 | ) | | (6,521 | ) |
Prior service cost (credit) | | | 1,371 | | | — | | | (25,771 | ) | | (27,392 | ) |
Amortization of prior service cost | | | (2,658 | ) | | (1,976 | ) | | 5,100 | | | 2,217 | |
Transitional obligation | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | |
Amortization of transitional obligation | | | — | | | — | | | (2,566 | ) | | (2,565 | ) |
Regulatory asset attributable to change from prior year | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | |
Total recognized in regulatory asset | | | 143,657 | | | (48,746 | ) | | (5,136 | ) | | (20,524 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total recognized in net periodic benefit cost and regulatory asset | | $ | 163,498 | | $ | (29,771 | ) | $ | 1,009 | | $ | (6,838 | ) |
|
Weighted-average assumptions used to determine benefit obligations: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Discount rate | | | 6.20 | % | | 6.20 | % | | 6.20 | % | | 6.40 | % |
Rate of compensation increase | | | 5.00 | % | | 5.00 | % | | 5.00 | % | | 5.00 | % |
Measurement date | | | 12/31/08 | | | 9/30/07 | | | 12/31/08 | | | 12/31/07 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Weighted-average assumptions used to determine net periodic benefit cost for years ended December 31: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Discount rate | | | 6.20 | % | | 5.80 | % | | 6.40 | % | | 5.90 | % |
Expected long-term rate of return on plan assets | | | 8.00 | % | | 8.00 | % | | 7.75 | % | | 8.00 | % |
Rate of compensation increase | | | 5.00 | % | | 4.50 | % | | 5.00 | % | | 4.50 | % |
- 153 -
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Pension Benefits | | Other Benefits | |
| |
| |
| |
| | 2008 | | 2007 | | 2008 | | 2007 | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | (Dollars In Thousands) | |
| |
| |
Assumed health care cost trend rates at December 31: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Health care cost trend rate assumed for next year | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | 9.00 | % | | 9.50 | % |
Rate to which the cost trend rate is assumed to decline (the ultimate trend rate) | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | 5.00 | % | | 5.00 | % |
Year that the rate reaches the ultimate trend rate | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | 2018 | | | 2015 | |
|
Pension plans with accumulated benefit obligations in excess of plan assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Projected benefit obligation | | $ | 423,538 | | $ | 9,106 | | | N/A | | | N/A | |
Accumulated benefit obligation | | | 389,144 | | | 7,582 | �� | | N/A | | | N/A | |
Fair Value of plan assets | | | 261,337 | | | — | | | N/A | | | N/A | |
The ABO for defined benefit pension plans was $389.1 million and $375.4 million at December 31, 2008, and 2007, respectively.
The estimated net loss and prior service cost for the defined benefit pension plans that will be amortized from regulatory assets into net periodic benefit cost over the next fiscal year are $25.4 million and $2.2 million, respectively. The estimated net loss, prior service cost (credit) and transitional obligation for the other defined benefit post-retirement plans that will be amortized from regulatory assets into net periodic benefit cost over the next fiscal year is $8.9 million, $(5.9) million, and $2.6 million, respectively.
- 154 -
Central Hudson’s pension and other post-retirement plans’ weighted average asset allocations at December 31, 2008, and 2007, by asset category are as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Pension Plan | | Other Plans | |
| |
| |
| |
| | 2008 | | 2007 | | 2008 | | 2007 | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Equity Securities | | | 48.7 | % | | 57.3 | % | | 65.6 | % | | 64.5 | % |
Debt Securities | | | 41.3 | % | | 34.6 | % | | 34.1 | % | | 32.4 | % |
Alternate Investment | | | 9.2 | % | | 7.6 | % | | — | % | | — | % |
Other | | | 0.8 | % | | 0.5 | % | | 0.3 | % | | 3.1 | % |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Total | | | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
For the pension plan and other benefit plans, equity securities include no CH Energy Group Common Stock at December 31, 2008, and 2007, respectively.
- 155 -
Assumed health care cost trend rates have a significant effect on the amounts reported for the health care plan. A 1% change in assumed health care cost trend rates would have the following effects:
| | | | | | | |
| | One Percentage Point Increase | | One Percentage Point Decrease | |
| |
| |
| |
| | (Dollars In Thousands) | |
Effect on total of service and interest cost components for 2008 | | $ | 1,076 | | $ | (894 | ) |
| | | | | | | |
Effect on year-end 2008 post-retirement benefit obligation | | $ | 9,943 | | $ | (8,449 | ) |
Employer contributions for OPEB totaled $4.2 million and $6.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2008, and 2007, respectively. The determination of future funding depends on a number of factors, including the discount rate, expected return on plan assets, medical claims assumptions used, mortality assumptions used, benefit changes, and corporate resources. The estimated contributions in 2009 range from $1-$5 million.
Estimated Future Benefit Payments: The following benefit payments, which reflect expected future service as appropriate, are expected to be paid:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Year | | Pension Benefits - Gross | | Other Benefits - Gross | | Other Benefits - Net(1) | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | (Dollars In Thousands) | |
| |
|
|
2009 | | $ | 27,430 | | $ | 7,509 | | $ | 6,851 | |
2010 | | | 28,052 | | | 8,041 | | | 7,354 | |
2011 | | | 28,866 | | | 8,538 | | | 7,825 | |
2012 | | | 29,491 | | | 8,804 | | | 8,053 | |
2013 | | | 29,952 | | | 8,963 | | | 8,170 | |
2014 - 2018 | | | 158,338 | | | 46,705 | | | 45,031 | |
(1) Estimated benefit payments reduced by estimated gross amount of Medicare Act of 2003 subsidy receipts expected.
NOTE 11 - EQUITY-BASED COMPENSATION
CH Energy Group’s Long-Term Performance-Based Incentive Plan (“2000 Plan”), adopted in 2000 and amended in 2001 and 2003, reserves 500,000 shares of CH Energy Group’s Common Stock for awards to be granted under the 2000 Plan. The 2000 Plan provides for the granting of stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock awards, performance shares, and performance units. No participant may be granted total awards in excess of 150,000 shares over the life of the 2000 Plan. Stock options granted to officers of CH Energy Group and its subsidiaries are exercisable over
- 156 -
a period of ten years, with 40% of the options vesting after two years and 20% of the options vesting each year thereafter for the following three years. Stock options granted to non-employee Directors are immediately exercisable.
The 2000 Plan was amended in the third quarter of 2003. The amendment allows executives to defer receipt of performance shares and performance units in accordance with the terms of CH Energy Group’s Directors and Executives Deferred Compensation Plan. Also, an amendment to the previously effective Stock Plan for Outside Directors provided for shares of stock previously accrued for retired Directors to be paid in the form of cash and provides that active Directors could elect to transfer previously accrued shares payable to them to CH Energy Group’s Directors and Executives Deferred Compensation Plan. In addition, the amendment freezes future participation and future accruals under the 2000 Plan.
In 2006, CH Energy Group adopted a Long-Term Equity Incentive Plan (“2006 Plan”) to replace the 2000 Plan. The 2006 Plan was approved by CH Energy Group’s shareholders on April 25, 2006. The 2000 Plan has been terminated, with no new awards to be granted under such plan. Outstanding awards granted under the 2000 Plan will continue in accordance with their terms and the provisions of the 2000 Plan.
The 2006 Plan reserves up to a maximum of 300,000 shares of CH Energy Group’s Common Stock for awards to be granted under the 2006 Plan. Awards may consist of stock option rights, stock appreciation rights, performance shares, performance units, restricted shares, restricted stock units, and other awards that CH Energy Group’s Compensation Committee of its Board of Directors (“Compensation Committee”) may authorize. The Compensation Committee may also, from time-to-time and upon such terms and conditions as it may determine, authorize the granting to non-employee Directors of stock option rights, stock appreciation rights, restricted shares, and restricted stock units.
In addition to the aggregate limit in the awards described above, the 2006 Plan imposes various sub-limits on the number of shares of CH Energy Group’s Common Stock that may be issued or transferred under the 2006 Plan. The aggregate number of shares of Common Stock actually issued or transferred by CH Energy Group upon the exercise of incentive stock options shall not exceed 300,000 shares. No participant shall be granted stock option rights and stock appreciation rights, in aggregate, for more than 15,000 shares of Common Stock during any calendar year. No participant in any calendar year shall receive an award of performance shares or restricted shares that specify management objectives, in the aggregate, for more than 20,000 shares of Common Stock, or performance units having an aggregate maximum value as of their respective date of grant in excess of $1 million. The number of shares of Common Stock issued as stock appreciation rights, restricted shares, and restricted stock units (after taking forfeitures into account) shall not exceed, in the aggregate, 100,000 shares of common stock.
- 157 -
CH Energy Group adopted SFAS 123(R) effective January 1, 2006, using the modified prospective application with no significant impact on its financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. Under this application, all new awards issued and any outstanding awards that may be modified, repurchased, or cancelled after January 1, 2006 have been accounted for under SFAS 123(R).
The following table summarizes information concerning stock options granted through December 31, 2008:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date of Grant | | Exercise Price | | Number of Options Granted | | Number of Options Outstanding | | Weighted Average Remaining Life in Years | | Number of Options Exercisable | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
January 1, 2000 | | $ | 31.94 | | | 30,300 | | | 320 | | | 1.00 | | | 320 | |
January 1, 2001 | | $ | 44.06 | | | 59,900 | | | 21,560 | | | 2.00 | | | 21,560 | |
January 1, 2003 | | $ | 48.62 | | | 36,900 | | | 18,420 | | | 4.00 | | | 18,420 | |
| | | | |
|
| |
|
| | | | |
|
| |
| | | | | | 127,100 | | | 40,300 | | | 2.91 | | | 40,300 | |
All options were fully vested as of December 31, 2007. The fair market values per option of CH Energy Group stock options granted in 2003, 2001, and 2000 are $6.51, $4.41, and $4.46, respectively. These fair market values were estimated as of the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following weighted average assumptions:
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | 2003 | | 2001 | | 2000 | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Risk-free interest rate | | | 4.40 | % | | 4.78 | % | | 6.36 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Expected life – in years | | | 10 | | | 5 | | | 5 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Expected stock volatility | | | 17.50 | % | | 20.06 | % | | 15.59 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Dividend yield | | | 4.4 | % | | 5.4 | % | | 5.4 | % |
- 158 -
A summary of the status of stock options awarded to executives and non-employee Directors of CH Energy Group and its subsidiaries under the 2000 Plan is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | Stock Option Shares | | Weighted Average Exercise Price | | Weighted Average Remaining Life in Years | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Outstanding at 12/31/07 | | | 40,300 | | $ | 46.05 | | | 3.91 | |
Granted | | | — | | | — | | | | |
Exercised | | | — | | | — | | | | |
Expired / Forfeited | | | — | | | — | | | | |
| |
|
| | | | | | | |
Outstanding at 12/31/08 | | | 40,300 | | $ | 46.05 | | | 2.91 | |
| |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | |
| Total Shares Outstanding | | 15,783,083 | |
| Potential Dilution | | 0.3 | % |
There was no compensation expense related to stock options for the year ended December 31, 2008 and the compensation expense was not material for the years ended December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006. The balance accrued for and the intrinsic value of outstanding options was not material as of December 31, 2008 and 2007. No non-qualified stock options were exercised during the year ended December 31, 2008.
A summary of the status of performance shares granted to executives under the 2006 Plan is as follows:
| | | | | | | |
Grant Date | | Performance Shares Granted | | Performance Shares Outstanding at December 31, 2008 | |
|
|
|
|
| |
April 25, 2006 | | | 20,710 | | | 18,290 | |
January 25, 2007 | | | 21,330 | | | 20,240 | |
January 24, 2008 | | | 33,440 | | | 33,440 | |
The ultimate number of shares earned under the awards is based on metrics established by the Compensation Committee at the beginning of the award cycle. Compensation expense is recorded as performance shares are earned over the relevant three-year life of the performance share grant prior to its award. The portion of the compensation expense related to an employee who retires during the performance period is the amount recognized up to the date of retirement.
On May 1, 2008, performance shares earned as of December 31, 2007 for the award cycle with a grant date of March 24, 2005 were issued to participants. Those recipients electing not to defer this compensation under the CH Energy Group Directors and Executives Deferred Compensation Plan received shares issued from CH Energy Group’s treasury stock. Additionally, on July 2, 2008, a pro-rated number of shares
- 159 -
under the April 25, 2006 and January 25, 2007 performance share grants were paid to a retired officer in accordance with the plan in the form of shares issued from CH Energy Group’s treasury stock. A total of 8,983 shares were issued from CH Energy Group’s treasury stock in satisfaction of these awards and are presented in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as an increase in common shares outstanding and as a reduction in treasury stock as of December 31, 2008. The carrying amount of treasury shares exceeded the quoted market value on these dates of issuance, therefore, the difference has been reflected as additional paid in capital in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2008. These shares were also included in the calculation of the average number of common shares outstanding used in the basic EPS calculation in the Consolidated Statement of Income for the year ended December 31, 2008.
The determination of compensation expense for performance shares is based on the use of the binomial method, which reflects the following assumptions:
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | For the year ended December 31, | |
| | 2008 | | 2007 | | 2006 | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Stock price | | $ | 51.39 | | $ | 44.54 | | $ | 52.80 | |
Dividend yield | | | 4.2 | % | | 4.8 | % | | 4.2 | % |
Performance period (in years) | | | 3 | | | 3 | | | 3 | |
Risk-free rates of return: | | | | | | | | | | |
One year | | | 0.37 | % | | 3.34 | % | | 5.00 | % |
Two year | | | 0.76 | % | | 3.05 | % | | 4.82 | % |
Three year | | | 1.00 | % | | 3.07 | % | | 4.74 | % |
Other considerations in the determination of compensation expense for performance shares include the grant price for each individual grant, estimated forfeitures, and historical percentile performance rank.
Effective January 2, 2008, 12,100 restricted shares, with a fair value upon issuance of $536,000, were granted under the 2006 Plan to certain officers and key employees of Griffith and an officer of CHEC. These shares were issued at fair market value on the date of grant, and for Griffith, are subject to a three-year vesting period contingent upon continued employment of each individual. Shares granted to the officer of CHEC vest ratably over the three-year vesting period contingent upon continued employment. Dividends paid on restricted shares held by Griffith officers and key employees will be automatically deferred and re-invested in additional restricted shares. The shares granted were issued from CH Energy Group’s treasury stock on January 2, 2008 and are presented in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as an increase in common shares outstanding and as a reduction in treasury stock as of December 31, 2008. The carrying amount of treasury shares exceeded the quoted market value on these dates of issuance, therefore, the difference has been reflected as additional paid in capital in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2008. However, in accordance with SFAS 123(R), this issuance does not impact the number of common shares outstanding used in the basic EPS calculation in the Consolidated Statement of Income
- 160 -
until 2009, when vesting begins. The total compensation cost and total recognized tax benefits related to these restricted stock awards was immaterial for the year ended December 31, 2008.
CH Energy Group has equity compensation for non-employee Directors. The equity component of annual compensation for each non-employee Director is fixed at a number of phantom shares of CH Energy Group Common Stock. These phantom shares are deferred until the Director’s termination of service. Effective January 1, 2008, CH Energy Group adopted new director stock ownership guidelines, which require each Director to accumulate within 5 years, and to hold during his or her service on the Board, at least 6,000 shares of CH Energy Group’s Common Stock (in phantom shares and/or Common Stock). This amendment to the plan provides that if a Director satisfies this required level of stock ownership, he or she will receive the cash value of equity compensation in lieu of additional phantom shares. This value will either be paid in cash or deferred under CH Energy Group’s Directors and Executives Deferred Compensation Plan at the election of the Director.
Through June 30, 2008, the annual equity compensation for each non-employee Director was the equivalent of $55,000. Effective July 1, 2008, this compensation was increased to $65,000 per year. The compensation expense recognized by CH Energy Group for total equity compensation to non-employee Directors was $0.4 million in 2008, 2007 and 2006.
For additional discussion regarding the dilutive effects of equity-based compensation, see Note 1 – “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” under the caption “Earnings Per Share.”
NOTE 12 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Electricity Purchase Commitments
Notwithstanding the sale of Roseton Electric Generating Plant, Danskammer Point Steam Electric Generating Station, and Unit No. 2 of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Generating Station (“Major Generating Assets”), Central Hudson remains obligated to supply electricity to its retail electric customers. Under the Settlement Agreement, Central Hudson’s retail customers may elect to procure electricity from third-party suppliers or may continue to rely on Central Hudson. As part of its efforts to supply customers who continue to rely on Central Hudson for their energy supply, Central Hudson entered into an agreement with Constellation to purchase capacity and energy, comprising approximately 8% of the output of Unit No. 2 of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Generating Station (“Nine Mile 2 Plant”) at negotiated prices during the ten-year period beginning on the sale of Central Hudson’s interest in the Nine Mile 2 Plant on November 7, 2001, and ending November 30, 2011. The agreement is “unit-contingent’’ in that Constellation is only required to supply electricity if the Nine Mile 2 Plant is operating. Following the expiration of this purchase agreement, a revenue sharing agreement with Constellation will begin, which will provide Central Hudson with a hedge against
- 161 -
electricity price increases and could provide additional future revenue for Central Hudson through 2021. In the Constellation agreements, electricity is purchased at defined prices that escalate over the life of the contract. The capacity and energy supplied under the agreement with Constellation in 2008 was sufficient to supply approximately 12% of Central Hudson’s total system requirements and cost approximately $25.2 million. For the years 2007 and 2006, the energy supplied under this agreement cost approximately $25.0 million and $24.9 million, respectively.
On November 12, 2002, Central Hudson entered into an agreement with Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 2, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC to purchase energy (but not capacity) on a unit-contingent basis at defined prices from January 1, 2005 to and including December 31, 2007. On March 6, 2007, Central Hudson entered into an agreement with Entergy Nuclear Power Marketing, LLC to purchase electricity (but not capacity) on a unit-contingent basis at defined prices from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2010. On an annual basis, the electricity purchased through the Entergy contracts represents approximately 21% of Central Hudson’s full-service customer requirements and cost approximately $57.5 million. For the years 2007 and 2006, the energy supplied under this agreement cost approximately $29.9 million and $30.4 million, respectively.
Purchases under these contracts are supplemented by shorter-term contracts, such as the Dynegy contract discussed below, contracts for differences, and by purchases from the NYISO, which oversees the bulk electricity transmission system, and the capacity market in New York State, and other parties. On January 30, 2008, Central Hudson entered into an 11-month agreement with Dynegy Power Marketing, Inc. to purchase 589,200 MWh of electricity on a unit-contingent basis at defined prices from February 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008. The electricity purchased through the Dynegy contracts represented approximately 15% of Central Hudson’s full-service customer requirements for the eleven-month period and cost approximately $50.0 million.
In the event the above noted counterparties are unable to fulfill their commitments to deliver under the terms of the agreements, Central Hudson would obtain the supply from the NYISO market and recover the full cost from customers. As such, there would be no impact on earnings.
Central Hudson must also acquire sufficient peak load capacity to meet the peak load requirements of its full service customers. This capacity is made up of its own generating capacity, contracts with capacity providers, and purchases from the NYISO capacity market.
Operating Leases
CH Energy Group and its subsidiaries have entered into agreements with various companies which provide products and services to be used in their normal operations. These agreements include operating leases for the use of data processing and office
- 162 -
equipment, vehicles, office space, and bulk petroleum storage locations. The provisions of these leases generally provide for renewal options and some contain escalation clauses.
Operating lease rental payment amounts charged to expense by CH Energy Group and its subsidiaries were $3.4 million in 2008, $3.5 million in 2007, and $3.1 million in 2006. Included in these amounts are payments for contingent rentals, which amounted to $563,000 in 2008, $555,000 in 2007, and $541,000 in 2006. Contingent rentals are those operating lease agreements that contain provisions for a change in lease payments subsequent to the inception of the lease.
Operating lease rental payment amounts charged to expense by Central Hudson were $2.1 million in 2008, $2.4 million in 2007, and $2.2 million in 2006. Included in these amounts are payments for contingent rentals, which amounted to $0.6 million in 2008, $0.6 million in 2007, and $0.5 million in 2006.
Future minimum lease payments excluding executory costs, such as property taxes and insurance, are included in the following table of Other Commitments. All leases are non-cancelable, recognizing payments on a straight-line basis over the minimum lease term. Contingent rental payments are adjusted incrementally based on the Consumer Price Index, as specified in the terms of each lease agreement, and are considered when calculating the future minimum payments.
- 163 -
Other Commitments
The following is a summary of commitments for CH Energy Group and its affiliates as of December 31, 2008:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Projected Payments Due By Period (In Thousands) | |
| |
| |
| | Less than 1 year | | Year Ending 2010 | | Year Ending 2011 | | Year Ending 2012 | | Year Ending 2013 | | Total | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Operating Leases | | $ | 3,193 | | $ | 2,852 | | $ | 2,594 | | $ | 2,190 | | $ | 1,980 | | $ | 12,809 | |
Construction/Maintenance & Other Projects(1) | | | 37,099 | | | 9,887 | | | 4,827 | | | 2,738 | | | 1,927 | | | 56,478 | |
Purchased Electric Contracts(2) | | | 112,961 | | | 99,055 | | | 35,931 | | | 4,030 | | | 4,030 | | | 256,007 | |
Purchased Natural Gas Contracts(2) | | | 66,796 | | | 39,751 | | | 24,481 | | | 13,618 | | | 7,669 | | | 152,315 | |
Purchased Fixed Liquid Petroleum Contracts(3) | | | 16,200 | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | — | | | 16,200 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Total | | $ | 236,249 | | $ | 151,545 | | $ | 67,833 | | $ | 22,576 | | $ | 15,606 | | $ | 493,809 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
(1) | Including Specific, Term, and Service Contracts, briefly defined as follows: Specific Contracts consist of work orders for construction; Term Contracts consist of maintenance contracts; and Service Contracts include consulting, educational, and professional service contracts. The operations and maintenance contract for Lyonsdale (which includes a base management fee included in these totals for the year 2009) also contains provisions for additional performance-based compensation that are not included in the amounts shown. |
| |
(2) | Purchased electric and purchased natural gas costs for Central Hudson are fully recovered via their respective regulatory cost adjustment mechanisms. |
| |
(3) | Estimated based on pricing on December 31, 2008. |
The following is a summary of commitments for Central Hudson as of December 31, 2008:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Projected Payments Due By Period (In Thousands) | |
| |
| |
| | Less than 1 year | | Year Ending 2010 | | Year Ending 2011 | | Year Ending 2012 | | Year Ending 2013 | | Total | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Operating Leases | | $ | 1,677 | | $ | 1,478 | | $ | 1,473 | | $ | 1,452 | | $ | 1,430 | | $ | 7,510 | |
Construction/Maintenance & Other Projects(1) | | | 36,437 | | | 9,710 | | | 4,819 | | | 2,730 | | | 1,919 | | | 55,615 | |
Purchased Electric Contracts(2) | | | 112,961 | | | 99,055 | | | 35,931 | | | 4,030 | | | 4,030 | | | 256,007 | |
Purchased Natural Gas Contracts(2) | | | 66,796 | | | 39,751 | | | 24,481 | | | 13,618 | | | 7,669 | | | 152,315 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Total | | $ | 217,871 | | $ | 149,994 | | $ | 66,704 | | $ | 21,830 | | $ | 15,048 | | $ | 471,447 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
(1) | Including Specific, Term, and Service Contracts, as defined in footnote (1) of the preceding chart. |
| |
(2) | Purchased electric and purchased natural gas costs for Central Hudson are fully recovered via their respective regulatory cost adjustment mechanisms. |
- 164 -
Contingencies
City of Poughkeepsie
On January 1, 2001, a fire destroyed a multi-family residence on Taylor Avenue in the City of Poughkeepsie, New York resulting in several deaths and damage to nearby residences. Eight separate lawsuits arising out of this incident have been commenced against Central Hudson and other defendants. The basis for the claimed liability of Central Hudson in these actions is that it was allegedly negligent in the supply of natural gas. The suits seek an aggregate of $528 million in compensatory damages. Central Hudson has notified its insurance carrier, denied liability, and defended the lawsuits. On December 10, 2008, Central Hudson entered into a settlement agreement with the plaintiffs and one remaining defendant. Under the settlement agreement, Central Hudson has agreed to make payments to the plaintiffs that will not be material in the aggregate. The settlement agreement is subject to final approval by the Court.
Environmental Matters
Central Hudson:
Air
In October 1999, Central Hudson was informed by the New York State Attorney General (“Attorney General”) that the Danskammer Point Steam Electric Generating Station (“Danskammer Plant”) was included in an investigation by the Attorney General’s Office into the compliance of eight older New York State coal-fired power plants with federal and state air emissions rules. Specifically, the Attorney General alleged that Central Hudson “may have constructed, and continues to operate, major modifications to the Danskammer Plant without obtaining certain requisite preconstruction permits.” In March 2000, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) assumed responsibility for the investigation. Central Hudson has completed its production of documents requested by the Attorney General, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“DEC”), and the EPA, and believes any permits required for these projects were obtained in a timely manner. Notwithstanding Central Hudson’s sale of the Danskammer Plant on January 30, 2001, Central Hudson could retain liability depending on the type of remedy, if any, imposed in connection with this matter. Central Hudson presently has insufficient information with which to predict the outcome of this matter.
Former Manufactured Gas Plant Facilities
Like most late 19th and early 20th century utilities in the northeastern United States, Central Hudson and its predecessors owned and operated manufactured gas plants (“MGPs”) to serve their customers’ heating and lighting needs. MGPs manufactured gas from coal and oil. This process produced certain by-products that may pose risks to human health and the environment.
- 165 -
The DEC, which regulates the timing and extent of remediation of MGP sites in New York State, has notified Central Hudson that it believes Central Hudson or its predecessors at one time owned and/or operated MGPs at eight sites in Central Hudson’s franchise territory. The DEC has further requested that Central Hudson investigate and, if necessary, remediate these sites under a Consent Order, Voluntary Cleanup Agreement, or Brownfield Cleanup Agreement. The DEC has placed five of these sites on the New York State Environmental Site Remediation Database. A number of the eight sites are now owned by third parties and have been redeveloped for other uses. The current status of the eight sites is as follows:
- 166 -
| | | |
SITE | | STATUS |
|
|
|
#1 | Beacon, NY | | Remediation complete. Final Report Approved by the DEC. Preparing ongoing Site Management Plan. |
|
|
|
|
#2 | Newburgh, NY | | Remediation complete in one area under the terms of the DEC-approved plan. The final Construction Completion Report on this area was filed with the DEC on 11/14/08. Remedial Design/Remedial Action Work Plan and Schedule was submitted to the DEC on 3/10/08 for two additional areas under a DEC-approved consent agreement. As work continues to resolve all technical issues associated with the remedial design and with the work plan, Central Hudson has formally requested an extension for submission of the draft Remedial Design of 3/2/09 and the final Remedial Design of 6/1/09. On 1/9/09, the DEC indicated that they have agreed to this request under the stipulation that no further extensions will be granted. |
|
|
|
|
#3 | Laurel Street Poughkeepsie, NY | | Remediation work is complete. Preparing Final Report and ongoing Site Management Plan. |
|
|
|
|
#4 | North Water Street Poughkeepsie, NY | | Supplemental site investigations completed in June 2008. A draft report of these investigations was completed in January and will be filed with the DEC in the first quarter of 2009. |
|
|
|
|
#5 | Kingston, NY | | Brownfield Cleanup Agreement was executed on 9/25/08. Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) was submitted to the DEC on 10/6/08. Central Hudson is working with the DEC to define requirements of the Remedial Investigation Work Plan. |
|
|
|
|
#6 | Catskill, NY | | Site investigation completed under the DEC-approved Brownfield Cleanup Agreement. Investigation report to be filed with the DEC in the first quarter of 2009. |
|
|
|
|
#7 | Saugerties, NY | | Central Hudson does not believe it has any liability for this site and is working with the DEC to confirm this. |
|
|
|
|
#8 | Bayeaux Street Poughkeepsie, NY | | Central Hudson does not believe it has any further liability for this site. |
|
|
|
|
In the second quarter of 2008, Central Hudson updated the estimate of potential remediation and future operating, maintenance and monitoring costs for sites #2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 indicating that the total cost for the five sites could exceed $165 million over the next 30 years. The updated estimate for sites #2 and 3 was based on completed remedial investigations and feasibility studies. As such, the estimate is subject to
- 167 -
change based on the current investigations, final remedial design (and associated engineering estimates), DEC and New York State Department of Health (“NYSDOH”) comments and requests, remedial design changes/negotiations and changed or unforeseen conditions during remediation. The updated estimate for sites #4, 5 and 6 was based on partially completed remedial investigations and current DEC and NYSDOH preferences related to site remediation and is considered conceptual and preliminary. The updated estimate reflects updated cost information along with the latest information from the investigation and remediation work being done on MGP sites # 2, 3 and 4 and to include site # 6. The cost estimate involves assumptions relating to investigation expenses, remediation costs, potential future liabilities, and post-remedial operating, maintenance and monitoring costs, and is based on a variety of factors including projections regarding the amount and extent of contamination, the location, size and use of the sites, proximity to sensitive resources, status of regulatory investigations, and information regarding remediation activities at other MGP sites in New York State. This cost estimate also assumes that proposed or anticipated remediation techniques are technically feasible and that proposed remediation plans receive DEC and NYSDOH approval. Further, the updated estimate could change materially based on changes to technology relating to remedial alternatives and changes to current laws and regulations.
Prior to 2008, Central Hudson recorded a $21.2 million estimated liability for sites # 2 and 3 based on estimates of remediation costs for the proposed clean-up plans. Based on the updated cost study, the estimated liability for sites #2 and 3 has been increased to $33.2 million. As of December 31, 2008, $24.7 million of this recorded estimated liability has not been spent; $4.4 million of this recorded estimated liability is expected to be spent over the next twelve months.
No amounts have been recorded in connection with the physical remediation of sites # 4, 5 and 6, for which Central Hudson has developed estimated future costs based on conceptual and preliminary plans. Absent DEC-approved remediation plans, management cannot reasonably estimate what cost, if any, will actually be incurred. The portion of the $165 million referenced above that is related to these three sites is approximately $121 million. Central Hudson had recorded a $1.4 million estimated liability in connection with estimated costs for preliminary investigations, site testing and development of remediation plans for sites # 4, 5 and 6 through 2010. Based on the updated cost study, this estimated liability has been increased to $2.0 million. As of December 31, 2008, $1.5 million of this recorded estimated liability has not been spent; $1.2 million of this recorded estimated liability is expected to be spent over the next twelve months. This estimated amount may change in the future as additional information is obtained regarding the results of site-testing, the scope of site investigation plans approved by the DEC and NYSDOH, and the evolving development of new technologies. Central Hudson cannot predict the results of site testing, the nature, timing or extent of comments from the DEC and NYSDOH, or changes in technology. The impact of these uncertainties on the estimate cannot be determined.
- 168 -
With regard to sites # 7 and 8, Central Hudson does not have sufficient information to estimate its potential remediation cost if any; as previously stated, Central Hudson believes that it has no liability for these sites.
Central Hudson spent approximately $4.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2008 related to site investigation and remediation. Based on the 2006 Rate Order, on July 1, 2007, Central Hudson started the recovery of a rate allowance for MGP Site Investigation & Remediation Costs. This recovery totaled $2.5 million as of December 31, 2008 with $1.7 million recovered in 2008.
Central Hudson has put its insurers on notice and intends to seek reimbursement from its insurers for the costs of any liabilities. Certain of these insurers have denied coverage. Pursuant to the 2006 Rate Order, Central Hudson is permitted to defer for future recovery the differences between actual costs for MGP site investigation and remediation and the associated rate allowances, with carrying charges to be accrued on the deferred balances at the authorized pre-tax rate of return.
Future remediation activities, including operating, maintenance and monitoring and related costs may vary significantly from the assumptions used in Central Hudson’s current cost estimates, and these costs could have a material adverse effect (the extent of which cannot be reasonably determined) on the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of CH Energy Group and Central Hudson if Central Hudson were unable to recover all or a substantial portion of these costs via collection in rates from customers and/or through insurance.
Little Britain Road
In December 1977, Central Hudson purchased property at 610 Little Britain Road, New Windsor, New York. In 1992, the DEC informed Central Hudson that the DEC was preparing to conduct a Preliminary Site Assessment (“PSA”) of the site and in 1995, the DEC issued an Order of Consent in which Central Hudson agreed to conduct the PSA. In 2000, following completion of the PSA, Central Hudson and the DEC entered into a Voluntary Cleanup Agreement (“VCA”) whereby Central Hudson removed approximately 3,100 tons of soil and has conducted a routine groundwater sampling program since that time. Groundwater sampling results show the presence of certain contaminants at levels exceeding DEC criteria. Deep groundwater wells were installed in 2005 and 2006, which also show contaminants exceeding DEC criteria. The DEC responded with a request for a plan to address the contamination. Central Hudson has submitted a proposal to the DEC for limited additional site work, including an assessment of vapor intrusion into a building on the site, and closure of the VCA. Negotiations between DEC and Central Hudson regarding additional site work and closure of the VCA are ongoing. Central Hudson completed a soil vapor intrusion study and results indicated that indoor air met Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) and NYSDOH standards, however, concentrations beneath the building’s concrete slab warranted installation of a mitigation system. This mitigation system was installed in 2008 at a cost of $104,000. At this time Central Hudson does not have
- 169 -
sufficient information to estimate potential ground water remediation costs. Central Hudson has put its insurers on notice regarding this matter and intends to seek reimbursement from its insurers for amounts, if any, for which it may become liable. Central Hudson cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
Newburgh Consolidated Iron Works
�� By letter from the EPA dated November 28, 2001, Central Hudson, among others, was served with a Request For Information pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) regarding any shipments of scrap or waste materials that Central Hudson may have made to Consolidated Iron and Metal Co., Inc. (“Consolidated Iron”), a Superfund site located in Newburgh, New York. Sampling by the EPA indicated that lead and polychlorinated biphenyls (or “PCBs”) are present at the site, and the EPA subsequently commenced a remedial investigation and feasibility study at the site. No records were found which indicate that the material shipped by Central Hudson to Consolidated Iron contained or was a hazardous substance. In April 2008 Central Hudson received a letter from the Consolidated Iron Joint Defense Group (“JDG”), a group of potentially responsible parties asserting a contribution claim against Central Hudson. The JDG had reached an agreement in principle with the EPA to resolve claims at the Consolidated Iron site under a consent decree to be filed with the court. In June 2008, counsel for the JDG informed Central Hudson that the EPA plans to pursue certain parties who may have shipped automotive batteries to the site that it believes fall outside of the recycling exemption at CERCLA Section 127. The JDG provided Central Hudson with an EPA database on which Central Hudson is identified as a party who shipped batteries to the site. In July 2008, counsel for the JDG recommended continuing settlement negotiations between the JDG and Central Hudson after the consent decree is lodged. In December 2008, Central Hudson entered into a settlement agreement with the JDG. Central Hudson expects to be added to the consent decree and anticipates no further liability for the site, in which case Management does not expect a material impact on earnings. Central Hudson cannot predict the outcome of this matter at the present time.
Asbestos Litigation
Since 1987, Central Hudson, along with many other parties, has been joined as a defendant or third-party defendant in 3,312 asbestos lawsuits commenced in New York State and federal courts. The plaintiffs in these lawsuits have each sought millions of dollars in compensatory and punitive damages from all defendants. The cases were brought by or on behalf of individuals who have allegedly suffered injury from exposure to asbestos, including exposure which allegedly occurred at the Roseton Electric Generating Plant and the Danskammer Plant.
As of January 15, 2009 of the 3,312 asbestos cases brought against Central Hudson, 1,183 remain pending. Of the cases no longer pending against Central Hudson, 1,978 have been dismissed or discontinued without payment by Central Hudson, and Central Hudson has settled 151 cases. Central Hudson is presently
- 170 -
unable to assess the validity of the remaining asbestos lawsuits; accordingly, it cannot determine the ultimate liability relating to these cases. Based on information known to Central Hudson at this time, including Central Hudson’s experience in settling asbestos cases and in obtaining dismissals of asbestos cases, Central Hudson believes that the costs which may be incurred in connection with the remaining lawsuits will not have a material adverse effect on either of CH Energy Group’s or Central Hudson’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
CHEC:
During the year ended December 31, 2008, Griffith spent $0.2 million on remediation efforts in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia and Connecticut. Griffith is to be reimbursed $0.3 million from the State of Connecticut under an environmental agreement and has recorded this amount as a receivable.
Griffith has a reserve for environmental remediation which is $1.4 million as of December 31, 2008, of which approximately $0.2 million is expected to be spent in the next twelve months.
Other Matters
Central Hudson and Griffith are involved in various other legal and administrative proceedings incidental to their businesses, which are in various stages. While these matters collectively could involve substantial amounts, it is the opinion of management that their ultimate resolution will not have a material adverse effect on either of CH Energy Group’s or the individual segment’s financial positions, results of operations, or cash flows.
NOTE 13 - SEGMENTS AND RELATED INFORMATION
CH Energy Group’s reportable operating segments are the regulated electric utility business and regulated natural gas utility business of Central Hudson and the unregulated fuel distribution business of Griffith. The investments and business development activities of CH Energy Group and the renewable energy and investment activities of CHEC, including its ownership interests in ethanol, wind, and biomass energy projects, are reported under the heading “Other Businesses and Investments.”
Central Hudson purchases, sells at wholesale, and distributes electricity and natural gas at retail in New York State’s Mid-Hudson River Valley. Electric service is available throughout the territory and natural gas service is provided in and about the cities of Poughkeepsie, Beacon, Newburgh, and Kingston, New York and certain outlying and intervening territories. Central Hudson also generates a small portion of its electricity requirements.
Griffith is engaged in fuel distribution including heating oil, gasoline, diesel fuel, kerosene, and propane, and the installation and maintenance of heating, ventilating,
- 171 -
and air conditioning equipment in Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington, D.C., Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New York. Management regularly reviews Griffith’s operating results as a standalone component of CH Energy Group and assesses its performance as a basis for allocating resources.
Certain additional information regarding these segments is set forth in the following tables. General corporate expenses, Central Hudson property common to both electric and natural gas segments, and the depreciation of Central Hudson’s common property have been allocated in accordance with practices established for regulatory purposes.
Central Hudson’s and Griffith’s operations are seasonal in nature and weather-sensitive. Demand for electricity typically peaks during the summer, while demand for natural gas and heating oil typically peaks during the winter.
- 172 -
CH Energy Group, Inc. Segment Disclosure
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, 2008 | |
| |
| |
| | Central Hudson | | | | | Other Businesses and Investments | | | | | | | |
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
(In Thousands, except Earnings Per Share) | | | | | Natural | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Electric | | Gas | | Griffith | | | Eliminations | | Total | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Revenues from external customers | | $ | 608,161 | | $ | 189,546 | | $ | 523,854 | | $ | 11,290 | | $ | — | | $ | 1,332,851 | |
Intersegment revenues | | | 16 | | | 323 | | | — | | | — | | | (339 | ) | | — | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Total revenues | | | 608,177 | | | 189,869 | | | 523,854 | | | 11,290 | | | (339 | ) | | 1,332,851 | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Depreciation and amortization | | | 23,592 | | | 6,220 | | | 7,649 | | | 837 | | | — | | | 38,298 | |
Interest and investment income | | | 1,605 | | | 1,566 | | | 82 | | | 5,929 | | | (4,515 | )(1) | | 4,667 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest expense | | | 19,975 | | | 5,451 | | | 4,584 | | | 491 | | | (4,515 | )(1) | | 25,986 | |
Income before income taxes | | | 35,311 | | | 10,230 | | | 7,198 | | | 4,171 | | | — | | | 56,910 | |
Income tax expense | | | 14,334 | | | 4,939 | | | 3,030 | | | (474 | ) | | — | | | 21,829 | |
Net Income | | | 20,977 | | | 5,291 | | | 4,169 | | | 4,644 | | | — | | | 35,081 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Segment assets at Dec 31 | | | 1,106,505 | | | 385,691 | | | 190,464 | | | 47,494 | | | 29 | (3) | | 1,730,183 | |
Goodwill | | | — | | | — | | | 67,455 | | | — | | | — | | | 67,455 | |
Capital expenditures | | | 58,827 | | | 19,503 | | | 2,706 | | | 2,562 | | | — | | | 83,598 | |
| |
(1) | This represents the elimination of inter-company interest income (expense) generated from temporary lending activities between CH Energy Group (the holding company), and its subsidiaries (CHEC and Griffith). |
| |
(2) | The amount of EPS attributable to CHEC’s other businesses and investments was $0.15 per share, with the balance of $0.14 per share resulting primarily from interest income. |
| |
(3) | Includes minority owner’s interest of $1,449 related to Lyonsdale. |
CH Energy Group, Inc. Segment Disclosure
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, 2007 | |
| |
| |
| | Central Hudson | | | | | Other Businesses and Investments | | | | | | | |
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
(In Thousands, except Earnings Per Share) | | | | | Natural | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Electric | | Gas | | Griffith | | | Eliminations | | Total | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers | | $ | 616,839 | | $ | 165,449 | | $ | 405,753 | | $ | 8,716 | | $ | — | | $ | 1,196,757 | |
Intersegment revenues | | | 15 | | | 301 | | | — | | | — | | | (316 | ) | | — | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Total revenues | | | 616,854 | | | 165,750 | | | 405,753 | | | 8,716 | | | (316 | ) | | 1,196,757 | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Depreciation and amortization | | | 22,251 | | | 6,148 | | | 6,715 | | | 809 | | | — | | | 35,923 | |
Interest and investment income | | | 3,770 | | | 1,973 | | | 115 | | | 7,082 | | | (4,534 | )(1) | | 8,406 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest expense | | | 17,535 | | | 5,372 | | | 4,091 | | | 443 | | | (4,534 | )(1) | | 22,907 | |
Income before income taxes | | | 42,159 | | | 10,633 | | | 5,171 | | | 6,571 | | | — | | | 64,534 | |
Income tax expense | | | 16,018 | | | 4,308 | | | 2,005 | | | (433 | ) | | — | | | 21,898 | |
Net Income | | | 26,141 | | | 6,325 | | | 3,166 | | | 7,004 | | | — | | | 42,636 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Segment assets at Dec 31 | | | 926,223 | | | 326,471 | | | 197,425 | | | 44,655 | | | (26 | )(3) | | 1,494,748 | |
Goodwill | | | — | | | — | | | 63,433 | | | — | | | — | | | 63,433 | |
Capital expenditures | | | 65,548 | | | 17,215 | | | 2,253 | | | 1,060 | | | — | | | 86,076 | |
| |
(1) | This represents the elimination of inter-company interest income (expense) generated from temporary lending activities between CH Energy Group (the holding company), and its subsidiaries (CHEC and Griffith). |
| |
(2) | The amount of EPS attributable to CHEC’s other businesses and investments was $0.16 per share, with the balance of $0.28 per share resulting primarily from interest income |
| |
(3) | Includes minority owner’s interest of $1,345 related to Lyonsdale. |
- 173 -
CH Energy Group, Inc. Segment Disclosure
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, 2006 | |
| |
| |
| | Central Hudson | | | | | Other Businesses and Investments | | | | | | | |
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
(In Thousands, except Earnings Per Share) | | | | | Natural | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Electric | | Gas | | Griffith | | | Eliminations | | Total | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers | | $ | 503,908 | | $ | 155,272 | | $ | 327,825 | | $ | 6,428 | | $ | — | | $ | 993,433 | |
Intersegment revenues | | | 14 | | | 319 | | | — | | | — | | | (333 | ) | | — | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Total revenues | | | 503,922 | | | 155,591 | | | 327,825 | | | 6,428 | | | (333 | ) | | 993,433 | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Depreciation and amortization | | | 22,363 | | | 6,639 | | | 6,139 | | | 560 | | | — | | | 35,701 | |
Interest and investment income | | | 4,634 | | | 1,882 | | | 105 | | | 6,726 | | | (3,480 | )(1) | | 9,867 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest expense | | | 15,478 | | | 4,934 | | | 3,150 | | | 330 | | | (3,480 | )(1) | | 20,412 | |
Income before income taxes | | | 42,425 | | | 13,004 | | | 2,407 | | | 9,017 | | | — | | | 66,853 | |
Income tax expense | | | 16,027 | | | 5,501 | | | 799 | | | 1,442 | | | — | | | 23,769 | |
Net Income | | | 26,398 | | | 7,503 | | | 1,608 | | | 7,575 | | | — | | | 43,084 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Segment assets at Dec 31 | | | 899,982 | | | 315,841 | | | 148,249 | | | 95,948 | | | 512 | (3) | | 1,460,532 | |
Goodwill | | | — | | | — | | | 52,828 | | | — | | | — | | | 52,828 | |
Capital expenditures | | | 57,340 | | | 14,071 | | | 3,659 | | | — | | | — | | | 75,070 | |
| |
(1) | This represents the elimination of inter-company interest income (expense) generated from temporary lending activities between CH Energy Group (the holding company), and its subsidiaries (CHEC and Griffith). |
| |
(2) | The amount of EPS attributable to CHEC’s other businesses and investments was $0.23 per share, with the balance of $0.25 per share resulting primarily from interest income |
| |
(3) | Includes minority interest of $1,481 related to Lyonsdale. |
- 174 -
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation Segment Disclosure |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, 2008 | |
(In Thousands) | | Electric | | Natural Gas | | Eliminations | | Total | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers | | $ | 608,161 | | $ | 189,546 | | $ | — | | $ | 797,707 | |
Intersegment revenues | | | 16 | | | 323 | | | (339 | ) | | — | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Total revenues | | | 608,177 | | | 189,869 | | | (339 | ) | | 797,707 | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Depreciation and amortization | | | 23,592 | | | 6,220 | | | — | | | 29,812 | |
Interest income | | | 1,605 | | | 1,566 | | | — | | | 3,171 | |
Interest expense | | | 19,975 | | | 5,451 | | | — | | | 25,426 | |
Income tax expense | | | 14,334 | | | 4,939 | | | — | | | 19,273 | |
Income available for common stock | | | 20,977 | | | 5,291 | | | — | | | 26,268 | |
Segment assets at Dec 31 | | | 1,106,505 | | | 385,691 | | | — | | | 1,492,196 | |
Capital expenditures | | | 58,827 | | | 19,503 | | | — | | | 78,330 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation Segment Disclosure |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, 2007 | |
(In Thousands) | | Electric | | Natural Gas | | Eliminations | | Total | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers | | $ | 616,839 | | $ | 165,449 | | $ | — | | $ | 782,288 | |
Intersegment revenues | | | 15 | | | 301 | | | (316 | ) | | — | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues | | | 616,854 | | | 165,750 | | | (316 | ) | | 782,288 | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization | | | 22,251 | | | 6,148 | | | — | | | 28,399 | |
Interest income | | | 3,770 | | | 1,973 | | | — | | | 5,743 | |
Interest expense | | | 17,535 | | | 5,372 | | | — | | | 22,907 | |
Income tax expense | | | 16,018 | | | 4,308 | | | — | | | 20,326 | |
Income available for common stock | | | 26,141 | | | 6,325 | | | — | | | 32,466 | |
Segment assets at Dec 31 | | | 926,223 | | | 326,471 | | | — | | | 1,252,694 | |
Capital expenditures | | | 65,548 | | | 17,215 | | | — | | | 82,763 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation Segment Disclosure |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, 2006 | |
(In Thousands) | | Electric | | Natural Gas | | Eliminations | | Total | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers | | $ | 503,908 | | $ | 155,272 | | $ | — | | $ | 659,180 | |
Intersegment revenues | | | 14 | | | 319 | | | (333 | ) | | — | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues | | | 503,922 | | | 155,591 | | | (333 | ) | | 659,180 | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization | | | 22,363 | | | 6,639 | | | — | | | 29,002 | |
Interest income | | | 4,634 | | | 1,882 | | | — | | | 6,516 | |
Interest expense | | | 15,478 | | | 4,934 | | | — | | | 20,412 | |
Income tax expense | | | 16,027 | | | 5,501 | | | — | | | 21,528 | |
Income available for common stock | | | 26,398 | | | 7,503 | | | — | | | 33,901 | |
Segment assets at Dec 31 | | | 899,982 | | | 315,841 | | | — | | | 1,215,823 | |
Capital expenditures | | | 57,340 | | | 14,071 | | | — | | | 71,411 | |
- 175 -
| |
NOTE 14 - | ACCOUNTING FOR DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES |
SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (“SFAS 133”), as amended, established accounting and reporting requirements for derivative instruments and hedging activities. SFAS 133 requires that an entity recognize the fair value of all derivative instruments as either assets or liabilities on the balance sheet with the corresponding unrealized gains or losses recognized in earnings. SFAS 133 permits the deferral of unrealized hedge gains and losses, under stringent hedge accounting provisions.
CH Energy Group and its subsidiaries do not enter into derivative instruments for speculative purposes.
Central Hudson uses derivative instruments to hedge exposure to variability in the prices of natural gas and electricity and to hedge exposure to variability in interest rates for its variable rate long-term debt. The types of derivative instruments typically used by Central Hudson are natural gas futures and swaps to hedge natural gas purchases, contracts for differences to hedge electricity purchases, and interest rate caps to hedge interest payments on variable rate debt. These derivatives are not designated as hedges under the provisions of SFAS 133, and the related gains and losses are included as part of Central Hudson’s commodity cost and/or price-reconciled in its natural gas and electricity cost adjustment charge clauses. On April 1, 2006, Central Hudson replaced its interest rate cap agreement with a new two-year agreement through April 1, 2008, with similar terms as the expired agreement. This rate cap agreement hedges the variability in interest rates related to Central Hudson’s bonds issued by the NYSERDA. If market interest rates increase above the cap, a payment is received from the counterparty which is expected to offset Central Hudson’s increased interest expense. The premium related to interest rate hedges, as well as any related actual gains, is also subject to a true-up mechanism authorized by the PSC for Central Hudson’s variable rate long-term debt. The earnings impacts from these derivatives are therefore deferred for refund to or recovery from customers under their respective regulatory adjustment mechanisms.
At December 31, 2008, Central Hudson had open derivative contracts to hedge natural gas prices during the periods of January - March 2009, May - September 2009, and November 2009 - March 2010, covering approximately 60.7% of Central Hudson’s projected total natural gas supply requirements during these periods. In 2008, derivative transactions were used to economically hedge 34.6% of Central Hudson’s total natural gas supply requirements as compared to 15.1% in 2007. In its electric operations, Central Hudson had open derivative contracts to economically hedge the price of approximately 21.5% of its projected electricity requirements for calendar year 2009 at December 31, 2008. In 2008, Central Hudson economically hedged approximately 8.1% of its total electricity supply requirements with OTC derivative contracts as compared to 18.0% in 2007. Central Hudson also economically hedged approximately 4.7% of its Summer 2008 Unforced Capacity (“UCAP”) capability period
- 176 -
requirement. In addition, Central Hudson has in place a number of agreements of varying terms to purchase electricity produced by certain of its former major generating assets and other generating facilities at fixed prices. The notional amounts currently economically hedged by the electricity purchase agreements for 2009 and 2010 represent approximately 41.7% and 43.6%, respectively, of its total anticipated electricity supply requirements in each year.
The total fair value (net unrealized loss) of Central Hudson’s derivatives at December 31, 2008 was ($15.8) million as compared to a fair value (net unrealized loss) of ($1.2) million at December 31, 2007. Central Hudson estimates that, as of December 31, 2008, if the commodity price increased/decreased by 10% the fair value of the derivatives would change by $7.3 million. Central Hudson expects that any such change in fair value would be largely offset by directionally opposite changes in the cost of electricity and natural gas purchased. Fair value is determined based on market quotes for exchange traded derivatives and broker quotes for OTC derivatives. Actual net losses of ($13.1) million were recorded in 2008, which increased amounts recovered through Central Hudson’s electric and natural gas cost adjustment clauses for the overall cost of electricity and natural gas. This compares to a total net loss of ($14.6) million recorded in 2007, which increased the overall cost of electricity and natural gas.
Griffith uses derivative instruments to hedge variability in the price of heating oil purchased for delivery to its customers. In 2008, Griffith purchased call option contracts to establish ceiling prices to hedge forecasted heating oil supply requirements for capped price programs not hedged by firm purchase commitments as it did in 2007. The options hedge commodity price changes. These derivatives are designated as cash flow hedges under the provisions of SFAS 133 and are accounted for under the deferral method with actual gains and losses from the hedging activity included in the cost of sales as the hedged transaction occurs. The call options entered into have been effective with no gains or losses from ineffectiveness recorded in 2008 or 2007. The assessment of hedge effectiveness for these hedges excludes the change in the fair value of the premium paid for these derivative instruments. The total amount of premiums expensed in 2008, 2007 and 2006 was $1.3 million, $0.5 million and $0.5 million, respectively. These net premiums are expensed based on the change in their respective fair value. The total fair value of open derivative instruments at December 31, 2008 was zero. The total fair value at December 31, 2007 was a net unrealized gain of $1.2 million. Griffith estimates that, as of December 31, 2008, if the commodity price increased/decreased by 10%, the fair value of the derivatives would not change by a material amount. Griffith expects that any change in fair value would be largely offset by a directionally opposite change in the cost of purchased heating oil. Including premium costs, a net actual gain of $0.7 million was recorded in 2008, and net losses of ($0.7) million and ($0.8) million were recorded in 2007 and 2006, respectively. These amounts were recorded in each year as part of the cost or price of the related commodity transactions. The fair values of put and call options are determined based on the market value of the underlying commodity.
- 177 -
At December 31, 2008, Griffith had open OTC call option positions covering approximately 4.3% of its anticipated fuel oil supply requirements for the period January 2009 through June 2009. The percentage hedged at December 31, 2007, for the period January 2008 to June 2008 was 6.2%. In 2008, derivative instruments were used to hedge 5.2% of total fuel oil requirements as compared to 7.3% in 2007.
In addition to the above, Central Hudson and Griffith use weather derivative contracts to hedge the effect on earnings of significant variances in weather conditions from normal patterns if such contracts can be obtained on reasonable terms. Weather derivative contracts are generally entered into for the periods November through December and January through March, which covers the bulk of the heating season. Central Hudson also has entered into similar contracts for the cooling season, which runs from June through August. Weather derivative contracts are not subject to the provisions of SFAS 133 and are accounted for in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Statement 99-2, Accounting for Weather Derivatives. In 2008, Central Hudson made a total payment to counter-parties of $0.2 million. In 2007, a total payment of $0.2 million, including premiums, was made to counter-parties. The 2008 payment was a premium payment for an option related to the January – March period that settled out of the money since weather was colder than the contractual strike point. The 2007 payment was a premium payment for an option related to the February – March period that settled out of the money since weather was colder than the contractual strike point. In 2008, Griffith made total payments of $29,000, including premiums paid. The 2008 payment was a premium payment for an option related to the January – March period that settled out of the money since weather was colder than the contractual strike point. In 2007, Griffith made payments of $0.9 million, including premiums paid. The amounts recorded in 2007 partially offset variations in revenues experienced due to the actual weather patterns that occurred in the period. Central Hudson and Griffith have each entered into weather derivative contracts for January through March 2009. Central Hudson and Griffith estimate that for the weather derivatives currently in place, a change of 10% in degree days from normal weather will not result in any payment to/from the counterparty.
NOTE 15 - FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of each class of financial instruments for which it is practicable to estimate that value:
Cash, Cash Equivalents and Short-term Investments: The carrying amount approximates fair value because of the short maturity of those instruments.
Long-term Debt: The fair value is estimated based on the quoted market prices for the same or similar issues or to current rates offered to Central Hudson for debt of the same remaining maturities and credit quality.
Notes Payable: The carrying amount approximates fair value because of the short maturity of those instruments.
- 178 -
Notes Receivable: The carrying value approximates fair value based on current market rates for notes issued by companies with comparable credit risk.
Short-term Investments: CH Energy Group’s investments include tax-exempt ARS and VRDN with interest rates that are reset anywhere from 7 to 35 days. These investments are available to fund current operations or to provide funding in accordance with CH Energy Group’s strategy to redeploy equity into its subsidiaries. Due to the nature of these securities with regard to their interest reset periods, the aggregate carrying value approximates their fair value, thereby not impacting shareholders equity with regard to unrealized gains and losses. The aggregate fair value of these short-term investments was zero at December 31, 2008 and $3.5 million at December 31, 2007. Cash flows from the purchases and liquidation of these investments are reported separately as investing activities in CH Energy Group’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
- 179 -
CH ENERGY GROUP / CENTRAL HUDSON
Long-term Debt Maturities and Fair Value