allete2009_10k.htm
United
States
Securities
and Exchange Commission
Washington,
D.C. 20549
Form
10-K
(Mark
One)
|
R
|
Annual
Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934
|
For the
fiscal year ended December 31,
2009
|
£
|
Transition
Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934
|
For the
transition period from ______________ to ______________
Commission
File No. 1-3548
ALLETE,
Inc.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Minnesota
|
|
41-0418150
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
30
West Superior Street, Duluth, Minnesota 55802-2093
(Address
of principal executive offices, including zip code)
(218)
279-5000
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
Securities
Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title
of Each Class
|
|
Name
of Each Stock Exchange
on
Which Registered
|
Common
Stock, without par value
|
|
New
York Stock Exchange
|
Securities
Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Yes R No
£
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.
Yes £ No
R
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days.
Yes R No
£
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. £
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company (as
defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).
Large
Accelerated Filer R
|
Accelerated
Filer £
|
Non-Accelerated
Filer £
|
Smaller
Reporting Company £
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Act).
Yes £ No
R
The
aggregate market value of voting stock held by nonaffiliates on June 30, 2009,
was $974,440,368.
As of
February 1, 2010, there were 35,243,905 shares of ALLETE Common Stock, without
par value, outstanding.
Documents
Incorporated By Reference
Portions
of the Proxy Statement for the 2010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are
incorporated by reference in Part III.
Index
Definitions
|
3
|
|
|
Safe
Harbor Statement Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995
|
5
|
|
|
Part
I
|
|
Item
1.
|
Business
|
6
|
|
Regulated
Operations
|
6
|
|
|
Electric
Sales / Customers
|
6
|
|
|
Power
Supply
|
9
|
|
|
Transmission
and Distribution
|
11
|
|
|
Investment
in ATC
|
11
|
|
|
Properties
|
11
|
|
|
Regulatory
Matters
|
12
|
|
|
Regional
Organizations
|
15
|
|
|
Minnesota
Legislation
|
15
|
|
|
Competition
|
15
|
|
|
Franchises
|
16
|
|
Investments
and Other
|
16
|
|
|
BNI
Coal
|
16
|
|
|
ALLETE
Properties
|
16
|
|
|
Non-Rate
Base Generation
|
17
|
|
|
Other.
|
17
|
|
Environmental
Matters
|
17
|
|
Employees
|
21
|
|
Availability
of Information
|
21
|
|
Executive
Officers of the Registrant
|
22
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
23
|
Item
1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
26
|
Item
2.
|
Properties
|
26
|
Item
3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
26
|
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
26
|
Part
II
|
|
Item
5.
|
Market
for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
|
27
|
Item
6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
28
|
Item
7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
29
|
|
Overview
|
29
|
|
2009
Compared to 2008.
|
30
|
|
2008
Compared to 2007
|
32
|
|
Critical
Accounting Estimates
|
34
|
|
Outlook
|
35
|
|
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
|
42
|
|
Capital
Requirements
|
46
|
|
Environmental
and Other Matters
|
46
|
|
Market
Risk
|
46
|
|
New
Accounting Standards
|
48
|
Item
7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
48
|
Item
8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
48
|
Item
9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure
|
48
|
Item
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
48
|
Item
9B.
|
Other
Information
|
49
|
Part
III
|
|
Item
10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
50
|
Item
11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
50
|
Item
12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related
Stockholder Matters
|
50
|
Item
13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
50
|
Item
14.
|
Principal
Accounting Fees and Services
|
50
|
Part
IV
|
|
|
Item
15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
51
|
|
|
Signatures
|
55
|
|
|
Consolidated
Financial Statements
|
58
|
Definitions
The
following abbreviations or acronyms are used in the text. References in this
report to “we,” “us” and “our” are to ALLETE, Inc. and its subsidiaries,
collectively.
Abbreviation
or Acronym
|
Term
|
AICPA
|
American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants
|
ALLETE
|
ALLETE,
Inc.
|
ALLETE
Properties
|
ALLETE
Properties, LLC and its subsidiaries
|
AFUDC
|
Allowance
for Funds Used During Construction - the cost of both debt and equity
funds used to finance utility plant additions during construction
periods
|
AREA
|
Arrowhead
Regional Emission Abatement
|
ARS
|
Auction
Rate Securities
|
ATC
|
American
Transmission Company LLC
|
Basin
|
Basin
Electric Power Cooperative
|
Bison
I
|
Bison
I Wind Project
|
BNI
Coal
|
BNI
Coal, Ltd.
|
BNSF
|
Burlington
Northern Santa Fe Railway Company
|
Boswell
|
Boswell
Energy Center
|
Boswell
NOX
Reduction Plan
|
NOX
emission reductions from Boswell Units 1, 2, and 4
|
CO2
|
Carbon
Dioxide
|
Company
|
ALLETE,
Inc. and its subsidiaries
|
DC
|
Direct
Current
|
DRI
|
Development
of Regional Impact
|
EITF
|
Emerging
Issues Task Force
|
EPA
|
Environmental
Protection Agency
|
ESOP
|
Employee
Stock Ownership Plan
|
FASB
|
Financial
Accounting Standards Board
|
FERC
|
Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission
|
Form
8-K
|
ALLETE
Current Report on Form 8-K
|
Form
10-K
|
ALLETE
Annual Report on Form 10-K
|
Form
10-Q
|
ALLETE
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
|
FTR
|
Financial
Transmission Rights
|
GAAP
|
Accounting
Principles Generally Accepted in the United States
|
GHG
|
Greenhouse
Gases
|
Heating
Degree Days
|
Measure
of the extent to which the average daily temperature is below 65 degrees
Fahrenheit, increasing demand for heating
|
IBEW
Local 31
|
International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 31
|
Invest
Direct
|
ALLETE’s
Direct Stock Purchase and Dividend Reinvestment Plan
|
kV
|
Kilovolt(s)
|
Laskin
|
Laskin
Energy Center
|
Manitoba
Hydro
|
Manitoba
Hydro-Electric Board
|
MBtu
|
Million
British thermal units
|
Mesabi
Nugget
|
Mesabi
Nugget Delaware, LLC
|
Minnesota
Power
|
An
operating division of ALLETE, Inc.
|
Minnkota
Power
|
Minnkota
Power Cooperative, Inc.
|
MISO
|
Midwest
Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
|
Moody’s
|
Moody’s
Investors Service, Inc.
|
MPCA
|
Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency
|
Definitions
(Continued)
MPUC
|
Minnesota
Public Utilities Commission
|
MW
/ MWh
|
Megawatt(s)
/ Megawatt-hour(s)
|
NextEra
Energy
|
NextEra
Energy Resources, LLC
|
NDPSC
|
North
Dakota Public Service Commission
|
Non-residential
|
Retail
commercial, non-retail commercial, office, industrial, warehouse, storage
and institutional
|
NOX
|
Nitrogen
Oxides
|
Note
___
|
Note
___ to the consolidated financial statements in this Form
10-K
|
NPDES
|
National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
|
NYSE
|
New
York Stock Exchange
|
OES
|
Minnesota
Office of Energy Security
|
Oliver
Wind I
|
Oliver
Wind I Energy Center
|
Oliver
Wind II
|
Oliver
Wind II Energy Center
|
Palm
Coast Park
|
Palm
Coast Park development project in Florida
|
Palm
Coast Park District
|
Palm
Coast Park Community Development District
|
PolyMet
Mining
|
PolyMet
Mining Corp.
|
PSCW
|
Public
Service Commission of Wisconsin
|
PUHCA
2005
|
Public
Utility Holding Company Act of 2005
|
Rainy
River Energy
|
Rainy
River Energy Corporation - Wisconsin
|
SEC
|
Securities
and Exchange Commission
|
SO2
|
Sulfur
Dioxide
|
Square
Butte
|
Square
Butte Electric Cooperative
|
Standard
& Poor’s
|
Standard
& Poor’s Ratings Services, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies,
Inc.
|
SWL&P
|
Superior
Water, Light and Power Company
|
Taconite
Harbor
|
Taconite
Harbor Energy Center
|
Taconite
Ridge
|
Taconite
Ridge Energy Center
|
Town
Center
|
Town
Center at Palm Coast development project in Florida
|
Town
Center District
|
Town
Center at Palm Coast Community Development District
|
WDNR
|
Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources
|
Safe
Harbor Statement
Under
the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995
Statements
in this report that are not statements of historical facts may be considered
“forward-looking” and, accordingly, involve risks and uncertainties that could
cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed. Although such
forward-looking statements have been made in good faith and are based on
reasonable assumptions, there is no assurance that the expected results will be
achieved. Any statements that express, or involve discussions as to, future
expectations, risks, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions, events,
uncertainties, financial performance, or growth strategies (often, but not
always, through the use of words or phrases such as “anticipates,” “believes,”
“estimates,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” “will likely result,”
“will continue,” “could,” “may,” “potential,” “target,” “outlook” or words of
similar meaning) are not statements of historical facts and may be
forward-looking.
In
connection with the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995, we are hereby filing cautionary statements identifying
important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from
those projected, or expectations suggested, in forward-looking statements made
by or on behalf of ALLETE in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, in presentations,
on our website, in response to questions or otherwise. These statements are
qualified in their entirety by reference to, and are accompanied by, the
following important factors, in addition to any assumptions and other factors
referred to specifically in connection with such forward-looking
statements:
·
|
our
ability to successfully implement our strategic
objectives;
|
·
|
prevailing
governmental policies, regulatory actions, and legislation including those
of the United States Congress, state legislatures, the FERC, the MPUC, the
PSCW, the NDPSC, and various local and county regulators, and city
administrators, about allowed rates of return, financings, industry and
rate structure, acquisition and disposal of assets and facilities, real
estate development, operation and construction of plant facilities,
recovery of purchased power, capital investments and other expenses,
present or prospective wholesale and retail competition (including but not
limited to transmission costs), zoning and permitting of land held for
resale and environmental matters;
|
·
|
our
ability to manage expansion and integrate acquisitions;
|
·
|
the
potential impacts of climate change and future regulation to restrict the
emissions of GHG on our Regulated Operations;
|
·
|
effects
of restructuring initiatives in the electric industry;
|
·
|
economic
and geographic factors, including political and economic
risks;
|
·
|
changes
in and compliance with laws and regulations;
|
·
|
weather
conditions;
|
·
|
natural
disasters and pandemic diseases;
|
·
|
war
and acts of terrorism;
|
·
|
wholesale
power market conditions;
|
·
|
population
growth rates and demographic patterns;
|
·
|
effects
of competition, including competition for retail and wholesale
customers;
|
·
|
changes
in the real estate market;
|
·
|
pricing
and transportation of commodities;
|
·
|
changes
in tax rates or policies or in rates of inflation;
|
·
|
project
delays or changes in project costs;
|
·
|
availability
and management of construction
materials and skilled construction labor for capital
projects;
|
·
|
changes
in operating expenses, capital and land
development expenditures;
|
·
|
global
and domestic economic conditions affecting us or our
customers;
|
·
|
our
ability to access capital markets and bank financing;
|
·
|
changes
in interest rates and the performance of the financial
markets;
|
·
|
our
ability to replace a mature workforce and retain qualified, skilled and
experienced personnel; and
|
·
|
the
outcome of legal and administrative proceedings (whether civil or
criminal) and settlements that affect the business and profitability of
ALLETE.
|
Additional
disclosures regarding factors that could cause our results and performance to
differ from results or performance anticipated by this report are discussed in
Item 1A under the heading “Risk Factors” beginning on page 23 of this
Form 10-K. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on
which such statement is made, and we undertake no obligation to update any
forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on
which that statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated
events. New factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for
management to predict all of these factors, nor can it assess the impact of each
of these factors on the businesses of ALLETE or the extent to which any factor,
or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from
those contained in any forward-looking statement. Readers are urged to carefully
review and consider the various disclosures made by us in this Form 10-K and in
our other reports filed with the SEC that attempt to advise interested parties
of the factors that may affect our business.
Part
I
Regulated Operations includes
our regulated utilities, Minnesota Power and SWL&P, as well as our
investment in ATC, a Wisconsin-based utility that owns and maintains electric
transmission assets in parts of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Illinois.
Minnesota Power provides regulated utility electric service in northeastern
Minnesota to 144,000 retail customers and wholesale electric service to 16
municipalities. Minnesota Power also provides regulated utility electric service
to 1 private utility in Wisconsin. SWL&P, a wholesale customer of Minnesota
Power, provides regulated electric, natural gas and water service in
northwestern Wisconsin to 15,000 electric customers, 12,000 natural gas
customers and 10,000 water customers. Our regulated utility operations include
retail and wholesale activities under the jurisdiction of state and federal
regulatory authorities. (See Item 1. Business – Regulated Operations –
Regulatory Matters.)
Investments and Other is
comprised primarily of BNI Coal, our coal mining operations in North Dakota, and
ALLETE Properties, our Florida real estate investment. This segment also
includes a small amount of non-rate base generation, approximately 7,000 acres
of land available-for-sale in Minnesota, and earnings on cash and
investments.
ALLETE is
incorporated under the laws of Minnesota. Our corporate headquarters are in
Duluth, Minnesota. Statistical information is presented as of December 31, 2009,
unless otherwise indicated. All subsidiaries are wholly owned unless otherwise
specifically indicated. References in this report to “we,” “us” and “our” are to
ALLETE and its subsidiaries, collectively.
Year
Ended December 31
|
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Operating Revenue – Millions
|
$759.1
|
$801.0
|
$841.7
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
of Consolidated Operating Revenue
|
|
|
|
Regulated
Operations
|
90%
|
89%
|
86%
|
Investments
and Other
|
10%
|
11%
|
14%
|
|
100%
|
100%
|
100%
|
For a
detailed discussion of results of operations and trends, see Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations. For business segment information, see Note 1. Operations and
Significant Accounting Policies and Note 2. Business Segments.
REGULATED
OPERATIONS
Electric
Sales / Customers
Regulated
Utility Electric Sales
|
Year Ended December 31
|
2009
|
%
|
2008
|
%
|
2007
|
%
|
Millions
of Kilowatt-hours
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail
and Municipals
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
1,164
|
10
|
1,172
|
9
|
1,141
|
9
|
Commercial
|
1,420
|
12
|
1,454
|
12
|
1,456
|
11
|
Industrial
|
4,475
|
37
|
7,192
|
57
|
7,054
|
55
|
Municipals
(FERC rate regulated)
|
992
|
8
|
1,002
|
8
|
1,009
|
8
|
Total
Retail and Municipals
|
8,051
|
67
|
10,820
|
86
|
10,660
|
83
|
Other
Power Suppliers
|
4,056
|
33
|
1,800
|
14
|
2,157
|
17
|
Total
Regulated Utility Electric Sales
|
12,107
|
100
|
12,620
|
100
|
12,817
|
100
|
Seasonality
Due to
the high concentration of industrial sales, Minnesota Power is not subject to
significant seasonal fluctuations. The operations of our industrial customers,
which make up a large portion of our sales portfolio, as shown in the table
above, are not typically subject to significant seasonal
variations.
REGULATED
OPERATIONS (Continued)
Industrial Customers. In 2009,
our industrial customers represented 37 percent of total regulated utility
kilowatt-hour sales. Our industrial customers are primarily in the taconite,
paper, pulp and wood products, and pipeline industries.
Industrial
Customer Electric Sales
|
Year
Ended December 31
|
2009
|
%
|
2008
|
%
|
2007
|
%
|
Millions
of Kilowatt-hours
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taconite
Producers
|
2,124
|
47
|
4,579
|
64
|
4,408
|
62
|
Paper,
Pulp and Wood Products
|
1,454
|
33
|
1,567
|
22
|
1,613
|
23
|
Pipelines
|
504
|
11
|
582
|
8
|
562
|
8
|
Other
Industrial
|
393
|
9
|
464
|
6
|
471
|
7
|
|
4,475
|
100
|
7,192
|
100
|
7,054
|
100
|
Approximately
60 percent of the ore consumed by integrated steel facilities in the United
States originates from six taconite customers of Minnesota Power, which
represented 2,124 million kilowatt-hours, or 47 percent, of our total industrial
sales in 2009. Taconite, an iron-bearing rock of relatively low iron content, is
abundantly available in northern Minnesota and an important domestic source of
raw material for the steel industry. Taconite processing plants use large
quantities of electric power to grind the iron-bearing rock, and agglomerate and
pelletize the iron particles into taconite pellets.
Beginning
in the fall of 2008, worldwide steel makers began to dramatically cut steel
production in response to reduced demand driven largely by the global credit
concerns. United States raw steel production ran at approximately 50 percent of
capacity in 2009, reflecting poor demand in automobiles, durable goods, and
structural and other steel products.
In late
2008, Minnesota taconite producers began to feel the impacts of decreased steel
demand, and reduced taconite production levels occurred in 2009. Annual taconite
production in Minnesota was approximately 18 million tons in 2009 (40 million
tons in 2008 and 39 million tons in 2007). Consequently, 2009 kilowatt-hour
sales to our taconite customers were lower by approximately 54 percent from 2008
levels, and we sold available power to Other Power Suppliers to partially
mitigate the earnings impact of these lower taconite sales.
Raw steel
production in the United States is projected to improve in 2010, and is
estimated to run at approximately 60 percent of capacity. As a result, Minnesota
Power expects an increase in taconite production in 2010 compared to 2009,
although production will still be less than previous years’ levels. We will
continue to market available power to Other Power Suppliers in an effort to
mitigate the earnings impact of these lower industrial sales. These sales are
dependent upon the availability of generation and are sold at market-based
prices into the MISO market on a daily basis or through bilateral agreements of
various durations. We can make no assurances that our power marketing efforts
will fully offset the reduced earnings resulting from lower demand nominations
from our industrial customers.
In
addition to serving the taconite industry, Minnesota Power also serves a number
of customers in the paper, pulp and wood products industry, which represented
1,454 million kilowatt-hours, or 33 percent, of our total industrial sales in
2009. In total, we serve four major paper and pulp mills directly and one paper
mill indirectly by providing wholesale service to the retail provider of the
mill. Minnesota Power also serves several wood product
manufacturers.
Minnesota
Power’s paper and pulp customers ran at, or very near, full capacity for the
majority of 2009, despite the fact that the industry as a whole experienced the
impacts of the global recession in reduced sales of nearly every paper grade.
Federal tax credits provided a subsidy for paper producers which allowed them to
remain competitive. Minnesota Power’s paper and pulp customers benefited from
the temporary or permanent idling of competitor plants both in North America and
in Europe, as well as continued strength of the Canadian dollar and the Euro
which has reduced imports both from Canada and Europe.
The
pipeline industry is the third key industrial segment served by Minnesota Power
with services provided to two crude oil pipelines and one refinery indirectly
through SWL&P, which represented 504 million kilowatt-hours, or 11 percent,
of our total industrial sales in 2009. These customers have a common reliance on
the importation of Canadian crude oil. After near capacity operations in 2007,
2008, and 2009, both pipeline operators are executing expansion plans to
transport Western Canadian crude oil reserves (Alberta Oil Sands) to United
States markets. Access to traditional Midwest markets is being expanded to
Southern markets as the Canadian supply is displacing domestic production and
deliveries imported from the Gulf Coast.
Large Power Customer
Contracts. Minnesota Power has 9 Large Power contracts with 10 Large
Power Customers. All of these contracts serve requirements of 10 MWs or more of
generating capacity. The customers consist of five taconite producing facilities
(two of which are owned by one company and are served under a single contract),
one iron nugget plant, and four paper and pulp mills.
REGULATED
OPERATIONS (Continued)
Large
Power Customer Contracts (Continued)
Large
Power Customer contracts require Minnesota Power to have a certain amount of
generating capacity available. In turn, each Large Power Customer is required to
pay a minimum monthly demand charge that covers the fixed costs associated with
having this capacity available to serve the customer, including a return on
common equity. Most contracts allow customers to establish the level of
megawatts subject to a demand charge on a four-month basis and require that a
portion of their megawatt needs be committed on a take-or-pay basis for at least
a portion of the agreement. In addition to the demand charge, each Large Power
Customer is billed an energy charge for each kilowatt-hour used that recovers
the variable costs incurred in generating electricity. Four of the Large Power
Customers have interruptible service which provides a discounted demand rate for
the ability to interrupt the customers during system emergencies. Minnesota
Power also provides incremental production service for customer demand levels
above the contractual take-or-pay levels. There is no demand charge for this
service and energy is priced at an increment above Minnesota Power’s cost.
Incremental production service is interruptible.
All
contracts with Large Power Customers continue past the contract termination date
unless the required advance notice of cancellation has been given. The advance
notice of cancellation varies from one to four years. Such contracts minimize
the impact on earnings that otherwise would result from significant reductions
in kilowatt-hour sales to such customers. Large Power Customers are required to
take all of their purchased electric service requirements from Minnesota Power
for the duration of their contracts. The rates and corresponding revenue
associated with capacity and energy provided under these contracts are subject
to change through the same regulatory process governing all retail electric
rates. (See Item 1. Business – Regulated Operations – Regulatory Matters –
Electric Rates.)
Minnesota
Power, as permitted by the MPUC, requires its taconite-producing Large Power
Customers to pay weekly for electric usage based on monthly energy usage
estimates. The customers receive estimated bills based on Minnesota Power’s
prediction of the customer’s energy usage, forecasted energy prices, and fuel
clause adjustment estimates. Minnesota Power’s five taconite-producing Large
Power Customers have generally predictable energy usage on a week-to-week basis,
which makes the variance between the estimated usage and actual usage
small.
Contract
Status for Minnesota Power Large Power Customers
As
of February 1, 2010
Customer (a)
|
Industry
|
Location
|
Ownership
|
Earliest
Termination
Date
|
Hibbing
Taconite Co.
|
Taconite
|
Hibbing,
MN
|
62.3%
ArcelorMittal USA Inc.
23%
Cliffs Natural Resources Inc.
14.7%
United States Steel Corporation
|
December
31, 2015
|
ArcelorMittal
USA – Minorca Mine (b)
|
Taconite
|
Virginia,
MN
|
ArcelorMittal
USA Inc.
|
February
28, 2014
|
United
States Steel Corporation
(USS
– Minnesota Ore) (b,c)
|
Taconite
|
Mt.
Iron, MN and Keewatin, MN
|
United
States Steel Corporation
|
February
28, 2014
|
United
Taconite LLC
|
Taconite
|
Eveleth,
MN
|
Cliffs
Natural Resources Inc.
|
December
31, 2015
|
Mesabi
Nugget Delaware, LLC
|
Iron
Nugget
|
Hoyt
Lakes, MN
|
Steel
Dynamics, Inc (80%)
Kobe
Steel USA (20%)
|
December
31, 2017
|
UPM,
Blandin Paper Mill (b)
|
Paper
|
Grand
Rapids, MN
|
UPM-Kymmene
Corporation
|
February
28, 2014
|
Boise
White Paper, LLC
|
Paper
|
International
Falls, MN
|
Boise
Paper Holdings, LLC
|
December
31, 2013
|
Sappi
Cloquet LLC
|
Paper
and Pulp
|
Cloquet,
MN
|
Sappi
Limited
|
February
28, 2014
|
NewPage
Corporation – Duluth Mills (b)
|
Paper
and Pulp
|
Duluth,
MN
|
NewPage
Corporation
|
February
28, 2014
|
|
(a)
|
During
2009, three Large Power Customers moved to the Large Light and Power rate
class.
|
|
(b)
|
The
contract will terminate four years from the date of written notice from
either Minnesota Power or the customer. No notice of contract cancellation
has been given by either party. Thus, the earliest date of cancellation is
February 28, 2014.
|
|
(c)
|
United
States Steel Corporation includes the Minntac Plant in Mountain Iron, MN
and the Keewatin Taconite Plant in Keewatin,
MN.
|
Residential and Commercial Customers.
In 2009, our residential and commercial customers represented 22 percent
of total regulated utility kilowatt-hour sales. Minnesota Power provides
regulated utility electric service in northeastern Minnesota to approximately
144,000 residential and commercial customers. SWL&P provides regulated
electric, natural gas and water service in northwestern Wisconsin to
approximately 15,000 electric customers, 12,000 natural gas customers and 10,000
water customers.
REGULATED
OPERATIONS (Continued)
Municipal Customers. In 2009, our municipal
customers represented 8 percent of total regulated utility kilowatt-hour sales,
which included 16 municipalities in Minnesota and 1 private utility in
Wisconsin. SWL&P, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ALLETE, is also a customer of
Minnesota Power. In 2008, Minnesota Power entered into new contracts with its
municipal customers with the exception of one small customer (less than 2 MW)
whose contract is now in the cancellation period. The new contracts transitioned
each customer to formula based rates, allowing rates to be adjusted annually
based on changes in costs, and expire in December 2013. In February 2009, the
FERC approved our municipal contracts, including the formula-based rate
provision.
Other Power Suppliers. The
Company also enters into off-system sales with Other Power Suppliers. These
sales are dependent upon the availability of generation and are sold at
market-based prices into the MISO market on a daily basis or through bilateral
agreements of various durations.
Approximately
200 MWs of capacity and energy from our Taconite Harbor facility in northern
Minnesota has been sold through two sales contracts totaling 175 MWs
(201 MWs including a 15 percent reserve), which were effective May 1,
2005, and expire on April 30, 2010. Both contracts contain fixed monthly
capacity charges and fixed minimum energy charges. One contract provides for an
annual escalator to the energy charge based on increases in our cost of fuel,
subject to a small minimum annual escalation. The other contract provides that
the energy charge will be the greater of the fixed minimum charge or an annual
amount based on the variable production cost of a combined-cycle, natural gas
unit. Our exposure in the event of a full or partial outage at our Taconite
Harbor facility is significantly limited under both contracts. When the buyer is
notified at least two months prior to an outage, there is no liability. Outages
with less than two months notice are subject to an annual duration limitation
typical of this type of contract.
On
October 29, 2009, Minnesota Power entered into an agreement to sell 100 MWs of
capacity and energy for the next ten years to Basin. The transaction is
scheduled to begin in May 2010, following the expiration of the two wholesale
power sales contracts on April 30, 2010. The capacity charge is based on a fixed
monthly schedule with a minimum annual escalation provision. The energy charge
is based on a fixed monthly schedule and provides for annual escalation based on
our cost of fuel. The agreement allows us to recover a pro rata share of
increased costs related to emissions that may occur during the last five years
of the contract.
Power
Supply
In order
to meet our customers’ electric requirements, we utilize a mix of Company
generation and purchased power. The Company’s generation is primarily
coal-fired, but also includes approximately 112 MWs of hydro generation from ten
hydro stations in Minnesota and 25 MWs of wind generation. Purchased power is
made up of long-term power purchase agreements and market purchases. The
following table reflects the Company’s generating capabilities and total
electrical requirements as of December 31, 2009. Minnesota Power had an annual
net peak load of 1,414 MWs on January 15, 2009.
REGULATED
OPERATIONS (Continued)
Power
Supply (Continued)
Regulated
Utility
Power
Supply
|
Unit
No.
|
Year
Installed
|
Net
Winter
Capability
|
Year Ended
December 31,
2009
Electric Requirements
|
|
|
|
MW
|
MWh
|
%
|
Coal-Fired
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boswell
Energy Center
|
1
|
1958
|
68
|
|
|
in
Cohasset, MN
|
2
|
1960
|
67
|
|
|
|
3
|
1973
|
352
|
|
|
|
4
|
1980
|
429
|
|
|
|
|
|
916
|
5,390,131
|
42.8%
|
Laskin
Energy Center
|
1
|
1953
|
55
|
|
|
in
Hoyt Lakes, MN
|
2
|
1953
|
51
|
|
|
|
|
|
106
|
510,505
|
4.1
|
Taconite
Harbor Energy Center
|
1
|
1957
|
75
|
|
|
in
Schroeder, MN
|
2
|
1957
|
74
|
|
|
|
3
|
1967
|
76
|
|
|
|
|
|
225
|
1,058,263
|
8.4
|
Total
Coal
|
|
|
1,247
|
6,958,899
|
55.3
|
Biomass/Coal/Natural
Gas
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hibbard
Renewable Energy Center
|
|
|
|
|
|
in
Duluth, MN
|
3
& 4
|
1949,
1951
|
54
|
40,703
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cloquet
Energy Center
in
Cloquet, MN
|
5
|
2001
|
22
|
19,340
|
0.2
|
Total
Biomass/Coal/Natural Gas
|
|
|
76
|
60,043
|
0.5
|
Hydro
|
|
|
|
|
|
Group
consisting of ten stations in MN
|
Various
|
|
109
|
434,541
|
3.5
|
Wind
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taconite
Ridge
in
Mt. Iron, MN (a)
|
1-10
|
2008
|
4
|
56,255
|
0.4
|
Total
Company Generation
|
|
|
1,436
|
7,509,738
|
59.7
|
Long-Term
Purchased Power
|
|
|
|
|
|
Square
Butte burns lignite coal near Center, ND
|
|
|
|
1,695,254
|
13.5
|
Wind
– Oliver County, ND
|
|
|
|
361,624
|
2.9
|
Hydro
– Manitoba Hydro in Winnipeg, MB, Canada
|
|
|
|
433,543
|
3.4
|
Total
Long-Term Purchased Power
|
|
|
|
2,490,421
|
19.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Purchased Power(b)
|
|
|
|
2,579,408
|
20.5
|
Total
Purchased Power
|
|
|
|
5,069,829
|
40.3
|
Total
|
|
|
1,436
|
12,579,567
|
100.0%
|
(a)
|
The
nameplate capacity of Taconite Ridge is 25 MWs. The capacity reflected in
the table is actual accredited capacity of the facility. Accredited
capacity is the amount of net generating capability associated with the
facility for which capacity credit may be obtained using limited
historical data. As more data is collected, actual accredited capacity may
increase.
|
(b)
|
Includes
short term market purchases in the MISO market and from Other Power
Suppliers.
|
Fuel. Minnesota Power
purchases low-sulfur, sub-bituminous coal from the Powder River Basin coal
region located in Montana and Wyoming. Coal consumption in 2009 for electric
generation at Minnesota Power’s coal-fired generating stations was approximately
4.2 million tons. As of December 31, 2009, Minnesota Power had a coal
inventory of about 810,000 tons. Minnesota Power’s primary coal supply
agreements have expiration dates through 2011. Under these agreements, Minnesota
Power has the flexibility to procure 70 percent to 100 percent of its total coal
requirements. In 2010, Minnesota Power expects to obtain coal under these coal
supply agreements and in the spot market. This diversity in coal supply options
allows Minnesota Power to manage its coal market price and supply risk and to
take advantage of favorable spot market prices. Minnesota Power continues to
explore future coal supply options. We believe that adequate supplies of
low-sulfur, sub-bituminous coal will continue to be available.
In 2001,
Minnesota Power and BNSF entered into a long-term agreement under which BNSF
transports all of Minnesota Power’s coal by unit train from the Powder River
Basin directly to Minnesota Power’s generating facilities or to designated
interconnection points. Minnesota Power also has agreements with an affiliate of
the Canadian National Railway and with Midwest Energy Resources Company to
transport coal from BNSF interconnection points to certain Minnesota Power
facilities.
REGULATED
OPERATIONS (Continued)
Fuel
(Continued)
Coal
Delivered to Minnesota Power
|
Year
Ended December 31
|
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
Average
Price per Ton
|
$24.99
|
$22.73
|
$21.78
|
Average
Price per MBtu
|
$1.37
|
$1.25
|
$1.20
|
Long-Term Purchased Power.
Minnesota Power has contracts to purchase capacity and energy from various
entities. The largest contract is with Square Butte. Under the agreement with
Square Butte, which expires at the end of 2026, Minnesota Power is currently
entitled to approximately 50 percent of the output of a 455-MW coal-fired
generating unit located near Center, North Dakota. (See Note 11. Commitments,
Guarantees, and Contingencies.) The lignite that has been dedicated to Square
Butte by BNI Coal is located on lands essentially all of which are under private
control and presently leased by BNI Coal. This lignite supply is sufficient to
provide fuel for the anticipated useful life of the generating unit. Square
Butte’s cost of lignite burned in 2009 was approximately $1.02 per
MBtu.
We have
two wind power purchase agreements with an affiliate of NextEra Energy to
purchase the output from two wind facilities, Oliver Wind I and II located near
Center, North Dakota. We began purchasing the output from Oliver Wind I, a 50-MW
facility, in December 2006 and the output from Oliver Wind II, a 48-MW facility,
in November 2007. Each agreement is for 25 years and provides for the purchase
of all output from the facilities. We pay a contracted energy price and will
receive any potential renewable energy or environmental air quality
credits.
We also
have a power purchase agreement with Manitoba Hydro that began in May 2009 and
expires in April 2015. Under the agreement with Manitoba Hydro, Minnesota Power
will purchase 50 MW of capacity and the energy associated with that capacity.
Both the capacity price and the energy price are adjusted annually by the change
in a governmental inflationary index.
Transmission
and Distribution
We have
electric transmission and distribution lines of 500 kV (8 miles), 250kV (465
miles), 230 kV (605 miles), 161 kV (43 miles), 138 kV (128 miles), 115 kV
(1,220 miles) and less than 115 kV (6,206 miles). We own and operate 166
substations with a total capacity of 10,287 megavoltamperes. Some of our
transmission and distribution lines interconnect with other
utilities.
Investment
in ATC
Rainy
River Energy, our wholly owned subsidiary, owns approximately 8 percent of ATC,
a Wisconsin-based utility that owns and maintains electric transmission assets
in parts of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Illinois. ATC provides
transmission service under rates regulated by the FERC that are set in
accordance with the FERC’s policy of establishing the independent operation and
ownership of, and investment in, transmission facilities. ATC rates are based on
a 12.2 percent return on common equity dedicated to utility plant. We account
for our investment in ATC under the equity method of accounting. As of December
31, 2009, our equity investment balance in ATC was $88.4 million ($76.9 million
at December 31, 2008). (See Note 6. Investment in ATC.)
Properties
We own
office and service buildings, an energy control center, repair shops, lease
offices, and storerooms in various localities. All of our electric plants are
subject to mortgages, which collateralize the outstanding first mortgage bonds
of Minnesota Power and SWL&P. Generally, we hold fee interest in our real
properties subject only to the lien of the mortgages. Most of our electric lines
are located on land not owned in fee, but are covered by appropriate easement
rights or by necessary permits from governmental authorities. WPPI Energy owns
20 percent of Boswell Unit 4. WPPI Energy has the right to use our transmission
line facilities to transport its share of Boswell generation. (See Note 4.
Jointly-Owned Electric Facility.)
REGULATED
OPERATIONS (Continued)
Regulatory
Matters
We are
subject to the jurisdiction of various regulatory authorities. The MPUC has
regulatory authority over Minnesota Power’s service area in Minnesota, retail
rates, retail services, issuance of securities and other matters. The FERC has
jurisdiction over the licensing of hydroelectric projects, the establishment of
rates and charges for the sale of electricity for resale and transmission of
electricity in interstate commerce, certain accounting and record-keeping
practices and ATC. The PSCW has regulatory authority over SWL&P’s retail
sales of electricity, natural gas, water, issuances of securities, and other
matters. The NDPSC has jurisdiction over site and route permitting of generation
and transmission facilities necessary for construction in North
Dakota.
Electric Rates. Minnesota
Power designs its electric service rates based on cost of service studies under
which allocations are made to the various classes of customers. Nearly all
retail sales include billing adjustment clauses, which adjust electric service
rates for changes in the cost of fuel and purchased energy, recovery of current
and deferred conservation improvement program expenditures and
recovery of certain environmental and renewable expenditures.
Information
published by the Edison Electric Institute (Typical Bills and Average Rates
Report – Summer 2009 and Rankings – July 1, 2009)
ranked Minnesota Power as having the eighth lowest average retail rates out of
175 utilities in the United States. According to this report, Minnesota Power
had the lowest rates in Minnesota and third lowest in the region consisting of
Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota and
Wisconsin.
Minnesota
Power requires that all large industrial and commercial customers under contract
specify the date when power is first required. Thereafter, the customer is
generally billed monthly for at least the minimum power for which they
contracted. These conditions are part of all contracts covering power to be
supplied to new large industrial and commercial customers and to current
customers as their contracts expire or are amended. All rates and other contract
terms are subject to approval by appropriate regulatory
authorities.
Minnesota Public Utilities
Commission. The MPUC has jurisdiction over Minnesota Power’s service area
in Minnesota, retail rates, retail services, issuance of securities and other
matters.
2008 Rate Case. In May 2008,
Minnesota Power filed a retail rate increase request with the MPUC seeking
additional revenues of approximately $40 million annually; the request also
sought an 11.15 percent return on equity, and a capital structure consisting of
54.8 percent equity and 45.2 percent debt. As a result of a May 2009 Order and
an August 2009 Reconsideration Order, the MPUC granted Minnesota Power a revenue
increase of approximately $20 million, including a return on equity of 10.74
percent and a capital structure consisting of 54.79 percent equity and 45.21
percent debt. Rates went into effect on November 1, 2009.
Interim
rates, subject to refund, were in effect from August 1, 2008 through October 31,
2009. During 2009, Minnesota Power recorded a $21.7 million liability for
refunds of interim rates, including interest, required to be made as a result of
the May 2009 Order and the August 2009 Reconsideration Order. In 2009, $21.4
million was refunded, with a remaining $0.3 million balance to be refunded in
early 2010; $7.6 million of the refunds required to be made were related to
interim rates charged in 2008.
With the
May 2009 Order, the MPUC also approved the stipulation and settlement agreement
that affirmed the Company’s continued recovery of fuel and purchased power costs
under the former base cost of fuel that was in effect prior to the retail rate
filing. The transition to the former base cost of fuel began with the
implementation of final rates on November 1, 2009. Any revenue impact associated
with this transition will be identified in a future filing related to the
Company’s fuel clause operation.
2010 Rate Case. Minnesota
Power previously stated its intention to file for additional revenues to recover
the costs of significant investments to ensure current and future system
reliability, enhance environmental performance and bring new renewable energy to
northeastern Minnesota. As a result, Minnesota Power filed a retail rate
increase request with the MPUC on November 2, 2009, seeking a return on equity
of 11.50 percent, a capital structure consisting of 54.29 percent equity and
45.71 percent debt, and on an annualized basis, an $81.0 million net increase in
electric retail revenue.
Minnesota
law allows the collection of interim rates while the MPUC processes the rate
filing. On December 30, 2009, the MPUC issued an Order (the Order)
authorizing $48.5 million of Minnesota Power’s November 2, 2009,
interim rate increase request of $73.0 million. The MPUC cited exigent
circumstances in reducing Minnesota Power’s interim rate request. Because the
scope and depth of this reduction in interim rates was unprecedented, and
because Minnesota law does not allow Minnesota Power to formally challenge the
MPUC’s action until a final decision in the case is rendered, on January 6,
2010, Minnesota Power sent a letter to the MPUC expressing its concerns about
the Order and requested that the MPUC reconsider its decision on its own motion.
Minnesota Power described its belief the MPUC’s decision violates the law by
prejudging the merits of the rate request prior to an evidentiary hearing and
results in the confiscation of utility property. Further, the Company is
concerned that the decision will have negative consequences on the environmental
policy directions of the State of Minnesota by denying recovery for statutory
mandates during the pendency of the rate proceeding. The MPUC has not acted in
response to Minnesota Power’s letter.
REGULATED
OPERATIONS (Continued)
Regulatory
Matters (Continued)
The rate
case process requires public hearings and an evidentiary hearing before an
administrative law judge, both of which are scheduled for the second quarter of
2010. A final decision on the rate request is expected in the fourth quarter. We
cannot predict the final level of rates that may be approved by the MPUC, and we
cannot predict whether a legal challenge to the MPUC’s interim rate decision
will be forthcoming or successful.
North Dakota Wind Project. On
July 7, 2009, the MPUC approved our petition seeking current cost recovery of
investments and expenditures related to Bison I and associated transmission
upgrades. We anticipate filing a petition with the MPUC in the first quarter of
2010 to establish customer billing rates for the approved cost recovery. Bison I
is the first portion of several hundred MWs of our North Dakota Wind Project,
which upon completion will fulfill the 2025 renewable energy supply requirement
for our retail load. Bison I will be comprised of 33 wind turbines with a total
nameplate capacity of 76 MWs, located near Center, North Dakota, and be in
service in late 2010 and 2011.
On
September 29, 2009, the NDPSC authorized site construction for Bison I. On
October 2, 2009, Minnesota Power filed a route permit application with the NDPSC
for a 22 mile, 230 kV Bison I transmission line that will connect Bison I to the
DC transmission line at the Square Butte Substation in Center, North Dakota. An
order is expected in the first quarter 2010.
On
December 31, 2009, we purchased an existing 250 kV DC transmission line from
Square Butte for $69.7 million. The 465-mile transmission line runs from Center,
North Dakota to Duluth, Minnesota. We expect to use this line to transport
increasing amounts of wind energy from North Dakota while gradually phasing out
coal-based electricity currently being delivered to our system over this
transmission line from Square Butte’s lignite coal-fired generating unit. We
expect that the Square Butte generating unit will continue to be fully utilized
and supplied with lignite coal by BNI Coal, as Minnkota Power is expected to
take Square Butte generation not utilized by Minnesota Power. Acquisition of
this transmission line was approved by an MPUC order dated December 21, 2009. In
addition, the FERC issued an order on November 24, 2009, authorizing acquisition
of the transmission facilities and conditionally accepting, upon compliance and
other filings, the proposed tariff revisions, interconnection agreement and
other related agreements.
Integrated Resource Plan. On
October 5, 2009, Minnesota Power filed with the MPUC its 2010 Integrated
Resource Plan, a comprehensive estimate of future capacity needs within
Minnesota Power’s service territory. Minnesota Power does not anticipate the
need for new base load generation within the Minnesota Power service territory
over the next 15 years, and plans to meet estimated future customer demand while
achieving:
|
·
|
Increased
system flexibility to adapt to volatile business cycles and varied future
industrial load scenarios;
|
|
·
|
Reductions
in the emission of GHGs (primarily carbon dioxide);
and
|
|
·
|
Compliance
with mandated renewable energy
standards.
|
To
achieve these objectives over the coming years, we plan to reshape our
generation portfolio by adding 300 to 500 megawatts of renewable energy to our
generation mix, and exploring options to incorporate peaking or intermediate
resources. Our 76 MW Bison I Wind Project in North Dakota is expected to be in
service in late 2010 and 2011.
We
project average annual long-term growth of approximately one percent in electric
usage over the next 15 years. We will also focus on conservation and demand side
management to meet the energy savings goals established in Minnesota
legislation.
Emission Reduction Plans. We
have made investments in pollution control equipment at our Boswell Unit 3
generating unit that reduces particulates, SO2, NOx and
mercury emissions to meet future federal and state requirements. This equipment
was placed in service in November 2009. During the construction phase, the MPUC
authorized a cash return on construction work in progress in lieu of AFUDC, and
this amount was collected through a current cost recovery rider. Our 2010 rate
case proposes to move this project from a current cost recovery rider to base
rates.
The
environmental regulatory requirements for Taconite Harbor Unit 3 are pending
approval of the Minnesota Regional Haze implementation by the EPA. We are
evaluating compliance requirements for this Unit. Environmental retrofits at
Laskin and Taconite Harbor Units 1 and 2 have been completed and are
in-service.
Boswell NOX Reduction Plan. In September
2008, we submitted to the MPCA and MPUC a $92 million environmental initiative
proposing cost recovery for expenditures relating to NOX emission
reductions from Boswell Units 1, 2, and 4. The Boswell NOX Reduction
Plan is expected to significantly reduce NOX emissions
from these units. In conjunction with the NOX reduction,
we plan to make an efficiency improvement to our existing turbine/generator at
Boswell Unit 4 adding approximately 60 MWs of total output. The Boswell 1, 2 and
4, selective non-catalytic reduction NOX controls
are currently in service, while the Boswell 4 low NOX burners
and turbine efficiency projects are anticipated to be in service in late 2010.
Our 2010 rate case seeks recovery for this project in base
rates.
REGULATED
OPERATIONS (Continued)
Regulatory
Matters (Continued)
Transmission. We have an
approved cost recovery rider in-place for certain transmission expenditures, and
our current billing factor was approved by the MPUC in June 2009. The billing
factor allows us to charge our retail customers on a current basis for the costs
of constructing certain transmission facilities plus a return on the capital
invested. Our 2010 rate case proposes to move completed transmission projects
from the current cost recovery rider to base rates.
Conservation Improvement Program
(CIP). Minnesota requires electric utilities to spend a minimum of 1.5
percent of gross operating revenues from service provided in the state on energy
CIPs each year. These investments are recovered from retail customers through a
billing adjustment and amounts included in retail base rates. The MPUC allows
utilities to accumulate, in a deferred account for future cost recovery, all CIP
expenditures, as well as a carrying charge on the deferred account balance.
Minnesota’s Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 introduced, in addition to
minimum spending requirements, an energy-saving goal of 1.5 percent of gross
annual retail electric energy sales by 2010. In June 2008, a biennial filing was
submitted for 2009 through 2010, and subsequently approved by the OES. For
future program years, Minnesota Power will build upon current successful CIPs in
an effort to meet the newly established 1.5 percent energy-saving goal.
Minnesota Power’s CIP investment goal was $4.6 million for 2009 ($3.7 million
for 2008; $3.2 million for 2007), with actual spending of $5.5 million in 2009
($4.8 million in 2008; $3.9 million in 2007).
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission. The FERC has jurisdiction over the licensing of hydroelectric
projects, the establishment of rates and charges for the sale of electricity for
resale and transmission of electricity in interstate commerce, certain
accounting and record-keeping practices and ATC.
Minnesota
Power’s non-affiliated municipal customers consist of 16 municipalities in
Minnesota and 1 private utility in Wisconsin. SWL&P, a wholly-owned
subsidiary of ALLETE, is also a customer of Minnesota Power. In 2008, Minnesota
Power entered into new contracts with these municipal customers which
transitioned customers to formula-based rates, allowing rates to be adjusted
annually based on changes in cost. In February 2009, the FERC approved our
municipal contracts which expire December 31, 2013. Under the formula-based
rates provision, wholesale rates are set at the beginning of the year based on
expected costs and provide for a true-up calculation for actual costs. Wholesale
rate increases totaling approximately $6 million and $10 million annually were
implemented on February 1, 2009 and January 1, 2010, respectively, with
approximately $6 million of additional revenues under the true-up provision
accrued in 2009, which will be billed in 2010.
In August
2005, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) was signed into law, which
enacted PUHCA 2005. PUHCA 2005 gives FERC certain authority over books and
records of public utility holding companies and their affiliates. It also
addresses FERC review and authorization of the allocation of costs for non-power
goods, or administrative or management services when requested by a holding
company system or state commission. In addition, EPAct 2005 directs the FERC to
issue certain rules addressing electricity reliability, investment in energy
infrastructure, fuel diversity for electric generation, promotion of energy
efficiency and wise energy use.
We
believe the overall impact of the EPAct 2005 on the electric utility industry
has been positive and are continuing to evaluate the effects on our business as
this legislation is being implemented. This federal legislation is designed to
bring more certainty to energy markets in which ALLETE participates, as well as
to provide investment incentives for energy efficiency, energy infrastructure
(such as electric transmission lines), and energy production. The FERC has the
responsibility of implementing numerous new standards as a result of the
promulgation of the EPAct 2005. To date, the FERC’s regulatory efforts under the
EPAct 2005 appear to be generally positive for the utility
industry.
Public Service Commission of
Wisconsin. The PSCW has regulatory authority over SWL&P’s retail
sales of electricity, natural gas, water, issuances of securities, and other
matters.
SWL&P’s
current retail rates are based on a December 2008 PSCW retail rate order that
became effective January 1, 2009, and allows for an 11.1 percent return on
equity. The new rates reflected a 3.5 percent average increase in retail utility
rates for SWL&P customers (a 13.4 percent increase in water rates, a 4.7
percent increase in electric rates, and a 0.6 percent decrease in natural gas
rates). On an annualized basis, the rate increase will generate approximately $3
million in additional revenue.
North Dakota Public Service
Commission. The NDPSC has jurisdiction over site and route permitting of
generation and transmission facilities necessary for construction in North
Dakota.
On
September 29, 2009, the NDPSC authorized site construction for Bison I. On
October 2, 2009, Minnesota Power filed a route permit application with the NDPSC
for the 22 mile, 230 kV Bison I transmission line that will connect Bison I to
the DC transmission line at the Square Butte Substation in Center, North Dakota.
An order is expected in the first quarter 2010.
Regional
Organizations
Midwest Independent Transmission
System Operator, Inc. Minnesota Power and SWL&P are members of MISO,
a regional transmission organization. While Minnesota Power and SWL&P retain
ownership of their respective transmission assets and control area functions,
their transmission network is under the regional operational control of MISO.
Minnesota Power and SWL&P take and provide transmission service under the
MISO open access transmission tariff. MISO continues its efforts to standardize
rates, terms, and conditions of transmission service over its broad region,
encompassing all or parts of 15 states and one Canadian province, and over
100,000 MWs of generating capacity.
In
January 2009, MISO launched the new Ancillary Services Market (ASM), aimed at
establishing a market for energy and operating reserves. In May 2008, in
preparation of the new market, Minnesota Power and the other investor-owned
utilities in Minnesota prepared a joint filing seeking MPUC approval for the
authority to account for costs and revenues that resulted from the institution
of the ASM market. The MPUC conditionally approved Minnesota investor-owned
utility participation in the MISO ASM market in an order dated March 17, 2009.
Under this approval, recovery of ASM charges is subject to refund pending the
MPUC’s review of our February 5, 2010 filing which documents the cost
effectiveness of ASM. The utilities must validate ASM cost recovery to date, as
well as on-going recovery, through a review of the cost and benefits of ASM
participation. The Company cannot predict the outcome of this
proceeding.
Mid-Continent Area Power Pool
(MAPP). Minnesota Power also participates in MAPP, a power pool operating
in parts of nine states in the Upper Midwest and in two Canadian provinces. MAPP
functions include a regional transmission committee that is charged with
planning for the future transmission needs of the region as well as ensuring
that all electric industry participants have equal access to the transmission
system.
Minnesota
Legislation
Renewable Energy. In February
2007, Minnesota enacted a law requiring 25 percent of Minnesota Power’s total
retail energy sales in Minnesota come from renewable energy sources by 2025. The
law also requires Minnesota Power to meet interim milestones of 12 percent by
2012, 17 percent by 2016, and 20 percent by 2020. Minnesota Power has identified
a plan to meet the renewable goals set by Minnesota and has included this in the
most recent filing of the IRP with the MPUC. The law allows the MPUC to modify
or delay a standard obligation if implementation will cause significant
ratepayer cost or technical reliability issues. If a utility is not in
compliance with a standard, the MPUC may order the utility to construct
facilities, purchase renewable energy or purchase renewable energy credits.
Minnesota Power was developing and making renewable supply additions as part of
its generation planning strategy prior to the enactment of this law and this
activity continues.
Greenhouse Gas Reduction. In
2007, Minnesota passed legislation establishing non-binding targets for carbon
dioxide reductions. This legislation establishes a goal of reducing statewide
GHG emissions across all sectors to a level at least 15 percent below 2005
levels by 2015, at least 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and at least 80
percent below 2005 levels by 2050. Minnesota is also participating in the
Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord, a regional effort to develop a
multi-state approach to GHG emission reductions.
We cannot
predict the nature or timing of any additional GHG legislation or regulation.
Although we are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs
could have a material impact on our financial results.
Competition
Retail
energy sales in Minnesota and Wisconsin are made to customers in assigned
service territories. As a result, most retail electric customers in Minnesota do
not have the ability to choose their electric supplier. Large energy users
outside of a municipality of 2 MW and above may be allowed to choose a supplier
upon MPUC approval. Minnesota Power serves 10 Large Power facilities over 10 MW,
none of which have engaged in a competitive rate process. Two customers
within the past 15 years that are over 2 MW but less than 10 MW under our Large
Light and Power tariff have participated in a competitive rate process with
neighboring electric cooperatives but were ultimately retained by Minnesota
Power. Retail electric and natural gas customers in Wisconsin do not have
the ability to choose their energy supplier. In both states, however,
electricity may compete with other forms of energy. Customers may also choose to
generate their own electricity, or substitute other fuels for their
manufacturing processes.
For the
year ended December 31, 2009, 8 percent of the Company’s energy sales were sales
to municipal customers in Minnesota and a private utility in Wisconsin by
contract under a formula-based rate approved by FERC. These customers have the
right to seek an energy supply from any wholesale electric service provider upon
contract expiration.
The FERC
has continued with its efforts to promote a more competitive wholesale market
through open-access transmission and other means. As a result, our sales to
Other Power Suppliers and our purchases to supply our retail and wholesale load
are in the competitive market.
Franchises
Minnesota
Power holds franchises to construct and maintain an electric distribution and
transmission system in 93 cities and towns located within its electric service
territory. SWL&P holds similar franchises for electric, natural gas and/or
water systems in 15 cities and towns within its service territory. The remaining
cities and towns served by us do not require a franchise to operate within their
boundaries. Our exclusive service territories are established by state
regulatory agencies.
INVESTMENTS
AND OTHER
Investments
and Other is comprised primarily of BNI Coal, our coal mining operations in
North Dakota, and ALLETE Properties, our Florida real estate investment. This
segment also includes a small amount of non-rate base generation, approximately
7,000 acres of land available-for-sale in Minnesota, and earnings on cash and
investments.
BNI
Coal
BNI Coal
operates a lignite mine in North Dakota. BNI Coal is a low-cost supplier of
lignite in North Dakota, producing about 4 million tons annually. Two electric
generating cooperatives, Minnkota Power and Square Butte, presently consume
virtually all of BNI Coal’s production of lignite under cost-plus, fixed fee
coal supply agreements extending through 2026. (See Item 1. Business – Long-Term
Purchased Power and Note 11. Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies.) The
mining process disturbs and reclaims between 200 and 250 acres per year. Laws
require that the reclaimed land be at least as productive as it was prior to
mining. The average cost to reclaim one acre of land is approximately $35,000;
however, depending on conditions, it could be significantly higher. Reclamation
costs are included in the cost of coal passed through to customers. With lignite
reserves of an estimated 600 million tons, BNI Coal has ample capacity to
expand production.
ALLETE
Properties
ALLETE
Properties represents our Florida real estate investment. Our current strategy
for the assets is to complete and maintain key entitlements and infrastructure
improvements without requiring significant additional investment, and sell the
portfolio over time or in bulk transactions. ALLETE intends to sell its Florida
land assets at reasonable prices when opportunities arise, and reinvest the
proceeds in its growth initiatives. ALLETE does not intend to acquire additional
Florida real estate.
Our two
major development projects are Town Center and Palm Coast Park. Ormond
Crossings, a third major project that is currently in the planning stage,
received land use approvals in December 2006. However, due to a change in
Florida law that became effective in July 2009, those approvals are being
revised. It is anticipated that the City of Ormond Beach, FL will approve a new
Development Agreement for Ormond Crossings in the first quarter of 2010. The new
agreement will facilitate development of the project as currently planned.
Separately, Lake Swamp wetland mitigation bank was permitted on land that was
previously part of Ormond Crossings.
Town Center. Town Center,
which is located in the City of Palm Coast, is a mixed-use development with a
neo-traditional downtown core area. Construction of the major infrastructure
improvements at Town Center was substantially complete at the end of 2008. At
build-out, Town Center is expected to include approximately 3,000 residential
units and 4.0 million square feet of various types of non-residential space.
Sites have also been set aside for a new city hall, a community center, an art
and entertainment center, and other public uses. Market conditions will
determine how quickly Town Center builds out.
Palm Coast Park. Palm Coast
Park, which is located in the City of Palm Coast, is a 4,700-acre mixed-use
development. Construction of the major infrastructure improvements at Palm Coast
Park was substantially complete at the end of 2007. At build-out, Palm Coast
Park is expected to include approximately 4,000 residential units, 3.0 million
square feet of various types of non-residential space and public facilities.
Market conditions will determine how quickly Palm Coast Park builds
out.
Ormond Crossings. Ormond
Crossings, which is located in the City of Ormond Beach, is a 3,000-acre,
mixed-use development. Planning, engineering design, and permitting of the
master infrastructure are ongoing. At build out, Ormond Crossings is expected to
include approximately 3,000 residential units, 5.0 million square feet of
various types of non-residential space and public facilities. Market conditions
will determine when Ormond Crossings will be built out. We do not expect any
development activity at Ormond Crossings in 2010.
Lake Swamp. Lake Swamp wetland
mitigation bank is a 1,900 acre regionally significant wetlands mitigation bank
that was permitted by the St. Johns River Water Management District in 2008 and
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in December 2009. Wetland mitigation credits
will be used at Ormond Crossings and will also be available for sale to
developers of other projects that are located in the bank’s service area.
Applications are currently being prepared to expand the bank by approximately
1,000 acres.
See Item
7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations – Outlook for more information on ALLETE Properties’ land
holdings.
INVESTMENTS
AND OTHER (Continued)
Seller Financing. ALLETE
Properties occasionally provides seller financing to certain qualified buyers.
At December 31, 2009, outstanding finance receivables were $12.9 million, with
maturities up to 3 years. These finance receivables accrue interest at
market-based rates and are collateralized by the financed
properties.
Regulation. A substantial
portion of our development properties in Florida are subject to federal, state
and local regulations, and restrictions that may impose significant costs or
limitations on our ability to develop the properties. Much of our property is
vacant land and some is located in areas where development may affect the
natural habitats of various protected wildlife species or in sensitive
environmental areas such as wetlands.
Non-Rate
Base Generation
As of
December 31, 2009, non-rate base generation consists of 30 MWs of
generation at Rapids Energy Center. For January through October non-rate base
generation also included Cloquet Energy Center (23 MWs of generation), which was
transferred to rate base as a result of our 2008 rate order. In 2009, we sold
0.2 million MWh of non-rate base generation (0.2 million in 2008 and
2007).
Non-Rate
Base Power Supply
|
Unit
No.
|
Year
Installed
|
Year
Acquired
|
Net
Capability
(MW)
|
Steam
|
|
|
|
|
Biomass
(a)
|
|
|
|
|
Cloquet
Energy Center (b)
|
5
|
2001
|
2001
|
22
|
in
Cloquet, MN
|
|
|
|
|
Rapids
Energy Center (c)
|
6
& 7
|
1969,
1980
|
2000
|
29
|
in
Grand Rapids, MN
|
|
|
|
|
Hydro
|
|
|
|
|
Conventional
Run-of-River
|
|
|
|
|
Rapids
Energy Center (c)
|
4
& 5
|
1917
|
2000
|
1
|
in
Grand Rapids, MN
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
Cloquet
Energy Center is supplemented by natural gas; Rapids Energy Center is
supplemented by coal.
|
(b)
|
Transferred
to Regulated Operations as a result of our 2008 rate order on November 1,
2009.
|
(c)
|
The
net generation is primarily dedicated to the needs of one
customer.
|
Other
Minnesota Land. We have
approximately 7,000 acres of land available-for-sale in Minnesota. We acquired
the land in 2001 when we purchased the Taconite Harbor generating
facilities.
Environmental
Matters
Our
businesses are subject to regulation of environmental matters by various
federal, state and local authorities. Currently, a number of regulatory changes
are under consideration by both the Congress and the EPA. Most notably, clean
energy technologies and the regulation of GHGs have taken a lead in these
discussions. Minnesota Power’s fossil fueled facilities will likely to be
subject to regulation under these climate change policies. Our intention is to
reduce our exposure to possible future carbon and GHG legislation by reshaping
our generation portfolio, over time, to reduce our reliance on
coal.
We
consider our businesses to be in substantial compliance with currently
applicable environmental regulations and believe all necessary permits to
conduct such operations have been obtained. Due to future restrictive
environmental requirements through legislation and/or rulemaking, we anticipate
that potential expenditures for environmental matters will be material and will
require significant capital investments. (See Item 7. Management’s Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Capital
Requirements.)
We review
environmental matters for disclosure on a quarterly basis. Accruals for
environmental matters are recorded when it is probable that a liability has been
incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated, based on
current law and existing technologies. These accruals are adjusted periodically
as assessment and remediation efforts progress, or as additional technical or
legal information become available. Accruals for environmental liabilities are
included in the consolidated balance sheet at undiscounted amounts and exclude
claims for recoveries from insurance or other third parties. Costs related to
environmental contamination treatment and cleanup are charged to expense unless
recoverable in rates from customers.
Environmental
Matters (Continued)
Air. Clean Air Act. The federal Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990 (Clean Air Act) established the acid rain program which
created emission allowances for SO2 and
system-wide average NOX limits.
Minnesota Power’s generating facilities mainly burn low-sulfur western
sub-bituminous coal. Square Butte, located in North Dakota, burns lignite coal.
All of these facilities are equipped with pollution control equipment such as
scrubbers, bag houses, or electrostatic precipitators. Minnesota Power’s
generating facilities are currently in compliance with applicable emission
requirements.
New Source Review. On August 8, 2008,
Minnesota Power received a Notice of Violation (NOV) from the United States EPA
asserting violations of the New Source Review (NSR) requirements of the Clean
Air Act at Boswell Units 1-4 and Laskin Unit 2. The NOV also asserts that the
Boswell Unit 4 Title V permit was violated, and that seven projects undertaken
at these coal-fired plants between the years 1981 and 2000 should have been
reviewed under the NSR requirements. Minnesota Power believes the projects were
in full compliance with the Clean Air Act, NSR requirements and applicable
permits.
We are
engaged in discussions with the EPA regarding resolution of these matters, but
we are unable to predict the outcome of these discussions. Since 2006, Minnesota
Power has significantly reduced, and continues to reduce, emissions at Boswell
and Laskin. The resolution could result in civil penalties and the installation
of control technology, some of which is already planned or completed for other
regulatory requirements. Any costs of installing pollution control technology
would likely be eligible for recovery in rates over time subject to MPUC and
FERC approval in a rate proceeding. We are unable to predict the ultimate
financial impact or the resolution of these matters at this time.
EPA Clean Air Interstate
Rule. In March 2005, the EPA announced the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR) that sought to reduce and permanently cap emissions of SO2, NOX, and
particulates in the eastern United States. Minnesota was included as one of the
28 states considered as “significantly contributing” to air quality standards
non-attainment in other downwind states. On July 11, 2008, the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Court) vacated the CAIR
and remanded the rulemaking to the EPA for reconsideration while also granting
our petition that the EPA reconsider including Minnesota as a CAIR state. In
September 2008, the EPA and others petitioned the Court for a rehearing or
alternatively requested that the CAIR be remanded without a court order. In December
2008, the Court granted the request that the CAIR be remanded without a court
order, effectively reinstating a January 1, 2009, compliance date for the CAIR,
including Minnesota. However, in the May 12, 2009, Federal Register, the EPA
issued a proposed rule that would amend the CAIR to stay its effectiveness with
respect to Minnesota until completion of the EPA’s determination of whether
Minnesota should be included as a CAIR state. The formal administrative stay of
CAIR for Minnesota was published in the November 3, 2009, Federal Register with
an effective date of December 3, 2009. The EPA has indicated the CAIR
Replacement Rule is expected in April 2010 with finalization in early 2011. At
this time we do not have any indication whether Minnesota will be included in
the Replacement Rule.
Minnesota Regional Haze. The
federal regional haze rule requires states to submit state implementation plans
(SIPs) to the EPA to address regional haze visibility impairment in 156
federally-protected parks and wilderness areas. Under the regional haze rule,
certain large stationary sources, that were put in place between 1962 and 1977
with emissions contributing to visibility impairment are required to install
emission controls, known as best available retrofit technology (BART). We have
certain steam units, Boswell Unit 3 and Taconite Harbor Unit 3, which are
subject to BART requirements.
Pursuant
to the regional haze rule, Minnesota was required to develop its SIP by December
2007. As a mechanism for demonstrating progress towards meeting the long-term
regional haze goal, in April 2007, the MPCA advanced a draft conceptual SIP
which relied on the implementation of CAIR. However, a formal SIP was never
filed due to the Court’s review of CAIR as more fully described above under “EPA
Clean Air Interstate Rule.” Subsequently, the MPCA requested that companies with
BART eligible units complete and submit a BART emissions control retrofit study,
which was done on Taconite Harbor Unit 3 in November 2008. The retrofit work
completed in 2009 at Boswell Unit 3 meets the BART requirement for that unit. On
December 15, 2009, the MPCA approved the SIP for submittal to the EPA for review
and approval. It is uncertain what controls will ultimately be required at
Taconite Harbor Unit 3 in connection with the regional haze rule.
EPA National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants. In March 2005, the EPA also announced the Clean
Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) that would have reduced and permanently capped electric
utility mercury emissions in the continental United States through a
cap-and-trade program. In February 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the CAMR and remanded the rulemaking to
the EPA for reconsideration. In October 2008, the EPA petitioned the Supreme
Court to review the Court’s decision in the CAMR case. In January 2009, the EPA
withdrew its petition, paving the way for possible regulation of mercury and
other hazardous air pollutant emissions through Section 112 of the Clean Air
Act, setting Maximum Achievable Control Technology standards for the utility
sector. In December 2009, Minnesota Power and other utilities received an
Information Collection Request from the EPA, requiring that emissions data be
provided and stack testing be performed in order to develop an improved database
with which to base future regulations. Cost estimates for complying with
potential future mercury and other hazardous air pollutant regulations under the
Clean Air Act cannot be estimated at this time.
Environmental
Matters (Continued)
Minnesota Mercury Emission Reduction
Act. This legislation requires Minnesota Power to file mercury emission
reduction plans for Boswell Units 3 and 4, with a goal of 90 percent reduction
in mercury emissions. The Boswell Unit 3 emission reduction plan was filed with
the MPCA in October 2006. Mercury control equipment has been installed and was
placed into service in November 2009. (See Item 1. Business – Regulated
Operations – Minnesota Public Utilities Commission – Emission Reduction Plans.)
A mercury emissions reduction plan for Boswell Unit 4 is required by July 1,
2011, with implementation no later than December 31, 2014. The legislation calls
for an evaluation of a mercury control alternative which provides for
environmental and public health benefits without imposing excessive costs on the
utility’s customers. Cost estimates for the Boswell Unit 4 emission reduction
plan are not available at this time.
Ozone. The EPA is attempting
to control, more stringently, emissions that result in ground level
ozone. In January 2010, the EPA proposed to reduce the eight-hour ozone
standard and to adopt a secondary standard for the protection of sensitive
vegetation from ozone-related damage. The EPA projects stating rules to address
attainment of these new, more stringent standards will not be required until
December 2013.
Climate Change. Minnesota
Power is addressing climate change by taking the following steps that also
ensure reliable and environmentally compliant generation resources to meet our
customer’s requirements.
|
·
|
Expand
our renewable energy supply.
|
|
·
|
Improve
the efficiency of our coal-based generation facilities, as well as other
process efficiencies.
|
|
·
|
Provide
energy conservation initiatives with our customers and demand side
efforts.
|
|
·
|
Support
research of technologies to reduce carbon emissions from generation
facilities and support carbon sequestration
efforts.
|
|
·
|
Achieve
overall carbon emission reductions.
|
The
scientific community generally accepts that emissions of GHGs are linked to
global climate change. Climate change creates physical and financial risk. These
physical risks could include, but are not limited to, increased or decreased
precipitation and water levels in lakes and rivers; increased temperatures; and
the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events. These all have the
potential to affect the Company’s business and operations.
Federal Legislation. We
believe that future regulations may restrict the emissions of GHGs from our
generation facilities. Several proposals at the Federal level to “cap” the
amount of GHG emissions have been made. On June 26, 2009, the U.S. House of
Representatives passed H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of
2009. H.R. 2454 is a comprehensive energy bill that also includes a
cap-and-trade program. H.R. 2454 allocates a significant number of emission
allowances to the electric utility sector to mitigate cost impacts on consumers.
Based on the emission allowance allocations, we expect we would have to purchase
additional allowances. We’re unable to predict at this time the value of these
allowances.
On
September 30, 2009, the Senate introduced S. 1733, the Senate version of H.R.
2454. This legislation proposes a more stringent, near-term greenhouse emissions
reduction target in 2020 of 20 percent below 2005 levels, as compared to the 17
percent reduction proposed by H.R. 2454.
Congress
may consider proposals other than cap-and-trade programs to address GHG
emissions. We are unable to predict the outcome of H.R. 2454, S. 1733, or other
efforts that Congress may make with respect to GHG emissions, and the impact
that any GHG emission regulations may have on the Company. We cannot predict the
nature or timing of any additional GHG legislation or regulation. Although we
are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs could have
a material impact on our financial results.
Greenhouse Gas Reduction. In
2007, Minnesota passed legislation establishing non-binding targets for carbon
dioxide reductions. This legislation establishes a goal of reducing statewide
GHG emissions across all sectors to a level at least 15 percent below 2005
levels by 2015, at least 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and at least 80
percent below 2005 levels by 2050.
Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Accord. Minnesota is also participating in the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Accord (the Accord), a regional effort to develop a multi-state
approach to GHG emission reductions. The Accord includes an agreement to develop
a multi-sector cap-and-trade system to help meet the targets established by the
group.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Reporting. In May 2008, Minnesota passed legislation that required the
MPCA to track emissions and make interim emissions reduction recommendations
towards meeting the State’s goal of reducing GHG by 80 percent by 2050. GHG
emissions from 2008 were reported in 2009.
We cannot
predict the nature or timing of any additional GHG legislation or regulation.
Although we are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs
could have a material impact on our financial results.
Environmental
Matters (Continued)
Climate
Change (Continued)
International Climate Change
Initiatives. The United States is not a party to the Kyoto Protocol,
which is a protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) that requires developed countries to cap GHG emissions at certain
levels during the 2008 to 2012 time period. In December 2009, leaders of
developed and developing countries met in Copenhagen, Denmark, under the UNFCCC
and issued the Copenhagen Accord. The Copenhagen Accord provides a mechanism for
countries to make economy-wide GHG emission mitigation commitments for reducing
emissions of GHG by 2020 and provide for developed countries to fund GHG
emissions mitigation projects in developing countries. President Obama
participated in the development of, and endorsed the Copenhagen
Accord.
EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Rule. On September 22, 2009, the EPA issued the final rule mandating that
certain GHG emission sources, including electric generating units, are required
to report emission levels. The rule is intended to allow the EPA to collect
accurate and timely data on GHG emissions that can be used to form future policy
decisions. The rule was effective January 1, 2010, and all GHG emissions must be
reported on an annual basis by March 31 of the following year. Currently, we
have the equipment and data tools necessary to report our 2010 emissions to
comply with this rule.
Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring
Rule. On October 27, 2009, the EPA issued the proposed Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring rule. This
proposed regulation addresses the six primary greenhouse gases and new
thresholds for when permits will be required for new and existing facilities
which undergo major modifications. The rule would require large industrial
facilities, including power plants, to obtain construction and operating permits
that demonstrate Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) are being used at
the facility to minimize GHG emissions. The EPA is expected to propose BACT
standards for GHG emissions from stationary sources.
For our
existing facilities, the proposed rule does not require amending our existing
Title V operating permits to include BACT for GHGs. However, modifying or
installing units with GHG emissions that trigger the PSD permitting requirements
could require amending operating permits to incorporate BACT to control GHG
emissions.
EPA Endangerment Findings. On
December 15, 2009, the EPA published its findings that the emissions of six GHG,
including CO2, methane,
and nitrous oxide, endanger human health or welfare. This finding may result in
regulations that establish motor vehicle GHG emissions standards in 2010. There
is also a possibility that the endangerment finding will enable expansion of the
EPA regulation under the Clean Air Act to include GHGs emitted from stationary
sources. A petition for review of the EPA’s endangerment findings was filed by
the Coalition for Responsible Regulation, et. al. with the United States
District Court Circuit Court of Appeals on
December 23, 2009.
Research and Study
Initiatives. We participate in several research and study initiatives
aimed at mitigating the potential impact of carbon emissions regulation on our
business. Through this research, we cannot be certain that carbon emissions will
be reduced or avoided through use of renewable energy sources or through
implementing efficiency and conservation efforts. In developing strategies for
our comprehensive approach to reducing our carbon emissions, we participate in
and fund organizations and studies.
As an
example, we commissioned a study with the University of Minnesota titled: Assessment of Carbon Flows
Associated with Forest Management and Biomass Procurement for the Laskin Biomass
Facility. This study was the first of its kind to comprehensively look at
the carbon lifecycle as it relates to burning biomass for electrical generation
in the region.
We
participate in the Electric Power Research Institute’s CoalFleet for Tomorrow
program, which reviews advanced clean coal generation and carbon capture
research and assessment. Similarly, we participate as a North Dakota Lignite
Interest member of the Canadian Clean Power Coalition. It also reviews advanced
clean coal technologies focusing on lower rank sub-bituminous and lignite fuel
energy conversion technologies and carbon control options. These provide
Minnesota Power the ability to assess what technologies will best fit the
economic fuels that are available in our region and when they may be
available.
We also
participate in research through the Plains CO2 Reduction
Partnership (PCOR). PCOR is looking at CO2 capture
technology through research conducted at the Energy and Environmental Research
Center, University of North Dakota. Minnesota Power is a partner, along with a
number of other utilities, technology providers, and consultants, to further
research on CO2 capture
techniques, operational issues and costs. The partnership is funded by the
members as well as the Department of Energy.
We cannot
predict whether our participation in any of these activities will result in a
benefit to ALLETE or impact the future financial position or results of
operations of the Company.
Water. The Federal Water
Pollution Control Act requires NPDES permits to be obtained from the EPA (or,
when delegated, from individual state pollution control agencies) for any
wastewater discharged into navigable waters. We have obtained all necessary
NPDES permits, including NPDES storm water permits for applicable facilities, to
conduct our operations. We are in material compliance with these
permits.
Environmental
Matters (Continued)
Solid and Hazardous Waste. The
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 regulates the management and
disposal of solid and hazardous wastes. We are required to notify the EPA of
hazardous waste activity and consequently, routinely submit the necessary
reports to the EPA. The Toxic Substances Control Act regulates the management
and disposal of materials containing polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB). In response
to the EPA Region V’s request for utilities to participate in the Great Lakes
Initiative by voluntarily removing remaining PCB inventories, Minnesota Power is
in the process of voluntarily replacing its remaining PCB capacitor banks. Known
PCB-contaminated oil in substation equipment was replaced by June 2007. We are
in material compliance with these rules.
Coal Ash Management
Facilities. Minnesota Power generates coal ash at all five of its steam
electric stations. Two facilities store ash in onsite impoundments (ash ponds)
with engineered liners and containment dikes. Another facility stores dry ash in
a landfill with an engineered liner and leachate collection system. Two
facilities generate a combined wood and coal ash that is either land applied as
an approved beneficial use, or trucked to state permitted landfills. Minnesota
Power continues to monitor state and federal legislative and regulatory
activities that may affect its ash management practices. The EPA is expected to
propose new regulations in February 2010 pertaining to the management of coal
ash by electric utilities. It is unknown how potential coal ash management rule
changes will affect Minnesota Power’s facilities. On March 9, 2009, the EPA
requested information from Minnesota Power (and other utilities) on its ash
storage impoundments at Boswell and Laskin. On June 22, 2009,
Minnesota Power received an additional EPA information request pertaining to
Boswell. Minnesota Power responded to both these information requests. On August
19, 2009, the Minnesota DNR visited both the Boswell and Laskin ash ponds. The
purpose of the inspection was to assess the structural integrity of the ash
ponds, as well as review operational and maintenance procedures. There were no
significant findings or concerns from the DNR staff during the
inspections.
Manufactured Gas Plant
Site. We are reviewing and addressing environmental conditions at a
former manufactured gas plant site within the City of Superior, Wisconsin, and
formerly operated by SWL&P. We have been working with the WDNR to
determine the extent of contamination and the remediation of contaminated
locations. At December 31, 2009, we have a $0.5 million liability for this
site, which was accrued on December 31, 2003, and a corresponding regulatory
asset as we expect recovery of remediation costs to be allowed by the
PSCW.
Employees
At
December 31, 2009, ALLETE had 1,474 employees, of which 1,411 were
full-time.
Minnesota
Power and SWL&P have an aggregate 614 employees who are members of the
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 31. Throughout
2009, Minnesota Power, SWL&P and IBEW Local 31 worked under contract
extensions of the agreements which expired on January 31, 2009. On April
10, 2009, IBEW Local 31 requested binding arbitration in accordance with the
provisions of the contracts which also provided Minnesota Power and SWL&P
with the protections of no strike clauses. Arbitration hearings took place
October 5, 2009, with final resolution for Minnesota Power occurring in January
2010. The terms of the agreement are retro active to February 1, 2009, and will
expire on January 31, 2012. SWL&P continues to work with its union
and the arbitrator to resolve the remaining differences between the
parties.
BNI Coal
has 137 employees, of which 100 are members of the IBEW Local 1593. BNI Coal and
IBEW Local 1593 have a labor agreement which expires on March 31,
2011.
Availability
of Information
ALLETE
makes its SEC filings, including its annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly
reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those
reports, available free of charge on ALLETE’s website www.allete.com, as soon as
reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with or furnished to
the SEC.
Executive
Officers of the Registrant
As of
February 12, 2010, these are the executive officers of ALLETE:
Executive Officers
|
Initial Effective Date
|
|
|
Donald J. Shippar, Age
60
|
|
Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer
|
May
12, 2009
|
Chairman,
President and Chief Executive Officer
|
January
1, 2006
|
President
and Chief Executive Officer
|
January
21, 2004
|
|
|
Alan R. Hodnik, Age
50
|
|
President
– ALLETE
|
May
12, 2009
|
Chief
Operating Officer – Minnesota Power
|
May
8, 2007
|
Senior
Vice President – Minnesota Power Operations
|
September
22, 2006
|
Vice
President – Minnesota Power Generation
|
May
1, 2005
|
|
|
Robert J. Adams, Age
47
|
|
Vice
President – Business Development and Chief Risk Officer
|
May
13, 2008
|
Vice
President – Utility Business Development
|
February
1, 2004
|
|
|
Deborah A. Amberg, Age
44
|
|
Senior
Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
|
January
1, 2006
|
Vice
President, General Counsel and Secretary
|
March
8, 2004
|
|
|
Steven Q. DeVinck, Age
50
|
|
Controller
and Vice President – Business Support
|
December
17, 2009
|
Controller
|
July
12, 2006
|
|
|
Mark A. Schober, Age
54
|
|
Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
July
1, 2006
|
Senior
Vice President and Controller
|
February
1, 2004
|
|
|
Donald W. Stellmaker,
Age 52
|
|
Treasurer
|
July
24, 2004
|
All of
the executive officers have been employed by us for more than five years in
executive or management positions. Prior to election to the positions shown
above, the following executives held other positions with the Company during the
past five years.
|
Mr. DeVinck was
Director of Nonutility Business Development, and Assistant Controller.
|
|
Mr. Hodnik was General
Manager of Thermal Operations.
|
There are
no family relationships between any of the executive officers. All officers and
directors are elected or appointed annually.
The
present term of office of the executive officers listed above extends to the
first meeting of our Board of Directors after the next annual meeting of
shareholders. Both meetings are scheduled for May 11, 2010.
Readers
are cautioned that forward-looking statements, including those contained in this
Form 10-K, should be read in conjunction with our disclosures under the heading:
“Safe Harbor Statement Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995” located on page 5 of this Form 10-K and the factors described below. The
risks and uncertainties described in this Form 10-K are not the only ones facing
our Company. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are not presently aware
of, or that we currently consider immaterial, may also affect our business
operations. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could
suffer if the concerns set forth below are realized.
Our
results of operations could be negatively impacted if our Large Power Customers
experience an economic down cycle or fail to compete effectively in the global
economy.
Our
ten Large Power Customers accounted for
approximately 23 percent of our 2009 consolidated operating revenue (36 percent
in 2008). One of these customers accounted for 8 percent of consolidated revenue
in 2009 (12.5 percent in 2008). These customers are involved in cyclical
industries that by their nature are adversely impacted by economic downturns and
are subject to strong competition in the global marketplace. An economic
downturn or failure to compete effectively in the global economy could have a
material adverse effect on their operations and, consequently, could negatively
impact our results of operations if we are unable to remarket at similar prices
the energy that would otherwise have been sold to such Large Power
Customers.
Our
operations are subject to extensive governmental regulations that may have a
negative impact on our business and results of operations.
We are
subject to prevailing governmental policies and regulatory actions, including
those of the United States Congress, state legislatures, the FERC, the MPUC, the
PSCW and the NDPSC. These governmental regulations relate to allowed rates of
return, financings, industry and rate structure, acquisition and disposal of
assets and facilities, operation and construction of plant facilities, recovery
of purchased power and capital investments, and present or prospective wholesale
and retail competition (including but not limited to transmission costs). These
governmental regulations significantly influence our operating environment and
may affect our ability to recover costs from our customers. We are required to
have numerous permits, approvals and certificates from the agencies that
regulate our business. We believe the necessary permits, approvals and
certificates have been obtained for existing operations and that our business is
conducted in accordance with applicable laws; however, we are unable to predict
the impact on our operating results from the future regulatory activities of any
of these agencies. Changes in regulations or the imposition of additional
regulations could have an adverse impact on our results of
operations.
Our
ability to obtain rate adjustments to maintain current rates of return depends
upon regulatory action under applicable statutes and regulations, and we cannot
provide assurance that rate adjustments will be obtained or current authorized
rates of return on capital will be earned. Minnesota Power and SWL&P from
time to time file rate cases with federal and state regulatory authorities. In
future rate cases, if Minnesota Power and SWL&P do not receive an adequate
amount of rate relief, rates are reduced, increased rates are not approved on a
timely basis or costs are otherwise unable to be recovered through rates, we may
experience an adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows. We are unable to predict the impact on our business and
operations results from future regulatory activities of any of these
agencies.
Our
operations could be adversely impacted by emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG)
that are linked to global climate change.
The
scientific community generally accepts that emissions of GHGs are linked to
global climate change. Climate change creates physical and financial risk. These
physical risks could include, but are not limited to, increased or decreased
precipitation and water levels in lakes and rivers; increased temperatures; and
the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events. These all have the
potential to affect the Company’s business and operations.
Our
operations could be adversely impacted by initiatives designed to reduce the
impact of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions such as carbon dioxide from our
generating facilities.
Proposals
for voluntary initiatives and mandatory controls to reduce GHGs such as carbon
dioxide, a by-product of burning fossil fuels, are being discussed within
Minnesota, among a group of Midwestern states that includes Minnesota, in the
United States Congress and worldwide. We currently use coal as the primary fuel
in 95 percent of the energy produced by our generating facilities.
We cannot
be certain whether new laws or regulations will be adopted to reduce GHGs and
what affect any such laws or regulations would have on us. If any new laws or
regulations are implemented, they could have a material effect on our results of
operations, particularly if implementation costs are not fully recoverable from
customers.
Risk
Factors (Continued)
The
cost of environmental emission allowances could have a negative financial impact
on our operations.
Minnesota
Power is subject to numerous environmental laws and regulations which cap
emissions and could require us to purchase environmental emissions allowances to
be in compliance. The laws and regulations expose us to emission allowance price
fluctuations which could increase our cost of operations. We are unable to
predict the emission allowance pricing, regulatory recovery or ratepayer impact
of these costs.
Our
operations pose certain environmental risks which could adversely affect our
results of operations and financial condition.
We are
subject to extensive environmental laws and regulations affecting many aspects
of our present and future operations, including air quality, water quality,
waste management, reclamation and other environmental considerations. These laws
and regulations can result in increased capital, operating and other costs, as a
result of compliance, remediation, containment and monitoring obligations,
particularly with regard to laws relating to power plant emissions. These laws
and regulations generally require us to obtain and comply with a wide variety of
environmental licenses, permits, inspections and other approvals. Both public
officials and private individuals may seek to enforce applicable environmental
laws and regulations. We cannot predict the financial or operational outcome of
any related litigation that may arise.
There are
no assurances that existing environmental regulations will not be revised or
that new regulations seeking to protect the environment will not be adopted or
become applicable to us. Revised or additional regulations which result in
increased compliance costs or additional operating restrictions, particularly if
those costs are not fully recoverable from customers, could have a material
effect on our results of operations.
We cannot
predict with certainty the amount or timing of all future expenditures related
to environmental matters because of the difficulty of estimating such costs.
There is also uncertainty in quantifying liabilities under environmental laws
that impose joint and several liability on all potentially responsible
parties.
The
operation and maintenance of our generating facilities involve risks that could
significantly increase the cost of doing business.
The
operation of generating facilities involves many risks, including start-up
risks, breakdown or failure of facilities, the dependence on a specific fuel
source, or the impact of unusual or adverse weather conditions or other natural
events, as well as the risk of performance below expected levels of output or
efficiency, the occurrence of any of which could result in lost revenue,
increased expenses or both. A significant portion of Minnesota Power’s
facilities were constructed many years ago. In particular, older generating
equipment, even if maintained in accordance with good engineering practices, may
require significant capital expenditures to keep operating at peak efficiency.
This equipment is also likely to require periodic upgrading and improvements due
to changing environmental standards and technological advances. Minnesota Power
could be subject to costs associated with any unexpected failure to produce
power, including failure caused by breakdown or forced outage, as well as
repairing damage to facilities due to storms, natural disasters, wars, terrorist
acts and other catastrophic events. Further, our ability to successfully and
timely complete capital improvements to existing facilities or other capital
projects is contingent upon many variables and subject to substantial risks.
Should any such efforts be unsuccessful, we could be subject to additional costs
and/or the write-off of our investment in the project or
improvement.
Our
electrical generating operations must have adequate and reliable transmission
and distribution facilities to deliver electricity to our
customers.
Minnesota
Power depends on transmission and distribution facilities owned by other
utilities, and transmission facilities primarily operated by MISO, as well as
its own such facilities, to deliver the electricity we produce and sell to our
customers, and to other energy suppliers. If transmission capacity is
inadequate, our ability to sell and deliver electricity may be hindered. We may
have to forego sales or we may have to buy more expensive wholesale electricity
that is available in the capacity-constrained area. In addition, any
infrastructure failure that interrupts or impairs delivery of electricity to our
customers could negatively impact the satisfaction of our customers with our
service.
Risk
Factors (Continued)
In
our operations the price of electricity and fuel may be volatile.
Volatility
in market prices for electricity and fuel may result from:
|
·
|
severe
or unexpected weather conditions;
|
|
·
|
changes
in electricity usage;
|
|
·
|
transmission
or transportation constraints, inoperability or
inefficiencies;
|
|
·
|
availability
of competitively priced alternative energy
sources;
|
|
·
|
changes
in supply and demand for energy;
|
|
·
|
changes
in power production capacity;
|
|
·
|
outages
at Minnesota Power’s generating facilities or those of our
competitors;
|
|
·
|
changes
in production and storage levels of natural gas, lignite, coal, crude oil
and refined products;
|
|
·
|
natural
disasters, wars, sabotage, terrorist acts or other catastrophic events;
and
|
|
·
|
federal,
state, local and foreign energy, environmental, or other regulation and
legislation.
|
Since
fluctuations in fuel expense related to our regulated utility operations are
passed on to customers through our fuel clause, risk of volatility in market
prices for fuel and electricity mainly impacts our wholesale power
sales.
We
are dependent on good labor relations.
We
believe our relations to be good with our 1,474 employees. Failure to
successfully renegotiate labor agreements could adversely affect the services we
provide and our results of operations. Currently, 714 of our employees are
members of either the IBEW Local 31 or Local 1593. The labor agreement with
Local 31 at Minnesota Power and SWL&P expired on January 31, 2009.
A new agreement between Minnesota Power and Local 31 went into effect in January
2010. The terms of the agreement are retroactive to February 1, 2009 and will
expire on January 31, 2012. SWL&P continues to work with its union and the
arbitrator to resolve the remaining differences between the parties. The labor
agreement with Local 1593 at BNI Coal expires on
March 31, 2011.
The current downturn in economic conditions
may continue to adversely affect our real estate investment.
The
ability of our real estate investment to generate revenue is directly related to
the Florida real estate market, the national and local economy in general and
changes in interest rates and the availability of credit. While conditions in
the Florida real estate market may fluctuate over the long-term, continued
demand for land is dependent on long-term prospects for strong, in-migration
population expansion.
Our
real estate investment is subject to extensive regulation through Florida laws
regulating planning and land development which makes it difficult and expensive
for us to conduct our operations.
Development
of real property in Florida entails an extensive approval process involving
overlapping regulatory jurisdictions. Real estate projects must generally comply
with the provisions of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land
Development Regulation Act (Growth Management Act). In addition,
development projects that exceed certain specified regulatory thresholds require
approval of a comprehensive DRI application. The Growth Management Act, in some
instances, can significantly affect the ability of developers to obtain local
government approval in Florida. In many areas, infrastructure funding has not
kept pace with growth. As a result, substandard facilities and services can
delay or prevent the issuance of permits. Consequently, the Growth Management
Act could adversely affect the cost of and our ability to develop future real
estate projects. Changes in the Growth Management Act or DRI review process or
the enactment of new laws regarding the development of real property could
adversely affect our ability to develop future real estate
projects.
Market
performance and other changes could decrease the value of pension and
postretirement health benefit plan assets, which then could require significant
additional funding and increase annual expense.
The
performance of the capital markets affects the values of the assets that are
held in trust to satisfy future obligations under our pension and postretirement
benefit plans. We have significant obligations to these plans and the Company
holds significant assets in these trusts. These assets are subject to market
fluctuations and will yield uncertain returns, which may fall below our
projected rates of return. A decline in the market value of the pension and
postretirement benefit plan assets will increase the funding requirements under
our benefit plans if the actual asset returns do not recover. Additionally, our
pension and postretirement benefit plan liabilities are sensitive to changes in
interest rates. As interest rates decrease, the liabilities increase,
potentially increasing benefit expense and funding requirements.
Risk
Factors (Continued)
If
we are not able to retain our executive officers and key employees, we may not
be able to implement our business strategy and our business could
suffer.
The
success of our business heavily depends on the leadership of our executive
officers, all of whom are employees-at-will and none of whom are subject to any
agreements not to compete. If we lose the service of one or more of our
executive officers or key employees, or if one or more of them decides to join a
competitor or otherwise compete directly or indirectly with us, we may not be
able to successfully manage our business or achieve our business objectives. We
may have difficulty in retaining and attracting customers, developing new
services, negotiating favorable agreements with customers and providing
acceptable levels of customer service.
We
rely on access to financing sources and capital markets. If we do not have
access to sufficient capital in the amount and at the times needed, our ability
to execute our business plans, make capital expenditures or pursue acquisitions
that we may otherwise rely on for future growth could be impaired.
We rely
on access to capital markets as sources of liquidity for capital requirements
not satisfied by our cash flow from operations. If we are not able to access
capital on satisfactory terms, the ability to implement our business plans may
be adversely affected. Market disruptions or a downgrade of our credit ratings
may increase the cost of borrowing or adversely affect our ability to access
financial markets. Such disruptions could include a severe prolonged economic
downturn, the bankruptcy of non-affiliated industry leaders in the same line of
business or financial services sector, deterioration in capital market
conditions, or volatility in commodity prices.
Item
1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
Properties
are included in the discussion of our businesses in Item 1 and are incorporated
by reference herein.
Item
3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
Material
legal and regulatory proceedings are included in the discussion of our
businesses in Item 1 and are incorporated by reference herein.
We are
involved in litigation arising in the normal course of business. Also in the
normal course of business, we are involved in tax, regulatory and other
governmental audits, inspections, investigations and other proceedings that
involve state and federal taxes, safety, compliance with regulations, rate base
and cost of service issues, among other things. We do not expect the outcome of
these matters to have a material effect on our financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security
Holders
|
No
matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during 2009.
Part
II
Item
5.
|
Market
for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Our
common stock is listed on the NYSE under the symbol ALE. We have paid dividends,
without interruption, on our common stock since 1948. A quarterly dividend of
$0.44 per share on our common stock will be paid on March 1, 2010, to the
holders of record on February 15, 2010.
The
following table shows dividends declared per share, and the high and low prices
for our common stock for the periods indicated as reported by the
NYSE:
|
2009
|
2008
|
|
Price
Range
|
Dividends
|
Price
Range
|
Dividends
|
Quarter
|
High
|
Low
|
Declared
|
High
|
Low
|
Declared
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
$33.27
|
$23.35
|
$0.44
|
$39.86
|
$33.76
|
$0.43
|
Second
|
29.14
|
24.45
|
0.44
|
46.11
|
38.82
|
0.43
|
Third
|
34.57
|
27.75
|
0.44
|
49.00
|
38.05
|
0.43
|
Fourth
|
35.29
|
32.23
|
0.44
|
44.63
|
28.28
|
0.43
|
Annual
Total
|
|
|
$1.76
|
|
|
$1.72
|
At
February 1, 2010, there were approximately 29,000 common stock shareholders of
record.
Common Stock Repurchases. We
did not repurchase any ALLETE common stock during 2009.
Item
6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Millions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
Revenue
|
$759.1
|
|
$801.0
|
|
$841.7
|
|
$767.1
|
|
$737.4
|
|
Operating
Expenses
|
653.1
|
|
679.2
|
|
710.0
|
|
628.8
|
|
692.3
|
(e)
|
Income
from Continuing Operations Before Non-Controlling Interest – Net of
Tax
|
60.7
|
|
83.0
|
|
89.5
|
|
81.9
|
|
20.3
|
(e)
|
Income
(Loss) from Discontinued Operations – Net of Tax
|
–
|
|
–
|
|
–
|
|
(0.9)
|
|
(4.3)
|
(e)
|
Net
Income
|
60.7
|
|
83.0
|
|
89.5
|
|
81.0
|
|
16.0
|
|
Less:
Non-Controlling Interest in Subsidiaries
|
(0.3)
|
|
0.5
|
|
1.9
|
|
4.6
|
|
2.7
|
|
Net
Income Attributable to ALLETE
|
61.0
|
|
82.5
|
|
87.6
|
|
76.4
|
|
13.3
|
|
Common
Stock Dividends
|
56.5
|
|
50.4
|
|
44.3
|
|
40.7
|
|
34.4
|
|
Earnings
Retained in (Distributed from) Business
|
$4.5
|
|
$32.1
|
|
$43.3
|
|
$35.7
|
|
$(21.1)
|
|
Shares
Outstanding – Millions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year-End
|
35.2
|
|
32.6
|
|
30.8
|
|
30.4
|
|
30.1
|
|
Average (a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
32.2
|
|
29.2
|
|
28.3
|
|
27.8
|
|
27.3
|
|
Diluted
|
32.2
|
|
29.3
|
|
28.4
|
|
27.9
|
|
27.4
|
|
Diluted
Earnings (Loss) Per Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
Operations
|
$1.89
|
|
$2.82
|
|
$3.08
|
|
$2.77
|
|
$0.64
|
(e)
|
Discontinued
Operations (b)
|
–
|
|
–
|
|
–
|
|
(0.03)
|
|
(0.16)
|
|
|
$1.89
|
|
$2.82
|
|
$3.08
|
|
$2.74
|
|
$0.48
|
|
Total
Assets
|
$2,393.1
|
|
$2,134.8
|
|
$1,644.2
|
|
$1,533.4
|
(d)
|
$1,398.8
|
|
Long-Term
Debt
|
695.8
|
|
588.3
|
|
410.9
|
|
359.8
|
|
387.8
|
|
Return
on Common Equity
|
6.9%
|
|
10.7%
|
|
12.4%
|
|
12.1%
|
|
2.2%
|
(e)
|
Common
Equity Ratio
|
57.0%
|
|
58.0%
|
|
63.7%
|
|
63.1%
|
|
60.7%
|
|
Dividends
Declared per Common Share
|
$1.76
|
|
$1.72
|
|
$1.64
|
|
$1.45
|
|
$1.245
|
|
Dividend
Payout Ratio
|
93%
|
|
61%
|
|
53%
|
|
53%
|
|
259%
|
(e)
|
Book
Value Per Share at Year-End
|
$26.39
|
|
$25.37
|
|
$24.11
|
|
$21.90
|
|
$20.03
|
|
Capital
Expenditures by Segment (c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regulated
Operations
|
$299.2
|
|
$317.0
|
|
$220.6
|
|
$107.5
|
|
$46.5
|
|
Investments
and Other
|
4.5
|
|
5.9
|
|
3.3
|
|
1.9
|
|
12.1
|
|
Discontinued
Operations
|
–
|
|
–
|
|
–
|
|
–
|
|
4.5
|
|
Total
Capital Expenditures
|
$303.7
|
|
$322.9
|
|
$223.9
|
|
$109.4
|
|
$63.1
|
|
(a)
|
Excludes
unallocated ESOP shares.
|
(b)
|
Operating
results of our Water Services businesses and our telecommunications
business are included in discontinued operations, and accordingly, amounts
have been restate for all periods
presented.
|
(c)
|
In
2008, we made changes to our reportable business segments in our
continuing effort to manage and measure performance of our operations
based on the nature of products and services provided and customers
served. (See Note 2. Business
Segments.)
|
(d)
|
Included
$86.1 million of assets reflecting the adoption of Plan Accounting –
Defined Benefit Pension Plans, and Health and Welfare Benefit
Plans.
|
(e)
|
Impacted
by a $50.4 million, or $1.84 per share, charge related to the assignment
of the Kendall County power purchase
agreement.
|
Item
7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
The
following discussion should be read in conjunction with our consolidated
financial statements and notes to those statements and the other financial
information appearing elsewhere in this report. In addition to historical
information, the following discussion and other parts of this report contain
forward-looking information that involves risks and uncertainties. Readers are
cautioned that forward-looking statements should be read in conjunction with our
disclosures in this Form 10-K under the headings: “Safe Harbor Statement Under
the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995” located on page 5 and
“Risk Factors” located in Item 1A. The risks and uncertainties described in this
Form 10-K are not the only ones facing our Company. Additional risks and
uncertainties that we are not presently aware of, or that we currently consider
immaterial, may also affect our business operations. Our business, financial
condition or results of operations could suffer if the concerns set forth in
this Form 10-K are realized.
Overview
Regulated Operations includes
our regulated utilities, Minnesota Power and SWL&P, as well as our
investment in ATC, a Wisconsin-based regulated utility that owns and maintains
electric transmission assets in parts of Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and
Illinois. Minnesota Power provides regulated utility electric service in
northeastern Minnesota to 144,000 retail customers and wholesale electric
service to 16 municipalities. Minnesota Power also provides regulated utility
electric service to 1 private utility in Wisconsin. SWL&P provides regulated
electric, natural gas and water service in northwestern Wisconsin to 15,000
electric customers, 12,000 natural gas customers and 10,000 water customers. Our
regulated utility operations include retail and wholesale activities under the
jurisdiction of state and federal regulatory authorities. (See Item 1. Business
– Regulated Operations – Regulatory Matters.)
Investments and Other is
comprised primarily of BNI Coal, our coal mining operations in North Dakota, and
ALLETE Properties, our Florida real estate investment. This segment also
includes a small amount of non-rate base generation, approximately 7,000 acres
of land available-for-sale in Minnesota, and earnings on cash and
investments.
ALLETE is
incorporated under the laws of Minnesota. Our corporate headquarters are in
Duluth, Minnesota. Statistical information is presented as of December 31, 2009,
unless otherwise indicated. All subsidiaries are wholly owned unless otherwise
specifically indicated. References in this report to “we,” “us” and “our” are to
ALLETE and its subsidiaries, collectively.
2009
Financial Overview
The
following net income discussion summarizes a comparison of the year ended
December 31, 2009, to the year ended December 31, 2008.
Net
income attributable to ALLETE for 2009 was $61.0 million, or $1.89 per diluted
share compared to $82.5 million, or $2.82 per diluted share for 2008. Earnings
per diluted share decreased approximately $0.19 compared to 2008 as a result of
additional shares of common stock outstanding in 2009. (See Note 12. Common
Stock and Earnings Per Share.)
Regulated Operations net
income attributable to ALLETE was $65.9 million in 2009 ($67.9 million in 2008).
The decrease is primarily attributable to lower net income at Minnesota Power
due to a 4.1 percent decrease in kilowatt-hour sales, higher depreciation and
interest expense, and the accrual of retail rate refunds related to 2008. These
decreases were partially offset by increased FERC-approved wholesale rates and
MPUC-approved current cost recovery revenue. In addition, 2009 reflected $1.4
million in additional after-tax earnings from our investment in ATC as a result
of additional investments made to fund our pro-rata share of ATC’s voluntary
capital contribution program.
Investments and Other
reflected a net loss attributable to ALLETE of $4.9 million in 2009 ($14.6
million of net income attributable to ALLETE in 2008). The decrease is primarily
attributable to a $6.5 million reduction in earnings at ALLETE Properties and
the absence of non-recurring items recorded in 2008. In 2009, ALLETE Properties
recorded a net loss of $4.7 million versus net income of $1.8 million in 2008.
In 2008, we recorded a $3.8 million non-recurring gain on the sale of certain
available-for-sale securities and $5.8 million in non-recurring tax benefits and
related interest due to the closing of a tax year and the completion of an IRS
review.
2009
Compared to 2008
See Note
2. Business Segments for financial results by segment.
Regulated
Operations
Operating
revenue decreased $30.4 million, or 4 percent, from 2008 due to lower
fuel and purchased power recoveries, lower retail and municipal kilowatt-hour
sales, lower natural gas revenue at SWL&P, and the accrual of prior year
retail rate refunds related to our 2008 retail rate case. These decreases were
partially offset by higher sales to Other Power Suppliers, higher FERC-approved
wholesale rates and increased revenue from MPUC-approved current cost recovery
riders.
Lower
fuel and purchased power recoveries along with a decrease in retail and
municipal kilowatt-hour sales combined for a total revenue reduction of $116.2
million. Fuel and purchased power recoveries decreased due to a reduction in
fuel and purchased power expense. (See Fuel and Purchased Power Expense.) Total
kilowatt-hour sales to retail and municipal customers decreased 26 percent from
2008 primarily due to idled production lines and temporary closures at some of
our taconite customers’ plants.
Natural
gas revenue at SWL&P was lower by $7.8 million due to a 27 percent decrease
in the price of natural gas and a 9 percent decline in sales. Natural gas
revenue is primarily a flow-through of the natural gas costs. (See Operating and
Maintenance Expense.)
Prior
year retail rate refunds resulting from the 2009 MPUC Order and August 2009
Reconsideration Order were recorded in 2009 and resulted in a reduction in
revenues of $7.6 million.
The
decrease in kilowatt-hour sales to retail and municipal customers has been
partially offset by revenue from marketing the power to Other Power Suppliers,
which increased $77.2 million in 2009. Sales to Other Power Suppliers are sold
at market-based prices into the MISO market on a daily basis or through
bilateral agreements of various durations.
Higher
rates from the March 1, 2008, and February 1, 2009, FERC-approved wholesale rate
increases for our municipal customers increased revenue by $13.2
million.
MPUC-approved
current cost recovery rider revenue increased $10.4 million in 2009 from 2008
primarily due to increased capital expenditures related to our Boswell Unit 3
emission reduction plan.
Kilowatt-hours
Sold
|
2009
|
2008
|
Quantity
Variance
|
%
Variance
|
Millions
|
|
|
|
|
Regulated
Utility
|
|
|
|
|
Retail
and Municipals
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
1,164
|
1,172
|
(8)
|
(0.7)
%
|
Commercial
|
1,420
|
1,454
|
(34)
|
(2.3)
%
|
Industrial
|
4,475
|
7,192
|
(2,717)
|
(37.8)
%
|
Municipals
|
992
|
1,002
|
(10)
|
(1.0)
%
|
Total
Retail and Municipals
|
8,051
|
10,820
|
(2,769)
|
(25.6)
%
|
Other
Power Suppliers
|
4,056
|
1,800
|
2,256
|
125.3
%
|
Total
Regulated Utility Kilowatt-hours
Sold
|
12,107
|
12,620
|
(513)
|
(4.1)
%
|
Revenue
from electric sales to taconite customers accounted for 15 percent of
consolidated operating revenue in 2009 (26 percent in 2008). The decrease in
revenue from our taconite customers was partially offset by revenue from
electric sales to Other Power Suppliers, which accounted for 20 percent of
consolidated operating revenue in 2009 (10 percent in 2008). Revenue from
electric sales to paper and pulp mills accounted for 9 percent of consolidated
operating revenue in 2009 (9 percent in 2008). Revenue from electric sales to
pipelines and other industrials accounted for 7 percent of consolidated
operating revenue in 2009 (7 percent in 2008).
Operating
expenses decreased $20.1 million, or 3 percent, from 2008.
Fuel and Purchased Power
Expense decreased $26.1 million, or 9 percent, from 2008 due to decreased
power generation attributable to lower kilowatt-hour sales, as well as a
reduction in wholesale electricity prices. Minnesota Power’s coal generating
fleet produced fewer kilowatt-hours of electricity due to planned outages to
implement environmental retrofits and to respond to decreased demand from our
taconite customers.
Operating and Maintenance
Expense decreased $3.5 million from 2008 primarily due to $7.4 million in
lower natural gas costs at SWL&P from a decline in the price and quantity of
natural gas purchased. This decrease was partially offset by increased salaries
and benefits costs, rate case expenses and plant maintenance.
2009
Compared to 2008 (Continued)
Regulated
Operations (Continued)
Depreciation Expense
increased $9.5 million, or 19 percent, from 2008 reflecting higher
property, plant and equipment balances placed in service.
Interest expense
increased $4.3 million, or 18 percent, from 2008 primarily due to
additional long-term debt issued to fund new capital investments and $0.5
million related to retail rate refunds.
Equity
earnings increased $2.2 million, or 14 percent, from 2008 reflecting
higher earnings from our increased investment in ATC. (See Note 6. Investment in
ATC.)
Investments
and Other
Operating
revenue decreased $11.5 million, or 13 percent, from 2008 primarily due
to a $14.3 million reduction in sales revenue at ALLETE Properties. In 2009,
ALLETE Properties sold approximately 35 acres of properties located outside of
our three main development projects for $3.8 million; no other sales were made
in 2009 due to the continued lack of demand for our properties as a result of
poor real estate market conditions in Florida. In 2008, ALLETE Properties sold
approximately 219 acres of property located outside of our three main
development projects for $6.3 million and recognized $3.7 million of previously
deferred revenue under percentage of completion accounting. Revenue at ALLETE
Properties in 2008 also included a pre-tax gain of $4.5 million from the sale of
a retail shopping center in Winter Haven, Florida.
ALLETE
Properties
|
2009
|
2008
|
Revenue
and Sales Activity
|
Quantity
|
Amount
|
Quantity
|
Amount
|
Dollars
in Millions
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
from Land Sales
|
|
|
|
|
Acres
(a)
|
35
|
$3.8
|
219
|
$6.3
|
Contract
Sales Price (b)
|
|
3.8
|
|
6.3
|
Revenue
Recognized from Previously Deferred Sales
|
|
–
|
|
3.7
|
Revenue
from Land Sales
|
|
3.8
|
|
10.0
|
Other
Revenue (c)
|
|
0.2
|
|
8.3
|
Total
ALLETE Properties Revenue
|
|
$4.0
|
|
$18.3
|
(a)
|
Acreage
amounts are shown on a gross basis, including wetlands and non-controlling
interest.
|
(b)
|
Reflected
total contract sales price on closed land transactions. Land sales are
recorded using a percentage-of-completion method. (See Note 1. Operations
and Significant Accounting
Policies.)
|
(c)
|
Included
a $4.5 million pre-tax gain from the sale of a shopping center in Winter
Haven, Florida in 2008.
|
BNI Coal,
which operates under a cost-plus contract, recorded additional revenue of $5.6
million as a result of higher expenses. (See Operating Expenses.)
Operating
expenses decreased $6.0 million, or 7 percent, from 2008 reflecting lower
fuel costs at our non-regulated generating facilities and decreased expense at
ALLETE Properties due to both lower cost of land sold and reductions in general
and administrative expenses. Expenses incurred as a result of a planned
maintenance outage at a non-regulated generating facility in the third quarter
of 2008 also contributed to the decrease in 2009. Partially offsetting these
decreases was an increase in expense at BNI Coal due to higher permitting costs
relating to mining expansion, a warranty credit in 2008, and dragline repairs in
2009. These costs were recovered through the cost-plus contract. (See Operating
Revenue.)
Interest expense
increased $3.2 million from 2008 primarily due to a decrease in the
proportion of ALLETE interest expense assigned to Minnesota Power. We record
interest expense for Minnesota Power regulated operations based on Minnesota
Power’s authorized capital structure and allocate the balance to Investments and
Other. Effective August 1, 2008, the proportion of interest expense
assigned to Minnesota Power decreased to reflect the authorized capital
structure inherent in interim rates that commenced on that date. Interest
expense was also higher in 2009 as 2008 included a $0.6 million reversal of
interest expense previously accrued due to the closing of a tax
year.
Other income
(expense) decreased $16.0 million from 2008 primarily due to a $6.5
million pre-tax gain realized from the sale of certain available-for-sale
securities in the first quarter of 2008, lower earnings on excess cash in 2009
of $1.9 million, and $1.4 million of interest income related to tax benefits
recognized in the third quarter of 2008. Losses incurred on emerging technology
investments totaled $4.6 million in 2009, and were $3.9 million higher than
similar losses recorded in 2008.
2009
Compared to 2008 (Continued)
Income
Taxes – Consolidated
For the
year ended December 31, 2009, the effective tax rate was 33.7 percent (34.3
percent for the year ended December 31, 2008). The effective tax rate in each
period deviated from the statutory rate (approximately 41 percent for 2009) due
to deductions for Medicare health subsidies, AFUDC-Equity, investment tax
credits, wind production tax credits, and depletion. In addition, the effective
rate for 2009 was impacted by lower pre-tax income. In 2008, non-recurring tax
benefits due to the closing of a tax year and the completion of an IRS review
totaled $4.6 million.
2008
Compared to 2007
Regulated
Operations
Regulated Operations
contributed income of $67.9 million in 2008 ($62.4 million in 2007). The
increase in earnings is primarily the result of higher rates and higher income
from our investment in ATC. Higher rates resulted from a March 1, 2008, increase
in FERC-approved wholesale rates, an August 1, 2008, MPUC-approved interim rate
increase (subject to refund) for retail customers in Minnesota, and
MPUC-approved current cost recovery on our environmental retrofit projects.
These rate increases were partially offset by the expiration of sales contracts
to Other Power Suppliers, and higher operations and maintenance expense,
depreciation expense, and interest expense
Operating
revenue decreased $11.6 million, or 2 percent, from 2007 primarily due to
decreased fuel and purchased power recoveries and the expiration of sales
contracts to Other Power Suppliers. These decreases were partially offset by
higher rates and kilowatt-hour sales to retail and municipal
customers.
Fuel and
purchased power recoveries decreased due to a $42.0 million reduction in fuel
and purchased power expense. (See Fuel and Purchased Power Expense discussion
below.)
Revenue
from sales to Other Power Suppliers decreased $21.1 million from 2007 due to the
expiration of sales contracts.
Higher
rates resulted from the August 1, 2008, interim rate increase for retail
customers in Minnesota of approximately $13 million, current cost recovery on
our environmental retrofit projects of approximately $21 million, and the
March 1, 2008, increase in FERC-approved wholesale rates of
approximately $6 million.
Kilowatt-hour
sales to our retail and municipal customers increased 2 percent from 2007
primarily due to a 2 percent increase in industrial load. The increase in
industrial sales was primarily due to an idled production line and production
delays at one of our taconite customers in 2007. Total regulated utility
kilowatt-hour sales were down 2 percent as the expiration of sales contracts to
Other Power Suppliers more than offset the increased retail and municipal
sales.
Kilowatt-hours
Sold
|
2008
|
2007
|
Quantity
Variance
|
%
Variance
|
Millions
|
|
|
|
|
Regulated
Utility
|
|
|
|
|
Retail
and Municipals
|
|
|
|
|
Residential
|
1,172
|
1,141
|
31
|
2.7%
|
Commercial
|
1,454
|
1,457
|
(3)
|
(0.2)%
|
Industrial
|
7,192
|
7,054
|
138
|
2.0%
|
Municipals
|
1,002
|
1,008
|
(6)
|
(0.6)%
|
Total
Retail and Municipals
|
10,820
|
10,660
|
160
|
1.5%
|
Other
Power Suppliers
|
1,800
|
2,157
|
(357)
|
(16.6)%
|
Total
Regulated Utility Kilowatt-hours
Sold
|
12,620
|
12,817
|
(197)
|
(1.5)%
|
Revenue
from electric sales to taconite customers accounted for 26 percent of
consolidated operating revenue in 2008 (24 percent in 2007). Revenue from
electric sales to paper and pulp mills accounted for 9 percent of consolidated
operating revenue in 2008 (9 percent in 2007). Revenue from electric sales to
pipelines and other industrials accounted for 7 percent of consolidated
operating revenue in 2008 (7 percent in 2007).
Operating
expenses decreased $25.1 million, or 4 percent, from 2007.
Fuel and Purchased Power
Expense decreased $42.0 million, or 12 percent, from 2007 primarily due
to a decrease in purchased power expense, as a result of higher electricity
production at the Company’s generation facilities. Megawatt-hour generation at
our facilities and Square Butte increased 9 percent over 2007.
2008
Compared to 2007 (Continued)
Regulated
Operations (Continued)
Operating and Maintenance
Expense increased $10.0 million, or 4 percent, over 2007 primarily due to
$3.3 million in increased natural gas purchases at SWL&P, reflecting a
colder 2008, $2.5 million higher salaries and wages, $1.8 million in increased
transmission costs, and $1.5 million in conservation improvement
costs.
Depreciation Expense
increased $6.9 million, or 16 percent, from 2007 reflecting higher
property, plant, and equipment balances placed in service and higher annual
depreciation rates for distribution and transmission effective
January 1, 2008.
Interest expense
increased $3.0 million, or 14 percent, from 2007 primarily due to higher
long-term debt balances from increased construction activity.
Equity
earnings increased $2.7 million, or 21 percent, from 2007 reflecting
higher earnings from our investment in ATC. (See Note 6. Investment in
ATC.)
Investments
and Other
Investments and Other reflected net income of
$14.6 million in 2008 ($25.2 million in 2007). The decrease in 2008 is primarily
due to lower net income at ALLETE Properties, which continues to experience
difficult real estate market conditions in Florida. This decrease was partially
offset by the sale of certain available-for-sale securities in the first quarter
of 2008, and tax benefits and related interest recognized in the third quarter
of 2008.
Operating
revenue decreased $29.1 million, or 25 percent, from 2007 primarily due
to a decrease in sales revenue at ALLETE Properties in 2008. ALLETE Properties
sold 219 acres of property in 2008 compared to 483 acres in 2007. In addition,
580,059 of non-residential square footage and 736 residential units were sold in
2007 compared to no non-residential or residential sales in 2008. Operating
revenue in 2008 included a pre-tax gain of $4.5 million for the sale of our
retail shopping center in Winter Haven, Florida in May 2008.
ALLETE
Properties
|
2008
|
2007
|
Revenue
and Sales Activity
|
Quantity
|
Amount
|
Quantity
|
Amount
|
Dollars
in Millions
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
from Land Sales
|
|
|
|
|
Non-residential
Sq. Ft.
|
–
|
–
|
580,059
|
$17.0
|
Residential
Units
|
–
|
–
|
736
|
14.8
|
Acres
(a)
|
219
|
$6.3
|
483
|
10.6
|
Contract
Sales Price (b)
|
|
6.3
|
|
42.4
|
Revenue
Recognized from Previously Deferred Sales
|
|
3.7
|
|
3.1
|
Deferred
Revenue
|
|
–
|
|
(1.2)
|
Revenue
from Land Sales
|
|
10.0
|
|
44.3
|
Other
Revenue (c)
|
|
8.3
|
|
6.2
|
Total
ALLETE Properties Revenue
|
|
$18.3
|
|
$50.5
|
(a)
|
Acreage
amounts are shown on a gross basis, including wetlands and non-controlling
interest.
|
(b)
|
Reflected
total contract sales price on closed land transactions. Land sales are
recorded using a percentage-of-completion method. (See Note 1. Operations
and Significant Accounting
Policies.)
|
(c)
|
Included
a $4.5 million pre-tax gain from the sale of a shopping center in Winter
Haven, Florida in 2008.
|
Operating
expenses decreased $5.7 million, or 6 percent, from 2007, primarily due
to a $4.8 million decrease in the cost of real estate sold in
Florida.
Interest
expense increased $0.7 million in 2008 primarily due to higher interest
expense at ALLETE, a portion of which is assigned to Minnesota Power and the
remainder is reflected in the Investments and Other segment.
Other income
increased $0.6 million, or 5 percent, from 2007 primarily due to a $6.5
million pre-tax gain realized from the sale of certain available-for-sale
securities in the first quarter of 2008 and interest income related to tax
benefits recognized in the third quarter of 2008. The gain was triggered when
securities were sold to reallocate investments to meet defined investment
allocations based upon an approved investment strategy. The increase was
partially offset by fewer gains from land sales in Minnesota during 2008, and
lower earnings on cash and short-term investments reflecting lower average cash
balances, and the 2007 release from a loan guarantee for Northwest Airlines,
Inc. of $1.0 million.
2008
Compared to 2007 (Continued)
Income
Taxes – Consolidated
For the
year ended December 31, 2008, the effective tax rate on income from continuing
operations before non-controlling interest was 34.3 percent (34.8 percent for
the year ended December 31, 2007). The effective tax rate in both years deviated
from the statutory rate (approximately 40 percent) primarily due to the
recognition of various tax benefits as well as deductions for Medicare health
subsidies, AFUDC-Equity, investment tax credits, and wind production tax
credits. In 2007, a tax benefit was realized as a result of a state income tax
audit settlement ($1.6 million). In 2008, non-recurring tax benefits due to the
closing of a tax year and the completion of an IRS review totaled $4.6
million.
Critical
Accounting Estimates
The
preparation of financial statements and related disclosures in conformity with
GAAP requires management to make various estimates and assumptions that affect
amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements. These estimates and
assumptions may be revised, which may have a material effect on the consolidated
financial statements. Actual results may differ from these estimates and
assumptions. These policies are discussed with the Audit Committee of our Board
of Directors on a regular basis. The following represent the policies we believe
are most critical to our business and the understanding of our results of
operations.
Regulatory Accounting. Our
regulated utility operations are subject to the guidance on accounting for the
effects of certain types of regulation. This guidance requires us to reflect the
effect of regulatory decisions in our financial statements. Regulatory assets or
liabilities arise as a result of a difference between GAAP and the accounting
principles imposed by the regulatory agencies. Regulatory assets represent
incurred costs that have been deferred as they are probable for recovery in
customer rates. Regulatory liabilities represent obligations to make refunds to
customers and amounts collected in rates for which the related costs have not
yet been incurred.
We
recognize regulatory assets and liabilities in accordance with applicable state
and federal regulatory rulings. The recoverability of regulatory assets is
periodically assessed by considering factors such as, but not limited to,
changes in regulatory rules and rate orders issued by applicable regulatory
agencies. The assumptions and judgments used by regulatory authorities may have
an impact on the recovery of costs, the rate of return on invested capital, and the
timing and amount of assets to be recovered by rates. A change in these
assumptions may result in a material impact on our results of operations. (See
Note 5. Regulatory Matters.)
Valuation of Investments. Our
long-term investment portfolio includes the real estate assets of ALLETE
Properties, debt and equity securities consisting primarily of securities held
to fund employee benefits, auction rate securities, and investments in emerging
technology funds. Our policy is to review these investments for impairment on a
quarterly basis by assessing such factors as continued commercial viability of
products, cash flow and earnings. Our consideration of possible impairment for
our real estate assets requires us to make judgments with respect to the current
fair values of this real estate. The poor market conditions for real estate in
Florida at this time require us to make certain assumptions in the determination
of fair values due to the lack of current comparable sales activity. Any
impairment would reduce the carrying value of our investments and be recognized
as a loss. In 2009, we recorded an impairment loss on these investments of $1.1
million pretax (none in 2008; $0.5 million pretax in 2007), primarily due to our
emerging technology funds. (See Note 7. Investments.)
Pension and Postretirement Health and
Life Actuarial Assumptions. We account for our pension and postretirement
benefit obligations in accordance with the accounting standards for defined
benefit pension and other postretirement plans. These standards require the use
of assumptions in determining our obligations and annual cost of our pension and
postretirement benefits. An important actuarial assumption for pension and other
postretirement benefit plans is the expected long-term rate of return on plan
assets. In establishing the expected long-term return on plan assets, we take
into account the actual long-term historical performance of our plan assets, the
actual long-term historical performance for the type of securities we are
invested in, and apply the historical performance utilizing the target
allocation of our plan assets to forecast an expected long-term return.
Our expected rate of return is then selected after considering the results of
each of those factors, in addition to considering the impact of current economic
conditions, if applicable, on long-term historical returns. Our pension asset
allocation at December 31, 2009, was approximately 53 percent equity, 28 percent
debt, 14 percent private equity, and 5 percent real estate. Our postretirement
health and life asset allocation at December 31, 2009, was approximately 54
percent equity, 38 percent debt, and 8 percent private equity. Equity securities
consist of a mix of market capitalization sizes with domestic and international
securities. We currently use an expected long-term rate of return of 8.5 percent
in our actuarial determination of our pension and other postretirement expense.
We review our expected long-term rate of return assumption annually and will
adjust it to respond to any changing market conditions. A one-quarter percent
decrease in the expected long-term rate of return would increase the annual
expense for pension and other postretirement benefits by approximately $1.3
million, pre-tax.
Critical
Accounting Estimates (Continued)
Pension
and Postretirement Health and Life Actuarial Assumptions
(Continued)
The
discount rate is computed using the Citigroup Pension Discount Curve adjusted
for ALLETE’s projected cash flows to match our plan characteristics. The
Citigroup Pension Discount Curve is determined using high-quality long-term
corporate bond rates at the valuation date. We believe the adjusted discount
curve used in this comparison does not materially differ in duration and cash
flows for our pension obligation. (See Note 16. Pension and Other Postretirement
Benefit Plans.)
Taxation. We are required
to make judgments regarding the potential tax effects of various financial
transactions and our ongoing operations to estimate our obligations to taxing
authorities. These tax obligations include income, real estate and sales/use
taxes. Judgments related to income taxes require the recognition in our
financial statements of the largest tax benefit of a tax position that is
“more-likely-than-not” to be sustained on audit. Tax positions that do not meet
the “more-likely-than-not” criteria are reflected as a tax liability in
accordance with the guidance for accounting for uncertainty in income taxes. We
must also assess our ability to generate capital gains to realize tax benefits
associated with capital losses. Capital losses may be deducted only to the
extent of capital gains realized during the year of the loss or during the two
prior or five succeeding years for federal purposes. We have recorded a
valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets associated with realized
capital losses to the extent it has been determined that it is
more-likely-than-not that some portion or all of the deferred tax asset will not
be realized.
Outlook
ALLETE is an energy company committed to
earning a financial return that rewards our shareholders, allows for
reinvestment in our businesses and sustains growth. To accomplish this, we
intend to take the actions necessary to earn our allowed rate of return in our
regulated businesses, while we pursue growth initiatives in renewable energy,
transmission and other energy-centric businesses.
We
believe that over the long term, wind energy will play an increasingly important
role in our nation’s energy mix. We intend to pursue the establishment of a
renewable energy business focused initially on developing wind assets in North
Dakota and the upper Midwest. We intend to develop wind resources which will be
used to meet renewable supply requirements of our regulated businesses as well
as wind resources that will be marketed to others. We will capitalize on our
existing presence in North Dakota through BNI Coal, our recently acquired DC
transmission line and our Bison 1 wind project. Through BNI Coal we have a
long-term business presence and established landowner relationships in North
Dakota. See page 38 for more discussion on the DC line acquisition and our Bison
I project. For projects to be marketed to others, we intend to secure long-term
power purchase agreements prior to construction of the wind generation
facilities. Establishment of the business is subject to appropriate MPUC
approvals.
We also
plan to make investments in upper Midwest transmission opportunities that
strengthen or enhance the regional transmission grid, or take advantage of our
geographical location between sources of renewable energy and end users. In
addition, we plan to make additional investments to fund our pro rata share of
ATC’s future capital expansion program. Minnesota Power is also participating
with other regional utilities in making regional transmission investments as a
member of the CapX2020 initiative. The CapX2020 initiative is discussed in more
detail on page 40.
We are
also exploring investing in other energy-centric businesses that will complement
an entrance into the renewable energy business, or leverage demand trends
related to transmission, environmental control or energy
efficiency.
ALLETE
intends to sell its Florida land assets at reasonable prices, over time or in
bulk transactions, and reinvest the proceeds in its growth initiatives. ALLETE
Properties does not intend to acquire additional real estate.
Regulated Operations.
Minnesota Power’s long-term strategy is to maintain its competitively
priced production of energy, reduce customer concentration exposure, comply with
environmental permit conditions and renewable requirements, and earn our allowed
rate of return. Keeping the production of energy competitive enables Minnesota
Power to effectively compete in the wholesale power markets, and minimizes
retail rate increases to help maintain the viability of its customers. As part
of maintaining cost competitiveness, Minnesota Power intends to reduce its
exposure to possible future carbon and GHG legislation by reshaping its
generation portfolio, over time, to reduce its reliance on coal. Minnesota Power
intends to reduce its customer concentration risk to reduce exposure to cyclical
industries; this may include restructuring commercial contracts, additional
sales to other regional power suppliers, and reshaping our power supply to be
more flexible to swings in customer demand. We will monitor and review
environmental proposals and may challenge those that add considerable cost with
limited environmental benefit. Current economic conditions require a very
careful balancing of the benefit of further environmental controls with the
impacts of the costs of those controls on our customers as well as on the
company, and its competitive position. We will pursue current cost recovery
riders to recover environmental and renewable investments, and will work with
our legislators and regulators to earn a fair return.
Rates.
Entities within our Regulated Operations segment file for periodic rate
revisions with the MPUC, the FERC or the PSCW.
Outlook
(Continued)
Rates
(Continued)
2008 Rate Case. In May 2008,
Minnesota Power filed a retail rate increase request with the MPUC seeking
additional revenues of approximately $40 million annually; the request also
sought an 11.15 percent return on equity, and a capital structure consisting of
54.8 percent equity and 45.2 percent debt. As a result of a May 2009 Order and
an August 2009 Reconsideration Order, the MPUC granted Minnesota Power a revenue
increase of approximately $20 million, including a return on equity of 10.74
percent and a capital structure consisting of 54.79 percent equity and 45.21
percent debt. Rates went into effect on November 1, 2009.
Interim
rates, subject to refund, were in effect from August 1, 2008 through October 31,
2009. During 2009, Minnesota Power recorded a $21.7 million liability for
refunds of interim rates, including interest, required to be made as a result of
the May 2009 Order and the August 2009 Reconsideration Order. In 2009, $21.4
million was refunded, with a remaining $0.3 million balance to be refunded in
early 2010; $7.6 million of the refunds required to be made were related to
interim rates charged in 2008.
With the
May 2009 Order, the MPUC also approved the stipulation and settlement agreement
that affirmed the Company’s continued recovery of fuel and purchased power costs
under the former base cost of fuel that was in effect prior to the retail rate
filing. The transition to the former base cost of fuel began with the
implementation of final rates on November 1, 2009. Any revenue impact associated
with this transition will be identified in a future filing related to the
Company’s fuel clause operation.
2010 Rate Case. Minnesota
Power previously stated its intention to file for additional revenues to recover
the costs of significant investments to ensure current and future system
reliability, enhance environmental performance and bring new renewable energy to
northeastern Minnesota. As a result, Minnesota Power filed a retail rate
increase request with the MPUC on November 2, 2009, seeking a return on equity
of 11.50 percent, a capital structure consisting of 54.29 percent equity and
45.71 percent debt, and on an annualized basis, an $81.0 million net increase in
electric retail revenue.
Minnesota
law allows the collection of interim rates while the MPUC processes the rate
filing. On December 30, 2009, the MPUC issued an Order (the Order)
authorizing $48.5 million of Minnesota Power’s November 2, 2009,
interim rate increase request of $73.0 million. The MPUC cited exigent
circumstances in reducing Minnesota Power’s interim rate request. Because the
scope and depth of this reduction in interim rates was unprecedented, and
because Minnesota law does not allow Minnesota Power to formally challenge the
MPUC’s action until a final decision in the case is rendered, on January 6,
2010, Minnesota Power sent a letter to the MPUC expressing its concerns about
the Order and requested that the MPUC reconsider its decision on its own motion.
Minnesota Power described its belief the MPUC’s decision violates the law by
prejudging the merits of the rate request prior to an evidentiary hearing and
results in the confiscation of utility property. Further, the Company is
concerned that the decision will have negative consequences on the environmental
policy directions of the State of Minnesota by denying recovery for statutory
mandates during the pendency of the rate proceeding. The MPUC has not acted in
response to Minnesota Power’s letter.
The rate
case process requires public hearings and an evidentiary hearing before an
administrative law judge, both of which are scheduled for the second quarter of
2010. A final decision on the rate request is expected in the fourth quarter. We
cannot predict the final level of rates that may be approved by the MPUC, and we
cannot predict whether a legal challenge to the MPUC’s interim rate decision
will be forthcoming or successful.
FERC-Approved Wholesale
Rates. Minnesota
Power’s non-affiliated municipal customers consist of 16 municipalities in
Minnesota and 1 private utility in Wisconsin. SWL&P, a wholly-owned
subsidiary of ALLETE, is also a customer of Minnesota Power. In 2008, Minnesota
Power entered into new contracts with these customers which transitioned
customers to formula-based rates, allowing rates to be adjusted annually based
on changes in cost. In February 2009, the FERC approved our municipal contracts
which expire December 31, 2013. Under the formula-based rates provision,
wholesale rates are set at the beginning of the year based on expected costs and
provide for a true-up calculation for actual costs. Wholesale rate increases
totaling approximately $6 million and $10 million annually were implemented on
February 1, 2009 and January 1, 2010, respectively, with approximately $6
million of additional revenues under the true-up provision accrued in 2009,
which will be billed in 2010.
2009 Wisconsin Rate
Increase. SWL&P’s
current retail rates are based on a December 2008 PSCW retail rate order that
became effective January 1, 2009, and allows for an 11.1 percent return on
equity. The new rates reflected a 3.5 percent average increase in retail utility
rates for SWL&P customers (a 13.4 percent increase in water rates, a 4.7
percent increase in electric rates, and a 0.6 percent decrease in natural gas
rates). On an annualized basis, the rate increase will generate approximately $3
million in additional revenue.
Industrial
Customers. Electric
power is one of several key inputs in the taconite mining, paper production, and
pipeline industries. In 2009, approximately 37 percent (57 percent in 2008), of
our Regulated Utility kilowatt-hour sales were made to our industrial customers,
which includes the taconite, paper and pulp, and pipeline
industries.
Beginning
in the fall of 2008, worldwide steel makers began to dramatically cut steel
production in response to reduced demand driven largely by the global credit
concerns. United States raw steel production ran at approximately 50 percent of
capacity in 2009, reflecting poor demand in automobiles, durable goods, and
structural and other steel products.
Outlook
(Continued)
Industrial
Customers (Continued)
In late
2008, Minnesota taconite producers began to feel the impacts of decreased steel
demand, and reduced taconite production levels occurred in 2009. Annual taconite
production in Minnesota was approximately 18 million tons in 2009 (40 million
tons in 2008 and 39 million tons in 2007). Consequently, 2009 kilowatt-hour
sales to our taconite customers were lower by approximately 54 percent from 2008
levels, and we sold available power to Other Power Suppliers to partially
mitigate the earnings impact of these lower taconite sales.
Raw steel
production in the United States is projected to improve in 2010, and is
estimated to run at approximately 60 percent of capacity. As a result, Minnesota
Power expects an increase in taconite production in 2010 compared to 2009,
although production will still be less than previous years’ levels. We will
continue to market available power to Other Power Suppliers in an effort to
mitigate the earnings impact of these lower industrial sales. Sales to Other
Power Suppliers are dependent upon the availability of generation and are sold
at market-based prices into the MISO market on a daily basis or through
bilateral agreements of various durations. We can make no assurances that our
power marketing efforts will fully offset the reduced earnings resulting from
lower demand nominations from our industrial customers.
Minnesota
Power’s paper and pulp customers ran at, or very near, full capacity for the
majority of 2009, despite the fact that the industry as a whole experienced the
impacts of the global recession in reduced sales of nearly every paper grade.
Federal tax credits provided a subsidy for paper producers which allowed them to
remain competitive. Minnesota Power’s paper and pulp customers benefited from
the temporary or permanent idling of competitor plants both in North America and
in Europe, as well as continued strength of the Canadian dollar and the Euro
which has reduced imports both from Canada and Europe.
Our
pipeline customers continued to operate at near capacity levels. As Western
Canadian oil sands reserves continue to develop and expand, pipeline operators
served by the Company are executing expansion plans to transport Western
Canadian crude oil reserves (Alberta Oil Sands) to United States markets. Access
to traditional Midwest markets is being expanded to Southern markets as the
Canadian supply is displacing domestic production and deliveries imported from
the Gulf Coast. We believe we are strategically positioned to serve these
expanding pipeline facilities.
Prospective Additional
Load. Several
companies in northeastern Minnesota continue to progress in development of
natural resource based projects that represent long-term growth potential and
load diversity for Minnesota Power. These potential projects are in the ferrous
and non-ferrous mining and steel industries. These projects include PolyMet
Mining Corporation (PolyMet), Mesabi Nugget Delaware, LLC (Mesabi Nugget), and
United States Steel Corporation’s expansion at its Keewatin Taconite facility.
Additionally, Essar Steel Limited Minnesota (Essar), continues to work with
local agencies on infrastructure development for its taconite mine, direct
reduction iron-making facility, and steel mill within the Nashwauk, MN municipal
utility service boundary.
PolyMet. Minnesota Power has
executed a long-term contract with PolyMet, a new industrial customer planning
to start a copper-nickel and precious metal (non-ferrous) mining operation in
northeastern Minnesota. PolyMet is currently in the environmental
permitting process, and the public comment period on its Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS) closed on February 3, 2010. Assuming that the DEIS
is judged to be complete, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may issue a Statement of Adequacy by mid-year 2010,
with issuance of environmental permitting to follow. Should these events
occur, operations could begin in late 2011 and Minnesota Power will begin to
supply approximately 70 MW of power through a contract lasting at least through
2018.
Mesabi Nugget. The
construction of the initial Mesabi Nugget facility is essentially complete and
the first production occurred in January 2010. Steel Dynamics, Inc., the
principal owner of Mesabi Nugget, has indicated that commissioning and
production ramp-up activities will occur throughout 2010, with full production
levels expected to be reached during the year. Mesabi Nugget is currently
pursuing permits for taconite mining activities on lands formerly mined by Erie
Mining Company and LTV Steel Mining Company near Hoyt Lakes, MN. Assuming
receipt of environmental permits to mine by the end of 2010, mining activities
could begin in 2011, which would allow Mesabi Nugget to self-supply its own
taconite concentrates and would result in increased electrical loads. Minnesota
Power has a 15 MW long-term power supply contract with Mesabi Nugget lasting at
least through 2017.
Keewatin Taconite. In February 2008, United
States Steel Corporation announced its intent to restart a pellet line at its
Keewatin Taconite processing facility (Keetac). This pellet line, which has been
idled since 1980, could be restarted and updated as part of a $300 million
investment, bringing about 3.6 million tons of additional pellet making
capability to northeastern Minnesota. The public comment period for a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for the Keetac facility ended on January 26,
2010.
Outlook
(Continued)
Renewable
Energy. In
February 2007, Minnesota enacted a law requiring 25 percent of Minnesota Power’s
total retail energy sales in Minnesota come from renewable energy sources by
2025. The law also requires Minnesota Power to meet interim milestones of 12
percent by 2012, 17 percent by 2016, and 20 percent by 2020. Minnesota Power has
identified a plan to meet the renewable goals set by Minnesota and has included
this in the most recent filing of the IRP with the MPUC. The law allows the MPUC
to modify or delay a standard obligation if implementation will cause
significant ratepayer cost or technical reliability issues. If a utility is not
in compliance with a standard, the MPUC may order the utility to construct
facilities, purchase renewable energy or purchase renewable energy credits.
Minnesota Power was developing and making renewable supply additions as part of
its generation planning strategy prior to the enactment of this law and this
activity continues.
We are
executing our renewable energy strategy. In 2006 and 2007, we entered into two
long-term power purchase agreements for a total of 98 MWs of wind energy
constructed in North Dakota (Oliver Wind I and II). Taconite Ridge Wind I, our
$50 million, 25-MW wind facility located in northeastern Minnesota became
operational in 2008.
North Dakota Wind Project. On
December 31, 2009, we purchased an existing 250 kV DC transmission line from
Square Butte for $69.7 million. The 465-mile transmission line runs from Center,
North Dakota to Duluth, Minnesota. We expect to use this line to transport
increasing amounts of wind energy from North Dakota while gradually phasing out
coal-based electricity currently being delivered to our system over this
transmission line from Square Butte’s lignite coal-fired generating unit.
Acquisition of this transmission line was approved by the MPUC and the FERC. In
addition, the FERC issued an order on November 24, 2009, authorizing acquisition
of the transmission facilities and conditionally accepting, upon compliance and
other filings, the proposed tariff revisions, interconnection agreement and
other related agreements.
On July
7, 2009, the MPUC approved our petition seeking current cost recovery of
investments and expenditures related to Bison I and associated transmission
upgrades. We anticipate filing a petition with the MPUC in the first quarter of
2010 to establish customer billing rates for the approved cost recovery. Bison I
is the first portion of several hundred MWs of our North Dakota Wind Project,
which upon completion will fulfill the 2025 renewable energy supply requirement
for our retail load. Bison I, located near Center, North Dakota, will be
comprised of 33 wind turbines with a total nameplate capacity of 75.9 MWs and
will be phased into service in late 2010 and 2011.
On
September 29, 2009, the NDPSC authorized site construction for Bison I. On
October 2, 2009, Minnesota Power filed a route permit application with the NDPSC
for a 22 mile, 230 kV Bison I transmission line that will connect Bison I to the
DC transmission line at the Square Butte Substation in Center, North Dakota. An
order is expected in the first quarter of 2010.
Manitoba Hydro. Minnesota
Power has a long-term power purchase agreement with Manitoba Hydro expiring in
2015. (See Item 1. Business – Power Supply.) In addition, Minnesota Power is
currently negotiating definitive agreements on two additional purchased power
transactions with Manitoba Hydro: an initial purchase of surplus energy over the
next ten years, followed by an anticipated long-term purchase of a 250-MW
capacity and energy agreement beginning in approximately 2020. The 250-MW
long-term purchase will require construction of hydroelectric facilities in
Manitoba and major new transmission facilities between Canada and the United
States. Transmission studies and definitive agreement negotiations are ongoing.
Both purchases require MPUC approval.
Hibbard Renewable Energy Center.
On September 30, 2009, we purchased boilers and associated systems
previously owned by the City of Duluth. This facility was initially built in the
late 1930s as a coal burning power plant, and retrofitted to burn wood-based
biomass fuel as well as coal. Over time, Minnesota Power intends to invest
approximately $20 million to upgrade the boilers and associated systems to
increase biomass energy generation at the plant. Hibbard’s current generating
capacity is approximately 50 MWs. This purchase will help us achieve Minnesota’s
mandate of providing 25 percent of our retail energy from renewable resources by
2025.
Integrated
Resource Plan.
On October 5, 2009, Minnesota Power filed with the MPUC its 2010 Integrated
Resource Plan, a comprehensive estimate of future capacity needs within
Minnesota Power’s service territory. Minnesota Power does not anticipate the
need for new base load generation within the Minnesota Power service territory
over the next 15 years, and plans to meet estimated future customer demand while
achieving:
|
·
|
Increased
system flexibility to adapt to volatile business cycles and varied future
industrial load scenarios;
|
|
·
|
Reductions
in the emission of GHGs (primarily carbon dioxide);
and
|
|
·
|
Compliance
with mandated renewable energy
standards.
|
To
achieve these objectives over the coming years, we plan to reshape our
generation portfolio by adding 300 to 500 megawatts of renewable energy to our
generation mix, and exploring options to incorporate peaking or intermediate
resources. Our 76 MW Bison I Wind Project in North Dakota is expected to be in
service in late 2010 and 2011.
We
project average annual long-term growth of approximately one percent in electric
usage over the next 15 years. We will also focus on conservation and demand side
management to meet the energy savings goals established in Minnesota
legislation.
Outlook
(Continued)
Climate Change. Minnesota
Power is addressing climate change by taking the following steps that also
ensure reliable and environmentally compliant generation resources to meet our
customer’s requirements.
|
·
|
Expand
our renewable energy supply.
|
|
·
|
Improve
the efficiency of our coal-based generation facilities, as well as other
process efficiencies.
|
|
·
|
Provide
energy conservation initiatives with our customers and demand side
efforts.
|
|
·
|
Support
research of technologies to reduce carbon emissions from generation
facilities and support carbon sequestration
efforts.
|
|
·
|
Achieve
overall carbon emission reductions.
|
The
scientific community generally accepts that emissions of GHGs are linked to
global climate change. Climate change creates physical and financial risk. These
physical risks could include, but are not limited to, increased or decreased
precipitation and water levels in lakes and rivers; increased temperatures; and
the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events. These all have the
potential to affect the Company’s business and operations.
Federal Legislation. We
believe that future regulations may restrict the emissions of GHGs from our
generation facilities. Several proposals at the Federal level to “cap” the
amount of GHG emissions have been made. On June 26, 2009, the U.S. House of
Representatives passed H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of
2009. H.R. 2454 is a comprehensive energy bill that also includes a
cap-and-trade program. H.R. 2454 allocates a significant number of emission
allowances to the electric utility sector to mitigate cost impacts on consumers.
Based on the emission allowance allocations, we expect we would have to purchase
additional allowances. We’re unable to predict at this time the value of these
allowances.
On
September 30, 2009, the Senate introduced S. 1733, the Senate version of H.R.
2454. This legislation proposes a more stringent, near-term greenhouse emissions
reduction target in 2020 of 20 percent below 2005 levels, as compared to the 17
percent reduction proposed by H.R. 2454.
Congress
may consider proposals other than cap-and-trade programs to address GHG
emissions. We are unable to predict the outcome of H.R. 2454, S. 1733, or other
efforts that Congress may make with respect to GHG emissions, and the impact
that any GHG emission regulations may have on the Company. We cannot predict the
nature or timing of any additional GHG legislation or regulation. Although we
are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs could have
a material impact on our financial results.
Greenhouse Gas Reduction. In
2007, Minnesota passed legislation establishing non-binding targets for carbon
dioxide reductions. This legislation establishes a goal of reducing statewide
GHG emissions across all sectors to a level at least 15 percent below 2005
levels by 2015, at least 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, and at least 80
percent below 2005 levels by 2050.
Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Accord. Minnesota is also participating in the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Accord (the Accord), a regional effort to develop a multi-state
approach to GHG emission reductions. The Accord includes an agreement to develop
a multi-sector cap-and-trade system to help meet the targets established by the
group.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Reporting. In May 2008, Minnesota passed legislation that required the
MPCA to track emissions and make interim emissions reduction recommendations
towards meeting the State’s goal of reducing GHG by 80 percent by 2050. GHG
emissions from 2008 were reported in 2009.
We cannot
predict the nature or timing of any additional GHG legislation or regulation.
Although we are unable to predict the compliance costs we might incur, the costs
could have a material impact on our financial results.
International Climate Change
Initiatives. The United States is not a party to the Kyoto Protocol,
which is a protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) that requires developed countries to cap GHG emissions at certain
levels during the 2008 to 2012 time period. In December 2009, leaders of
developed and developing countries met in Copenhagen, Denmark, under the UNFCCC
and issued the Copenhagen Accord. The Copenhagen Accord provides a mechanism for
countries to make economy-wide GHG emission mitigation commitments for reducing
emissions of GHG by 2020 and provide for developed countries to fund GHG
emissions mitigation projects in developing countries. President Obama
participated in the development of, and endorsed the Copenhagen
Accord.
EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Rule. On September 22, 2009, the EPA issued the final rule mandating that
certain GHG emission sources, including electric generating units, are required
to report emission levels. The rule is intended to allow the EPA to collect
accurate and timely data on GHG emissions that can be used to form future policy
decisions. The rule was effective January 1, 2010, and all GHG emissions must be
reported on an annual basis by March 31 of the following year. Currently, we
have the equipment and data tools necessary to report our 2010 emissions to
comply with this rule.
Outlook
(Continued)
Climate
Change (Continued)
Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring
Rule. On October 27, 2009, the EPA issued the proposed Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring rule. This
proposed regulation addresses the six primary greenhouse gases and new
thresholds for when permits will be required for new facilities and existing
facilities which undergo major modifications. The rule would require large
industrial facilities, including power plants, to obtain construction and
operating permits that demonstrate Best Available Control Technologies (BACT)
are being used at the facility to minimize GHG emissions. The EPA is
expected to propose BACT standards for GHG emissions from stationary
sources.
For our
existing facilities, the proposed rule does not require amending our existing
Title V operating permits to include BACT for GHGs. However, modifying or
installing units with GHG emissions that trigger the PSD permitting requirements
could require amending operating permits to incorporate BACT to control GHG
emissions.
EPA Endangerment Findings. On
December 15, 2009, the EPA published its findings that the emissions of six GHG,
including CO2, methane,
and nitrous oxide, endanger human health or welfare. This finding may result in
regulations that establish motor vehicle GHG emissions standards in 2010. There
is also a possibility that the endangerment finding will enable expansion of the
EPA regulation under the Clean Air Act to include GHGs emitted from stationary
sources. A petition for review of the EPA’s endangerment findings was filed by
the Coalition for Responsible Regulation, et. al. with the United States
District Court Circuit Court of Appeals on
December 23, 2009.
Coal Ash
Management Facilities. Minnesota Power generates coal ash at all five of
its steam electric stations. Two facilities store ash in onsite impoundments
(ash ponds) with engineered liners and containment dikes. Another facility
stores dry ash in a landfill with an engineered liner and leachate collection
system. Two facilities generate a combined wood and coal ash that is either land
applied as an approved beneficial use, or trucked to state permitted landfills.
Minnesota Power continues to monitor state and federal legislative and
regulatory activities that may affect its ash management practices. The EPA is
expected to propose new regulations in February 2010 pertaining to the
management of coal ash by electric utilities. It is unknown how potential coal
ash management rule changes will affect Minnesota Power’s facilities. On March
9, 2009, the EPA requested information from Minnesota Power (and other
utilities) on its ash storage impoundments at Boswell and Laskin. On
June 22, 2009, Minnesota Power received an additional EPA information
request pertaining to Boswell. Minnesota Power responded to both these
information requests. On August 19, 2009, the Minnesota DNR visited both the
Boswell and Laskin ash ponds. The purpose of the inspection was to assess the
structural integrity of the ash ponds, as well as review operational and
maintenance procedures. There were no significant findings or concerns from the
DNR staff during the inspections.
CapX2020. Minnesota Power is a
participant in the CapX2020 initiative which represents an effort to ensure
electric transmission and distribution reliability in Minnesota and the
surrounding region for the future. CapX2020, which includes Minnesota’s largest
transmission owners, consists of electric cooperatives, municipals and
investor-owned utilities, and has assessed the transmission system and projected
growth in customer demand for electricity through 2020. Studies show that the
region's transmission system will require major upgrades and expansion to
accommodate increased electricity demand as well as support renewable energy
expansion through 2020.
Minnesota
Power intends to invest in two lines, a 250-mile 345 kV line between Fargo,
North Dakota and Monticello, Minnesota, and a 70-mile, 230 kV line between
Bemidji and Grand Rapids, Minnesota. The MPUC issued the Certificate of Need for
the 230 kV line in July 2009. The MPUC decision on the Route Permit
application is expected in 2010. Our total investment in these lines is expected
to be approximately $100 million. We intend to seek recovery of these costs
in a filing with the MPUC in the first quarter of 2010, under a Minnesota Power
transmission cost recovery tariff rider authorized by Minnesota legislation.
Construction of the lines is targeted to begin in late 2010 and may take up to
four years.
Emission
Reduction Plans.
We have made investments in pollution control equipment at our Boswell Unit 3
generating unit that reduces particulates, SO2, NOx and
mercury emissions to meet future federal and state requirements. This equipment
was placed in service in November 2009. During the construction phase, the MPUC
authorized a cash return on construction work in progress in lieu of AFUDC, and
this amount was collected through a current cost recovery rider. Our 2010 rate
case proposes to move this project from a current cost recovery rider to base
rates.
The
environmental regulatory requirements for Taconite Harbor Unit 3 are pending
approval of the Minnesota Regional Haze implementation by the EPA. We are
evaluating compliance requirements for this Unit. Environmental retrofits at
Laskin and Taconite Harbor Units 1 and 2 have been completed and are
in-service.
Boswell
NOX Reduction
Plan. In September 2008, we submitted to the MPCA and MPUC a $92 million
environmental initiative proposing cost recovery for expenditures relating to
NOX
emission reductions from Boswell Units 1, 2, and 4. The Boswell NOX Reduction
Plan is expected to significantly reduce NOX emissions
from these units. In conjunction with the NOX reduction,
we plan to make an efficiency improvement to our existing turbine/generator at
Boswell Unit 4 adding approximately 60 MWs of total output. The Boswell 1, 2 and
4, selective non-catalytic reduction NOX controls
are currently in service, while the Boswell 4 low NOX burners
and turbine efficiency projects are anticipated to be in service in late 2010.
Our 2010 rate case seeks recovery for this project in base
rates.
Outlook
(Continued)
Transmission. We have an approved cost
recovery rider in-place for certain transmission expenditures, and our current
billing factor was approved by the MPUC in June 2009. The billing factor allows
us to charge our retail customers on a current basis for the costs of
constructing certain transmission facilities plus a return on the capital
invested. Our 2010 rate case proposes to move completed transmission projects
from the current cost recovery rider to base rates.
Power Sales
Agreement. On October 29, 2009, Minnesota Power entered into an agreement
to sell Basin 100 MWs of capacity and energy for the next ten years. The
transaction is scheduled to begin in May 2010, following the expiration of two
wholesale power sales contracts on April 30, 2010. The Basin agreement contains
a fixed monthly schedule of capacity charges with an annual escalation
provision. The energy charge is based on a fixed monthly schedule and provides
for annual escalation based on our cost of fuel. The agreement allows us to
recover a pro-rata share of increased costs related to emissions that may occur
during the last five years of the contract. (See Item 3. Power
Marketing.)
Investment in
ATC. At December
31, 2009, our equity investment was $88.4 million, representing an approximate 8
percent ownership interest. ATC provides transmission service under rates
regulated by the FERC that are set in accordance with the FERC’s policy of
establishing the independent operation and ownership of, and investment in,
transmission facilities. ATC rates are based on a 12.2 percent return on common
equity dedicated to utility plant. ATC has identified $2.5 billion in future
projects needed over the next 10 years to improve the adequacy and reliability
of the electric transmission system. This investment is expected to be funded
through a combination of internally generated cash, debt, and investor
contributions. As additional opportunities arise, we plan to make additional
investments in ATC through general capital calls based upon our pro-rata
ownership interest in ATC. On January 29, 2010, we invested an additional $1.2
million in ATC. In total, we expect to invest approximately $2 million
throughout 2010. (See Note 6. Investment in ATC.)
Investments
and Other
BNI Coal. In 2009, BNI Coal sold
approximately 4.2 million tons of coal (4.5 million tons in 2008) and
anticipates similar sales in 2010.
ALLETE Properties. ALLETE Properties
represents our Florida real estate investment. Our current strategy for the
assets is to complete and maintain key entitlements and infrastructure
improvements without requiring significant additional investment, and sell the
portfolio over time or in bulk transactions. ALLETE intends to sell its Florida
land assets at reasonable prices when opportunities arise, and reinvest the
proceeds in its growth initiatives. ALLETE does not intend to acquire additional
Florida real estate.
Our two
major development projects are Town Center and Palm Coast Park. Ormond
Crossings, a third major project that is currently in the planning stage,
received land use approvals in December 2006. However, due to a change in the
Florida law that became effective in July 2009, those approvals are being
revised. It is anticipated that the City of Ormond Beach, FL will approve a new
Development Agreement for Ormond Crossings in the first quarter of 2010. The new
agreement will facilitate development of the project as currently planned.
Separately, Lake Swamp wetland mitigation bank was permitted on land that was
previously part of Ormond Crossings.
Summary
of Development Projects
|
|
Total
|
Residential
|
Non-residential
|
Land
Available-for-Sale
|
Ownership
|
Acres
(a)
|
Units
(b)
|
Sq.
Ft. (b,
c)
|
Current
Development Projects
|
|
|
|
|
Town
Center
|
80%
|
854
|
2,264
|
2,238,400
|
Palm
Coast Park
|
100%
|
3,143
|
3,154
|
3,555,000
|
Total
Current Development Projects
|
|
3,997
|
5,418
|
5,793,400
|
Proposed
Development Project
|
|
|
|
|
Ormond
Crossings
|
100%
|
2,924
|
(d)
|
(d)
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
Lake
Swamp Wetland Mitigation Project
|
100%
|
3,034
|
(e)
|
(e)
|
Total
of Development Projects
|
|
9,955
|
5,418
|
5,793,400
|
(a)
|
Acreage
amounts are approximate and shown on a gross basis, including wetlands and
non-controlling interest.
|
(b)
|
Estimated
and includes non-controlling interest. Density at build out may differ
from these estimates.
|
(c)
|
Depending
on the project, non-residential includes retail commercial, non-retail
commercial, office, industrial, warehouse, storage and
institutional.
|
(d)
|
A
development order that was approved by the City of Ormond Beach is being
replaced by a development agreement to facilitate development of Ormond
Crossings as currently planned. At build-out, we expect the project to
include 2,950 residential units, 4.87 million square feet of various types
of non-residential space and public
facilities.
|
(e)
|
Lake Swamp wetland mitigation
bank is a regionally significant wetlands mitigation bank that was
permitted by the St. Johns River Water Management District in 2008 and by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in December 2009. Wetland mitigation
credits will be used at Ormond Crossings and will also be available for
sale to developers of other projects that are located in the bank’s
service area.
|
Outlook
(Continued)
Investments
and Other (Continued)
Other
Land Available-for-Sale (a)
|
Total
|
Mixed
Use
|
Residential
|
Non-residential
|
Agricultural
|
Acres
(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Land
|
1,277
|
394
|
113
|
267
|
503
|
(a)
|
Other
land includes land located in Palm Coast, Lehigh, and Cape Coral,
Florida.
|
(b)
|
Acreage
amounts are approximate and shown on a gross basis, including wetlands and
non-controlling interest.
|
Long-term
finance receivables as of December 31, 2009, were $12.9 million, which included
$7.8 million due from an entity which filed for voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy
protection in June 2009. The estimated fair value of the collateral relating to
these receivables was greater than the $7.8 million amount due at December 31,
2009, and no impairment was recorded on these receivables; however, $0.3 million
of impairments was recorded on other receivables.
If a
purchaser defaults on a sales contract, the legal remedy is usually limited to
terminating the contract and retaining the purchaser’s deposit. The property is
then available for resale. In many cases, contract purchasers incur significant
costs during due diligence, planning, designing and marketing the property
before the contract closes, therefore they have substantially more at risk than
the deposit.
ALLETE
intends to sell its Florida land assets at reasonable prices when opportunities
arise. However, if weak market conditions continue for an extended period of
time, the impact on our future operations would be the continuation of little to
no sales while still incurring operating expenses such as community development
district assessments and property taxes. This could result in annual net losses
for ALLETE Properties similar to 2009.
Income Taxes. ALLETE’s aggregate
federal and multi-state statutory tax rate is approximately 41 percent for 2010.
On an ongoing basis, ALLETE has certain tax credits and other tax adjustments
that will reduce the statutory rate to the expected effective tax rate. These
tax credits and adjustments historically have included items such as investment
tax credits, wind production tax credits, AFUDC-Equity, domestic manufacturer’s
deduction, depletion, Medicare prescription reimbursement, as well as other
items. The annual effective rate can also be impacted by such items as changes
in income from operations before non-controlling interest and income taxes,
state and federal tax law changes that become effective during the year,
business combinations and configuration changes, tax planning initiatives and
resolution of prior years’ tax matters. We expect our effective tax rate to be
approximately 35 percent for 2010.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Liquidity Position. ALLETE is
well-positioned to meet the Company’s immediate cash flow needs. At December 31,
2009, we have a cash balance of approximately $26 million, $87.8 million of
unused lines of credit ($157.0 million net of $69.2 million drawn down as of
December 31, 2009), and a debt-to-capital ratio of 43 percent. In the first
quarter 2010, we expect to use proceeds from the sale of $80 million First
Mortgage Bonds to repay the amount drawn down on the line of
credit.
Capital Structure. ALLETE’s
capital structure for each of the last three years is as follows:
Year
Ended December 31
|
2009
|
%
|
2008
|
%
|
2007
|
%
|
Millions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
Equity
|
$929.5
|
57
|
$827.1
|
57
|
$742.6
|
63
|
Non-Controlling
Interest
|
9.5
|
–
|
9.8
|
1
|
9.3
|
1
|
Long-Term
Debt (Including Current Maturities)
|
701.0
|
43
|
598.7
|
42
|
422.7
|
36
|
Short-Term
Debt
|
1.9
|
–
|
6.0
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
|
$1,641.9
|
100
|
$1,441.6
|
100
|
$1,174.6
|
100
|
Liquidity
and Capital Resources (Continued)
Cash Flows. Selected
information from ALLETE’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows is as
follows:
Year
Ended December 31
|
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
Millions
|
|
|
|
Cash
and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period
|
$102.0
|
$23.3
|
$44.8
|
Cash
Flows from (used for)
|
|
|
|
Operating
Activities
|
137.4
|
153.6
|
124.2
|
Investing
Activities
|
(320.0)
|
(276.1)
|
(154.1)
|
Financing
Activities
|
106.3
|
201.2
|
8.4
|
Change
in Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
(76.3)
|
78.7
|
(21.5)
|
Cash
and Cash Equivalents at End of Period
|
$25.7
|
$102.0
|
$23.3
|
Operating Activities. Cash
from operating activities was $137.4 million for 2009 ($153.6 million for 2008;
$124.2 million for 2007). Cash from operating activities was lower in 2009
primarily due to lower net income, an increase in accounts receivable, and
higher deferred regulatory assets, partially offset by higher deferred tax and
depreciation expense. Accounts receivable increased due a receivable for 2009
income tax refunds primarily resulting from substantial income tax deductions
under the bonus depreciation provision of the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009 (the Act). Deferred regulatory assets increased due to the
collection of certain current cost recovery rider revenue attributable to 2009
being deferred into a later year. Deferred tax expense increased also due to the
bonus depreciation provisions of the Act, and depreciation expense increased in
conjunction with the increase in property, plant and equipment.
Cash from
operating activities was higher in 2008 than 2007 due to an increase in deferred
income tax expense and decreased working capital requirements, which was
partially offset by lower net income and higher contributions to defined benefit
pension and postretirement health plans (included in Other Liabilities on the
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows). Working capital requirements decreased
mainly due to lower uncollected purchased power costs (included in Prepayments
and Other on the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows). Deferred income tax
expense increased due to the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, and contributions to
defined benefit pension and postretirement health plans increased $15.6 million
during 2008.
Investing Activities. Cash
used for investing activities was $320.0 million for 2009 ($276.1 million for
2008; $154.1 million for 2007). Cash used for investing activities was
higher than 2008 reflecting increased capital additions to property, plant, and
equipment. Capital additions to property, plant, and equipment increased due to
the purchase of an existing 250 kV DC transmission line for $69.7 million offset
by a decrease in other capital additions because of the completion of some major
capital projects in 2008 and 2009. In addition, 2008 included higher net sales
of short-term investments and proceeds from the sale of assets (retail shopping
center) in Winter Haven, Florida.
Cash used
for investing activities was higher in 2008 than 2007 reflecting increased
capital additions to property, plant, and equipment which were partially offset
by the proceeds from the sale of assets (retail shopping center) in Winter
Haven, Florida. Capital additions to property, plant, and equipment increased
due to construction activity for environmental retrofit projects, AREA Plan
projects, Taconite Ridge, and additional investments in ATC.
Financing Activities. Cash
from financing activities was $106.3 million for 2009 ($201.2 million for
2008; $8.4 million for 2007). Cash from financing activities was lower in 2009
than 2008 due to less debt and common stock issuance. During 2009, $111.4
million of debt was issued, while in 2008 $198.7 million of debt was issued.
During 2009, proceeds from common stock issuances totaled $65.2 million, while
in 2008, proceeds from common stock issuances totaled $71.1 million. Lower debt
and common stock issuance in 2009 was a result of issuing capital in 2008 ahead
of the need for this capital.
Cash from
financing activities was higher in 2008 than 2007 primarily from the issuance of
debt for $198.7 million. In addition, common stock was issued for net proceeds
of $71.1 million. Financing activities increased to support our capital
expenditure program.
Working Capital. Additional
working capital, if and when needed, generally is provided by consolidated bank
lines of credit or the sale of securities or commercial paper. We have available
consolidated bank lines of credit aggregating $87.8 million, the majority of
which expire in January 2012. In addition, we have 0.4 million original issue
shares of our common stock available for issuance through Invest Direct, our
direct stock purchase and dividend reinvestment plan, and 3.3 million original
issue shares of common stock available for issuance through a Distribution
Agreement with KCCI, Inc. The amount and timing of future sales of our
securities will depend upon market conditions and our specific
needs.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources (Continued)
Securities. In January 2009,
we issued $42.0 million in principal amount of unregistered First Mortgage Bonds
(Bonds) in the private placement market. The Bonds mature January 15, 2019, and
carry a coupon rate of 8.17 percent. We have the option to prepay all or a
portion of the Bonds at our discretion, subject to a make-whole provision. The
Bonds are subject to additional terms and conditions which are customary for
this type of transaction. We are using the proceeds from the sale of the Bonds
to fund utility capital expenditures and for general corporate purposes. The
Bonds were sold in reliance on exemption from registration under Section 4(2) of
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, to institutional accredited
investors.
In
December 2009, we agreed to sell $80.0 million in principal amount of First
Mortgage Bonds (Bonds) in the private placement market in three series as
follows:
Issue
Date
(on
or about)
|
Maturity
|
Principal
Amount
|
Coupon
|
February
17, 2010
|
April
15, 2021
|
$15
Million
|
4.85%
|
February
17, 2010
|
April
15, 2025
|
$30
Million
|
5.10%
|
February
17, 2010
|
April
15, 2040
|
$35
Million
|
6.00%
|
We expect
to use the proceeds from the February 2010 sale of Bonds to pay down the
syndicated revolving credit facility, to fund utility capital investments or for
general corporate purposes.
We
entered into a Distribution Agreement with KCCI, Inc., originating in February
2008 and subsequently amended in February 2009, with respect to the issuance and
sale of up to an aggregate of 6.6 million shares of our common stock, without
par value. The shares may be offered for sale, from time to time, in accordance
with the terms of the agreement pursuant to Registration Statement No.
333-147965. During 2009, 1.7 million shares of common stock were issued under
this agreement resulting in net proceeds of $51.9 million. In 2008, 1.6 million
shares were issued for net proceeds of $60.8 million.
In March
2009, we contributed 463,000 shares of ALLETE common stock, with an aggregate
value of $12.0 million, to our pension plan. On May 19, 2009, we registered the
463,000 shares of ALLETE common stock with the SEC pursuant to Registration
Statement No. 333-147965.
In 2009,
we issued 0.4 million shares of common stock through Invest Direct, Employee
Stock Purchase Plan and Retirement Savings and Stock Ownership Plan resulting in
net proceeds of $13.3 million. These shares of common stock were registered
under the following Registration Statement Nos. 333-150681, 333-105225, and
333-124455, respectively.
Financial Covenants. Our
long-term debt arrangements contain customary covenants. In addition, our lines
of credit and letters of credit supporting certain long-term debt arrangements
contain financial covenants. The most restrictive covenant requires
ALLETE to maintain a ratio of its Funded Debt to Total Capital (as the
amounts are calculated in accordance with the respective long-term debt
arrangements) of less than or equal to 0.65 to 1.00 measured quarterly. As of
December 31, 2009, our ratio was approximately 0.41 to 1.00. Failure to meet
this covenant would give rise to an event of default if not cured after notice
from the lender, in which event ALLETE may need to pursue alternative sources of
funding. Some of ALLETE’s debt arrangements contain “cross-default” provisions
that would result in an event of default if there is a failure under other
financing arrangements to meet payment terms or to observe other covenants that
would result in an acceleration of payments due. As of December 31, 2009, ALLETE
was in compliance with its financial covenants.
Off-Balance Sheet
Arrangements. Off-balance sheet arrangements are discussed in Note 11.
Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources (Continued)
Contractual Obligations and
Commercial Commitments. Minnesota Power has contractual obligations and
other commitments that will need to be funded in the future, in addition to its
capital expenditure programs. The following is a summarized table of contractual
obligations and other commercial commitments at December 31,
2009.
|
Payments
Due by Period
|
Contractual
Obligations
|
|
Less
than
|
1
to 3
|
4
to 5
|
After
|
As
of December 31, 2009
|
Total
|
1
Year
|
Years
|
Years
|
5
Years
|
Millions
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term
Debt (a)
|
$1,172.1
|
$41.5
|
$196.6
|
$98.2
|
$835.8
|
Pension
and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans
|
194.1
|
36.6
|
105.4
|
52.1
|
–
|
Operating
Lease Obligations
|
89.1
|
8.8
|
26.4
|
15.8
|
38.1
|
Uncertain
Tax Positions (b)
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
Unconditional
Purchase Obligations
|
394.0
|
114.1
|
102.7
|
30.4
|
146.8
|
|
$1,849.3
|
$201.0
|
$431.1
|
$196.5
|
$1,020.7
|
(a)
|
Includes
interest and assumes variable interest rates in effect at December 31,
2009, remains constant through remaining
term.
|
(b)
|
Excludes
$9.5 million of noncurrent unrecognized tax benefits due to uncertainty
regarding the timing of future cash payments related to the guidance in
accounting for uncertain tax
positions.
|
Long-Term Debt. Our long-term
debt obligations, including long-term debt due within one year, represent the
principal amount of bonds, notes and loans which are recorded on our
consolidated balance sheet, plus interest. The table above assumes the interest
rate in effect at December 31, 2009, remains constant through the remaining
term. (See Note 10. Short-Term and Long-Term Debt.)
Pension and Other Postretirement
Benefit Plans. The funded status of the defined pension and other
postretirement benefit obligations refers to the difference between plan assets
and estimated obligations under the plans. The funded status may change over
time due to several factors, including contribution levels, assumed discount
rates and actual and assumed rates of return on plan assets.
Management
considers various factors when making funding decisions such as regulatory
requirements, actuarially determined minimum contribution requirements, and
contributions required to avoid benefit restrictions for the pension plans.
Estimated defined benefit pension contributions for years 2010 through 2014 are
expected to be up to $25 million per year, and are based on estimates and
assumptions that are subject to change. Funding for the other postretirement
benefit plans is impacted by utility regulatory requirements. Estimated
postretirement health and life contributions for years 2010 through 2014 are
approximately $11 million per year, and are based on estimates and assumptions
that are subject to change.
Unconditional Purchase Obligations.
Unconditional purchase obligations represent our Square Butte power
purchase agreements, minimum purchase commitments under coal and rail contracts,
and purchase obligations for certain capital expenditure projects. (See Note 11.
Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies.)
Under our
power purchase agreement with Square Butte that extends through 2026, we are
obligated to pay our pro rata share of Square Butte’s costs based on our
entitlement to the output of Square Butte’s 455-MW coal-fired generating unit
near Center, North Dakota. Minnesota Power’s payment obligation will be
suspended if Square Butte fails to deliver any power, whether produced or
purchased, for a period of one year. Square Butte’s fixed costs consist
primarily of debt service. The table above reflects our share of future debt
service based on our output entitlement of 50 percent. This debt service may be
reduced if the contingent power sales agreement with Minnkota Power goes into
effect in 2013. For further information on Square Butte see Note 11.
Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies.
We have
two wind power purchase agreements with an affiliate of NextEra Energy to
purchase the output from two wind facilities, Oliver Wind I and Oliver Wind II
located near Center, North Dakota. We began purchasing the output from Oliver
Wind I, a 50-MW facility, in December 2006 and the output from Oliver Wind II, a
48-MW facility in November 2007. Each agreement is for 25 years and provides for
the purchase of all output from the facilities. There are no fixed capacity
charges, and we only pay for energy as it is delivered to us.
Credit Ratings. Our securities
have been rated by Standard & Poor’s and by Moody’s. Rating agencies use
both quantitative and qualitative measures in determining a company’s credit
rating. These measures include business risk, liquidity risk, competitive
position, capital mix, financial condition, predictability of cash flows,
management strength and future direction. Some of the quantitative measures can
be analyzed through a few key financial ratios, while the qualitative ones are
more subjective. The disclosure of these credit ratings is not a recommendation
to buy, sell or hold our securities. Ratings are subject to revision or
withdrawal at any time by the assigning rating organization. Each rating should
be evaluated independently of any other rating.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources (Continued)
Credit
Ratings (Continued)
Credit
Ratings
|
Standard
& Poor’s
|
Moody’s
|
Issuer
Credit Rating
|
BBB+
|
Baa1
|
Commercial
Paper
|
A-2
|
P-2
|
Senior
Secured
|
|
|
First
Mortgage Bonds (a)
|
A–
|
A2
|
Unsecured
Debt
|
|
|
Collier
County Industrial Development Revenue Bonds – Fixed Rate
|
BBB
|
–
|
(a)
|
Includes
collateralized pollution control
bonds.
|
Common Stock Dividends. ALLETE
is committed to providing an attractive, secure dividend to its shareholders
while, at the same time, funding its growth strategy. The Company’s long-term
objective is to maintain a dividend payout ratio similar to our peers and
provide for future dividend increases. In 2009, we paid out 93 percent (61
percent in 2008; 53 percent in 2007) of our per share earnings in dividends. On
January 21, 2010, our Board of Directors declared a dividend of $0.44 per share,
unchanged from 2009, which is payable on March 1, 2010, to shareholders of
record at the close of business on February 15, 2010.
Capital
Requirements
ALLETE’s
projected capital expenditures for the years 2010 through 2014 are presented in
the table below. Actual capital expenditures may vary from the estimates due to
changes in forecasted plant maintenance, regulatory decisions or approvals,
future environmental requirements, base load growth or capital market
conditions.
Capital
Expenditures
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
2014
|
Total
|
Regulated
Utility Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Base
and Other
|
$156
|
$82
|
$81
|
$82
|
$89
|
$490
|
|
Current
Cost Recovery (a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental
|
2
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
2
|
|
|
Renewable
|
81
|
66
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
147
|
|
|
Transmission
|
5
|
21
|
27
|
42
|
13
|
108
|
|
|
Generation
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
–
|
|
Total
Current Cost Recovery
|
88
|
87
|
27
|
42
|
13
|
257
|
Regulated
Utility Capital Expenditures
|
244
|
169
|
108
|
124
|
102
|
747
|
Other
|
|
6
|
18
|
24
|
8
|
8
|
64
|
Total
Capital Expenditures
|
$250
|
$187
|
$132
|
$132
|
$110
|
$811
|
(a)
|
Estimated
current capital expenditures recoverable outside of a rate
case.
|
We intend
to finance expenditures from both internally generated funds and incremental
debt and equity.
Environmental
and Other Matters
Our
businesses are subject to regulation of environmental matters by various
federal, state and local authorities. Due to future restrictive environmental
requirements through legislation and/or rulemaking, we anticipate that potential
expenditures for environmental matters will be material and will require
significant capital investments. We are unable to predict the outcome of the
issues discussed in Note 11. Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies. (See
Item 1. Business – Environmental Matters.)
Market
Risk
Securities
Investments
Available-for-Sale
Securities. At December 31, 2009, our available-for-sale securities
portfolio consisted of securities established to fund certain employee benefits
and auction rate securities. (See Note 7. Investments.)
Interest Rate Risk. We are
exposed to risks resulting from changes in interest rates as a result of our
issuance of variable rate debt. We manage our interest rate risk by varying the
issuance and maturity dates of our fixed rate debt, limiting the amount of
variable rate debt, and continually monitoring the effects of market changes in
interest rates. The table below presents the long-term debt obligations and the
corresponding weighted average interest rate at December 31,
2009.
Market
Risk (Continued)
Interest
Rate Risk (Continued)
|
Expected
Maturity Date
|
Interest
Rate Sensitive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
Financial
Instruments
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
2014
|
Thereafter
|
Total
|
Value
|
Dollars
in Millions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term
Debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
Rate (a)
|
$1.6
|
$1.6
|
$1.6
|
$71.1
|
$19.6
|
$528.1
|
$623.6
|
$657.3
|
Average
Interest Rate – %
|
5.9
|
5.9
|
5.9
|
5.2
|
6.9
|
5.9
|
5.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable
Rate
|
$3.6
|
$12.3
|
$1.7
|
$2.8
|
–
|
$57.0
|
$77.4
|
$77.5
|
Average
Interest Rate – % (b)
|
0.4
|
3.6
|
1.9
|
0.3
|
–
|
0.3
|
0.9
|
|
(a)
|
The
$65 million line of credit is included in the fixed rate maturity of
$528.1 as it will be refinanced with long-term debt in the first quarter
of 2010.
|
(b)
|
Assumes
rate in effect at December 31, 2009, remains constant through remaining
term.
|
Interest
rates on variable rate long-term debt are reset on a periodic basis reflecting
current market conditions. Based on the variable rate debt outstanding at
December 31, 2009, and assuming no other changes to our financial structure, an
increase or decrease of 100 basis points in interest rates would impact the
amount of pretax interest expense by $0.8 million.
Commodity Price Risk. Our
regulated utility operations in Minnesota and Wisconsin incur costs for fuel
(primarily coal and related transportation), power, and natural gas purchased
for resale in our regulated service territories. Our regulated utilities’
exposure to price risk for these commodities is significantly mitigated by the
current ratemaking process and regulatory environment, which allows recovery of
fuel costs in excess of those in the 2008 retail rate case filing. Conversely,
costs below those in the 2008 retail rate case filing result in a credit to our
ratepayers. We seek to prudently manage our customers’ exposure to price risk by
entering into contracts of various durations and terms for the purchase of coal
and power (in Minnesota), power and natural gas (in Wisconsin), and related
transportation costs.
Power Marketing. Our power
marketing activities consist of (1) purchasing energy in the wholesale market
for resale in our regulated service territories when retail energy requirements
exceed generation output and (2) selling excess available energy and purchased
power. From time to time, our utility operations may have excess energy that is
temporarily not required by retail and wholesale customers in our regulated
service territory. We actively sell this energy to the wholesale market to
optimize the value of our generating facilities.
In 2009
kilowatt-hour sales to our taconite customers were lower by approximately 54
percent from 2008 levels. During 2009, we sold available power to Other Power
Suppliers to partially mitigate the earnings impact of these lower industrial
sales. Minnesota Power expects an increase in taconite production in 2010
compared to 2009, although production will still be less than previous years’
levels.
For the
year ended December 31, 2009, we have entered into financial derivative
instruments to manage price risk for certain power marketing contracts.
Outstanding derivative contracts at December 31, 2009, consist of cash flow
hedges for an energy sale that includes pricing based on daily natural gas
prices, and FTRs purchased to manage congestion risk for forward power sales
contracts. These derivative instruments are recorded on our consolidated balance
sheet at fair value. As of December 31, 2009, we recorded approximately
$0.7 million of derivatives in other assets on our consolidated balance sheet of
which the entire balance relates to our FTRs. These derivative instruments
settle monthly throughout the first five months of 2010. (See Note 8.
Derivatives.)
Approximately
200 MWs of capacity and energy from our Taconite Harbor facility in northern
Minnesota has been sold through two sales contracts totaling 175 MWs
(201 MWs including a 15 percent reserve), which were effective May 1,
2005, and expire on April 30, 2010. Both contracts contain fixed monthly
capacity charges and fixed minimum energy charges. One contract provides for an
annual escalator to the energy charge based on increases in our cost of fuel,
subject to a small minimum annual escalation. The other contract provides that
the energy charge will be the greater of the fixed minimum charge or an annual
amount based on the variable production cost of a combined-cycle, natural gas
unit. Our exposure in the event of a full or partial outage at our Taconite
Harbor facility is significantly limited under both contracts. When the buyer is
notified at least two months prior to an outage, there is no liability. Outages
with less than two months notice are subject to an annual duration limitation
typical of this type of contract. These contracts qualify for the normal
purchase normal sale exception under the guidance for derivative instruments and
hedging activities and are not required to be recorded at fair
value.
We are
exposed to credit risk primarily through our power marketing activities. We use
credit policies to manage credit risk, which includes utilizing an established
credit approval process and monitoring counterparty limits.
Market
Risk (Continued)
Power
Marketing (Continued)
Power Sales Agreement. On
October 29, 2009, Minnesota Power entered into an agreement to sell Basin 100
MWs of capacity and energy for the next ten years. The transaction is scheduled
to begin in May 2010, following the expiration of two wholesale power sales
contracts on April 30, 2010. The Basin agreement contains a fixed monthly
schedule of capacity charges with a minimum annual escalation provision. The
energy charge is based on a fixed monthly schedule and provides for annual
escalation based on our cost of fuel. The agreement allows us to recover a
pro-rata share of increased costs related to emissions that may occur during the
last five years of the contract.
New
Accounting Standards
New
accounting standards are discussed in Note 1.
Item
7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk
|
See Item
7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations – Market Risk for information related to quantitative and qualitative
disclosure about market risk.
Item
8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
See our
consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and for each
of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009, and supplementary
data, which are indexed in Item 15(a).
Item
9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure
|
Not
applicable.
Item
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
Conclusion
Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Under the
supervision and with the participation of management, including our principal
executive officer and principal financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of
the effectiveness of the design and operation of ALLETE’s disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”)). Based upon those evaluations, our
principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that
such disclosure controls and procedures are effective to provide assurance that
information required to be disclosed in ALLETE’s reports filed or submitted
under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within
the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and such information is
accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal
executive and principal financial officer, to allow timely decisions regarding
required disclosure.
Management’s
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our
management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal
control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule
13a-15(f). Under the supervision and with the participation of our management,
including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, we
conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control—Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. Based on our evaluation under the framework in Internal
Control—Integrated Framework, our management concluded that our internal control
over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2009.
The
effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2009, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an
independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which
is included herein.
Item
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures (Continued)
|
Changes
in Internal Controls
There has
been no change in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during our most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
Item
9B.
|
Other
Information
|
None.
Part
III
Item
10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate
Governance
|
Unless
otherwise stated, the information required for this Item is incorporated by
reference herein from our Proxy Statement for the 2010 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders (2010 Proxy Statement) under the following headings:
|
·
|
Directors. The
information regarding directors will be included in the “Election of
Directors” section;
|
|
·
|
Audit Committee Financial
Expert. The information regarding the Audit Committee financial
expert will be included in the “Audit Committee Report”
section;
|
|
·
|
Audit Committee Members.
The identity of the Audit Committee members is included in the “Audit
Committee Report” section;
|
|
·
|
Executive Officers. The
information regarding executive officers is included in Part I of this
Form 10-K; and
|
|
·
|
Section 16(a)
Compliance. The information regarding Section 16(a) compliance will
be included in the “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance” section.
|
Our 2010
Proxy Statement will be filed with the SEC within 120 days after the end of our
2009 fiscal year.
Code of Ethics. We have
adopted a written Code of Ethics that applies to all of our employees, including
our chief executive officer, chief financial officer and controller. A copy of
our Code of Ethics is available on our website at www.allete.com and print
copies are available without charge upon request to ALLETE, Inc., Attention:
Secretary, 30 West Superior St. Duluth, Minnesota 55802. Any amendment to the
Code of Ethics or any waiver of the Code of Ethics will be disclosed on our
website at www.allete.com promptly following the date of such amendment or
waiver.
Corporate Governance. The
following documents are available on our website at www.allete.com and print
copies are available upon request:
|
·
|
Corporate
Governance Guidelines;
|
|
·
|
Audit
Committee Charter;
|
|
·
|
Executive
Compensation Committee Charter; and
|
|
·
|
Corporate
Governance and Nominating Committee
Charter.
|
Any
amendment to these documents will be disclosed on our website at www.allete.com
promptly following the date of such amendment.
Item
11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
The
information required for this Item is incorporated by reference herein from the
“Compensation of Executive Officers,” the “Compensation Discussion and
Analysis”, the “Executive Compensation Committee Report” and the “Director
Compensation – 2009” sections in our 2010 Proxy Statement.
Item
12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related
Stockholder Matters
|
The
information required for this Item is incorporated by reference herein from the
“Securities Owned by Certain Beneficial Owners,” the “Securities owned by
Directors and Management” and the “Equity Compensation Plan Information”
sections in our 2010 Proxy Statement.
Item
13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
The
information required for this Item is incorporated by reference herein from the
“Corporate Governance” section in our 2010 Proxy Statement.
We have
adopted a Related Person Transaction Policy which is available on our website at
www.allete.com. Print copies are available without charge, upon request. Any
amendment to this policy will be disclosed on our website at www.allete.com
promptly following the date of such amendment.
Item
14.
|
Principal
Accounting Fees and Services
|
The
information required by this Item is incorporated by reference herein from the
“Audit Committee Report” section in our 2010 Proxy Statement.
Part
IV
Item
15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
(a)
|
Certain
Documents Filed as Part of this Form 10-K.
|
|
(1)
|
Financial
Statements
|
Page
|
|
|
ALLETE
|
|
|
|
|