Xcel Energy 10-K 2018-12-31
Filed 2019-02-22. 22 sections, 556K characters. Original on sec.gov · Markdown · JSON
Cover and table of contents
10-K 1 xcel1231201810-k.htm 10-K

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
| x | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018
or
| ¨ | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
| 001-3034 | 41-0448030 | |
| (Commission File Number) | (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
| (Registrant, State of Incorporation or Organization, Address of Principal Executive Officers and Telephone Number) | ||
| Xcel Energy Inc. | ||
| (a Minnesota corporation) | ||
| 414 Nicollet Mall | ||
| Minneapolis, MN 55401 | ||
| 612-330-5500 |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
| Title of each class | Name of each exchange on which registered | |
| Common Stock, $2.50 par value per share | Nasdaq Stock Market LLC | |
| 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. x Yes ¨ 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 x No
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. x Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 and Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). x Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulations S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the 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, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. x Large accelerated filer ¨ Accelerated filer ¨ Non-accelerated filer ¨ Smaller Reporting Company ¨ Emerging growth company
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). ¨ Yes x No
As of June 29, 2018, the aggregate market value of the voting common stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrants was $23,246,479,826 and there were 508,898,420 shares of common stock outstanding.
As of Feb. 14, 2019, there were 514,211,368 shares of common stock outstanding, $2.50 par value.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
The Registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement for its 2019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders is incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
Item 1. Business
ABBREVIATIONS AND INDUSTRY TERMS
| Xcel Energy Inc.’s Subsidiaries and Affiliates (current and former) | |
| Capital Services | Capital Services, LLC |
| Eloigne | Eloigne Company |
| e prime | e prime inc. |
| NCE | New Century Energies, Inc. |
| NSP-Minnesota | Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation |
| NSP System | The electric production and transmission system of NSP-Minnesota and NSP-Wisconsin operated on an integrated basis and managed by NSP-Minnesota |
| NSP-Wisconsin | Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin corporation |
| Operating companies | NSP-Minnesota, NSP-Wisconsin, PSCo and SPS |
| PSCo | Public Service Company of Colorado |
| SPS | Southwestern Public Service Co. |
| Utility subsidiaries | NSP-Minnesota, NSP-Wisconsin, PSCo and SPS |
| WGI | WestGas InterState, Inc. |
| WYCO | WYCO Development, LLC |
| Xcel Energy | Xcel Energy Inc. and its subsidiaries |
| Federal and State Regulatory Agencies | |
| CPUC | Colorado Public Utilities Commission |
| D.C. Circuit | United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit |
| DOC | Minnesota Department of Commerce |
| DOE | United States Department of Energy |
| DOJ | Department of Justice |
| DOT | United States Department of Transportation |
| EPA | United States Environmental Protection Agency |
| FERC | Federal Energy Regulatory Commission |
| Fifth Circuit | United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit |
| IRS | Internal Revenue Service |
| Minnesota District Court | U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| MPSC | Michigan Public Service Commission |
| MPUC | Minnesota Public Utilities Commission |
| NDPSC | North Dakota Public Service Commission |
| NERC | North American Electric Reliability Corporation |
| Ninth Circuit | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
| NMPRC | New Mexico Public Regulation Commission |
| NRC | Nuclear Regulatory Commission |
| OAG | Minnesota Office of the Attorney General |
| PHMSA | Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration |
| PSCW | Public Service Commission of Wisconsin |
| PUCT | Public Utility Commission of Texas |
| SDPUC | South Dakota Public Utilities Commission |
| SEC | Securities and Exchange Commission |
| TCEQ | Texas Commission on Environmental Quality |
| Electric, Purchased Gas and Resource Adjustment Clauses | |
| CIP | Conservation improvement program |
| DCRF | Distribution cost recovery factor |
| DSM | Demand side management |
| DSMCA | Demand side management cost adjustment |
| ECA | Retail electric commodity adjustment |
| EE | Energy efficiency |
| EECRF | Energy efficiency cost recovery factor |
| EIR | Environmental improvement rider |
| FCA | Fuel clause adjustment |
| FPPCAC | Fuel and purchased power cost adjustment clause |
| GCA | Gas cost adjustment |
| GUIC | Gas utility infrastructure cost rider |
| PCCA | Purchased capacity cost adjustment |
| PCRF | Power cost recovery factor |
| PGA | Purchased gas adjustment |
| PSIA | Pipeline system integrity adjustment |
| RDF | Renewable development fund |
| RER | Renewable energy rider |
| RES | Renewable energy standard |
| RESA | Renewable energy standard adjustment |
| SCA | Steam cost adjustment |
| SEP | State energy policy rider |
| TCA | Transmission cost adjustment |
| TCR | Transmission cost recovery adjustment |
| TCRF | Transmission cost recovery factor |
| WCA | Windsource® cost adjustment |
| Other | |
| AFUDC | Allowance for funds used during construction |
| ALJ | Administrative law judge |
| APBO | Accumulated postretirement benefit obligation |
| ARAM | Average rate assumption method |
| ARO | Asset retirement obligation |
| ASC | FASB Accounting Standards Codification |
| ASU | FASB Accounting Standards Update |
| ATM | At-the-market |
| ATRR | Annual transmission revenue requirement |
| BART | Best available retrofit technology |
| Boulder | City of Boulder, CO |
| C&I | Commercial and Industrial |
| CAPM | Capital Asset Pricing Model |
| CACJA | Clean Air Clean Jobs Act |
| CAISO | California Independent System Operator |
| CapX2020 | Alliance of electric cooperatives, municipals and investor-owned utilities in the upper Midwest involved in a joint transmission line planning and construction effort |
| CBA | Collective-bargaining agreement |
| CCR | Coal combustion residuals |
| CCR Rule | Final rule (40 CFR 257.50 - 257.107) published by the EPA regulating the management, storage and disposal of CCRs as a nonhazardous waste |
| CDD | Cooling degree-days |
| CEP | Colorado Energy Plan |
| CIG | Colorado Interstate Gas Company, LLC |
| CO2 | Carbon dioxide |
| Corps | U.S. Army Corps of Engineers |
| CPCN | Certificate of public convenience and necessity |
| CPP | Clean Power Plan |
| CWA | Clean Water Act |
| CWIP | Construction work in progress |
| DCF | Discounted Cash Flows |
| DECON | Decommissioning method where radioactive contamination is removed and safely disposed at a requisite facility, or decontaminated to a permitted level. |
| DRC | Development Recovery Company |
| DRIP | Dividend Reinvestment Program |
| EEI | Edison Electric Institute |
| ELG | Effluent limitations guidelines |
| EMANI | European Mutual Association for Nuclear Insurance |
| EPS | Earnings per share |
| EPU | Extended power uprate |
| ERP | Electric resource plan |
| ETR | Effective tax rate |
| FASB | Financial Accounting Standards Board |
| FTR | Financial transmission right |
| GAAP | Generally accepted accounting principles |
| GE | General Electric |
| GHG | Greenhouse gas |
| HDD | Heating degree-days |
| HTY | Historic test year |
| IM | Integrated market |
| IPP | Independent power producing entity |
| IRC | Internal Revenue Code |
| IRP | Integrated Resource Plan |
| ISFSI | Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation |
| ITC | Investment Tax Credit |
| JOA | Joint operating agreement |
| LCM | Life cycle management |
| LLW | Low-level radioactive waste |
| LSP Transmission | LSP Transmission Holdings, LLC |
| Mankato 1 | Mankato Energy Center, LLC |
| Mankato 2 | Mankato Energy Center II, LLC |
| MDL | Multi-district litigation |
| MGP | Manufactured gas plant |
| MISO | Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. |
| Moody’s | Moody’s Investor Services |
| NAAQS | National Ambient Air Quality Standard |
| Native load | Demand of retail and wholesale customers that a utility has an obligation to serve under statute or contract |
| NAV | Net asset value |
| NEIL | Nuclear Electric Insurance Ltd. |
| NETO | New England Transmission Owners |
| NOL | Net operating loss |
| NOX | Nitrogen oxide |
| O&M | Operating and maintenance |
| OATT | Open Access Transmission Tariff |
| OCC | Office of Consumer Counsel |
| Opinion 531 | Methodology for calculating base ROE adopted by the FERC in June 2014 |
| Paris Agreement | Establishes a framework for GHG mitigation actions by all countries (“nationally determined contributions”) |
| PI | Prairie Island nuclear generating plant |
| PJM | PJM Interconnection, LLC |
| PM | Particulate matter |
| Post-65 | Post-Medicare |
| PPA | Purchased power agreement |
| Pre-65 | Pre-Medicare |
| PRP | Potentially responsible party |
| PTC | Production tax credit |
| QF | Qualifying facilities |
| R&E | Research and experimentation |
| REC | Renewable energy credit |
| RFP | Request for proposal |
| ROE | Return on equity |
| ROFR | Right-of-first-refusal |
| RPS | Renewable portfolio standards |
| RTO | Regional Transmission Organization |
| Standard & Poor’s | Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services |
| SAB | Staff Accounting Bulletin |
| SAB 118 | Income Tax Accounting Implications of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act |
| SERP | Supplemental executive retirement plan |
| SMMPA | Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency |
| SO2 | Sulfur dioxide |
| SPP | Sout |
Showing the first 8K of 81K characters. Open the full section
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Xcel Energy is subject to a variety of risks, many of which are beyond our control. Risks that may adversely affect the business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows are described below. These risks should be carefully considered together with the other information set forth in this report and future reports that Xcel Energy files with the SEC.
Oversight of Risk and Related Processes
A key accountability of the Board of Directors is the oversight of material risk, and our Board of Directors employs an effective process for doing so. Management and each Board of Directors’ committee have responsibility for overseeing the identification and mitigation of key risks and reporting its assessments and activities to the full Board of Directors.
Management identifies and analyzes risks to determine materiality and other attributes such as timing, probability and controllability. Identification and analysis occurs formally through a key risk assessment conducted by senior management, the financial disclosure process, hazard risk management procedures and internal auditing and compliance with financial and operational controls. Management also identifies and analyzes risk through its business planning process and development of goals and key performance indicators, which include risk identification to determine barriers to implementing Xcel Energy’s strategy. The business planning process also identifies areas in which there is a potential for a business area to assume inappropriate risk to meet goals and determines how to prevent inappropriate risk-taking.
Xcel Energy has a robust compliance program and promotes a culture of compliance, including tone at the top. The process for risk mitigation includes adherence to our code of conduct and compliance policies, operation of formal risk management structures and overall business management to mitigate the risks inherent in the implementation of strategy. Xcel Energy manages and further mitigates risks through formal risk management structures, including management councils, risk committees and services of corporate areas such as internal audit, corporate controller and legal.
Management communicates regularly with the Board of Directors and key stakeholders regarding risk. Senior management presents and communicates a periodic risk assessment to the Board of Directors which provides information on the risks management believes are material, including the earnings impact, timing, likelihood and controllability.
The Board of Directors approaches oversight, management and mitigation of risk as an integral and continuous part of its governance of Xcel Energy. The Board of Directors regularly reviews management’s key risk assessment and analyzes areas of existing and future risks and opportunities. In addition, the Board of Directors assigns oversight of critical risks to its four committees to ensure these risks are well understood and given appropriate focus. The Audit Committee is responsible for reviewing the adequacy of risk oversight and affirming that appropriate oversight occurs. Oversight of cybersecurity risks by the Operations, Nuclear, Environmental and Safety Committee includes receiving independent outside assessments of cybersecurity maturity and assessment of plans.
New risks are considered and assigned as appropriate during the annual Board of Directors’ and committee evaluation process. Committee charters and annual work plans are updated accordingly. Committees regularly report on their oversight activities and certain risk issues may be brought to the full Board of Directors for consideration when deemed appropriate. Finally, the Board of Directors conducts an annual strategy session where Xcel Energy’s future plans and initiatives are reviewed.
Risks Associated with Our Business
Operational Risks
Our natural gas and electric transmission and distribution operations involve numerous risks that may result in accidents and other operating risks and costs.
Our natural gas transmission and distribution activities include inherent hazards and operating risks, such as leaks, explosions, outages and mechanical problems. Our electric transmission and distribution activities also include inherent hazards and operating risks such as contact, fire and outages which could cause substantial financial losses. These natural gas and electric risks could result in loss of life, significant property damage, environmental pollution, impairment of our operations and substantial losses. We maintain insurance against some, but not all, of these risks and losses. The occurrence of these events, if not fully covered by insurance, could have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Additionally, for natural gas costs that may be required in order to comply with potential new regulations, including the Pipeline Safety Act, could be significant.
The Pipeline Safety Act requires verification of pipeline infrastructure records by pipeline owners and operators to confirm the maximum allowable operating pressure of lines located in high consequence areas or more-densely populated areas. We have programs in place to comply with the Pipeline Safety Act and for systematic infrastructure monitoring and renewal over time. A significant incident could increase regulatory scrutiny and result in penalties and higher costs of operations.
The PHMSA is responsible for administering the DOT’s national regulatory program to assure the safe transportation of natural gas, petroleum and other hazardous materials by pipelines. The PHMSA continues to develop regulations and other approaches to risk management to assure safety in design, construction, testing, operation, maintenance and emergency response of natural gas pipeline infrastructure.
Our utility operations are subject to long-term planning risks.
Most electric utility investments are planned to be used for decades. Transmission and generation investments typically have long lead times and are planned well in advance of when they are brought in-service subject to long-term resource plans. These plans are based on numerous assumptions such as: sales growth, customer usage, commodity prices, economic activity, costs, regulatory mechanisms, customer behavior, available technology and public policy.
The electric utility sector is undergoing a period of significant change. For example, increases in appliance, lighting and energy efficiency, wider adoption and lower cost of renewable generation and distributed generation, shifts away from coal generation to decrease CO2 emissions and increasing use of natural gas in electric generation driven by lower natural gas prices. Customer adoption of these technologies and increased energy efficiency could result in excess transmission and generation resources as well as stranded costs if Xcel Energy is not able to fully recover the costs and investments. These changes also introduce additional uncertainty into long-term planning which gives rise to a risk that the magnitude and timing of resource additions and growth in customer demand may not coincide and that the preference for the types of additions may change from planning to execution. In addition, we are subject to longer-term availability of the natural resource inputs such as coal, natural gas, uranium and water to cool our facilities. Lack of availability of these resources could jeopardize long-term operations of our facilities or make them uneconomic to operate.
Changing customer expectations and technologies are requiring significant investments in advanced grid infrastructure. This increases the exposure to potential outdating of technologies and resultant risks. The inability of coal mining companies to attract capital could disrupt longer-term supplies. Decreasing use per customer driven by appliance and lighting efficiency and the availability of cost-effective distributed generation places downward pressure on sales growth. This may lead to under recovery of costs, excess resources to meet customer demand and increases in electric rates. Finally, multiple states may not agree as to the appropriate resource mix and the differing views may lead to costs incurred to comply with one jurisdiction that are not recoverable across all of the jurisdictions served by the same assets.
Our subsidiary, NSP-Minnesota, is subject to the risks of nuclear generation.
NSP-Minnesota’s two nuclear stations, PI and Monticello, subject it to the risks of nuclear generation, which include:
| • | Risks associated with use of radioactive material in the production of energy, the management, handling, storage and disposal of radioactive materials; |
| • | Limitations on insurance available to cover losses that might arise in connection with nuclear operations, as well as obligations to contribute to an insurance pool in the event of damages at a covered U.S. reactor; and, |
| • | Uncertainties with the technological and financial aspects of decommissioning nuclear plants. For example, assumptions regarding decommissioning costs may change based on economic conditions and changes in the expected life of the asset may cause our funding obligations to change. |
The NRC has authority to impose licensing and safety-related requirements for the operation of nuclear generation facilities. The NRC has the authority to impose fines and/or shut down a unit until compliance is achieved. Revised NRC safety requirements could necessitate substantial capital expenditures or an increase in operating expenses. In addition, the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations reviews NSP-Minnesota’s nuclear operations and nuclear generation facilities. Compliance with the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations’ recommendations could result in substantial capital expenditures or a substantial increase in operating expenses.
If an incident did occur, it could have a material effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. Furthermore, the non-compliance or the occurrence of a serious incident at other nuclear facilities could result in increased regulation of the industry, which may increase NSP-Minnesota’s compliance costs.
NSP-Wisconsin’s production and transmission system is operated on an integrated basis with NSP-Minnesota. NSP-Wisconsin may be subject to risks associated with NSP-Minnesota’s nuclear generation.
We are subject to commodity risks and other risks associated with energy markets and energy production.
If fuel costs increase, customer demand could decline and bad debt expense may rise, which could have a material impact on our results of operations. While we have fuel clause recovery mechanisms in most of our states, higher fuel costs could significantly impact our results of operations if costs are not recovered. Delays in the timing of the collection of fuel cost recoveries could impact our cash flows. Low fuel costs have a positive impact on sales, however low oil and natural gas prices could negatively impact oil and gas production activities and subsequently our sales volumes and revenue.
A significant disruption in supply could cause us to seek alternative supply services at potentially higher costs or suffer increased liability for unfulfilled contractual obligations. Significantly higher energy or fuel costs relative to sales commitments have a negative impact on our cash flows and potentially result in economic losses. Potential market supply shortages may not be fully resolved through alternative supply sources and could cause disruptions in our ability to provide electric and/or natural gas services to our customers. Failure to provide service due to disruptions may also result in fines, penalties or cost disallowances through the regulatory process.
We also engage in wholesale sales and purchases of electric capacity, energy and energy-related products as well as natural gas. In many markets, emission allowances and/or RECs are also needed to comply with various statutes and commission rulings. As a result we are subject to market supply and commodity price risk. Commodity price changes can affect the value of our commodity trading derivatives. We mark certain derivatives to estimated fair market value on a daily basis. Actual settlements can vary significantly from estimated fair values recorded and significant changes from the assumptions underlying our fair value estimates could cause earnings variability.
Financial Risks
Our profitability depends on the ability of our utility subsidiaries to recover their costs and changes in regulation may impair the ability of our utility subsidiaries to recover costs from their customers.
We are subject to comprehensive regulation by federal and state utility regulatory agencies, including siting and construction of facilities, customer service and the rates that we can charge customers.
The profitability of our utility operations is dependent on our ability to recover the costs of providing energy and utility services and earn a return on our capital investment. Our rates are generally regulated and based on an analysis of the utility’s costs incurred in a test year. Our utility subsidiaries are subject to both future and historical test years depending upon the regulatory jurisdiction. Thus, the rates a utility is allowed to charge may or may not match its costs at any given time. Rate regulation is premised on providing an opportunity to earn a reasonable rate of return on invested capital. In a continued low interest rate environment there has been pressure pushing down ROE. There can also be no assurance that our regulatory commissions will judge all the costs of our utility subsidiaries to be prudent, which could result in disallowances, or that the regulatory process will always result in rates that will produce full recovery. Changes in the long-term cost-effectiveness or changes to the operating conditions of our assets may result in early retirements of utility facilities and while regulation typically provides relief for these types of changes, there is no assurance that regulators would allow full recovery of all remaining costs leaving all or a portion of these asset costs stranded. Higher than expected inflation or tariffs may increase costs of construction and operations. Rising fuel costs could increase the risk that our utility subsidiaries will not be able to fully recover their fuel costs from their customers. Furthermore, there could be changes in the regulatory environment that would impair the ability of our utility subsidiaries to recover costs historically collected from their customers, or these factors could cause the operating utilities to exceed commitments made regarding cost caps and result in less than full recovery. Overall, management currently believes prudently incurred costs are recoverable given the existing regulatory mechanisms in place.
Adverse regulatory rulings or the imposition of additional regulations could have an adverse impact on our results of operations and materially affect our ability to meet our financial obligations, including debt payments and the payment of dividends on our common stock.
Any reductions in our credit ratings could increase our financing costs and the cost of maintaining certain contractual relationships.
We cannot be assured that our current ratings or our subsidiaries’ ratings will remain in effect, or that a rating will not be lowered or withdrawn by a rating agency. Significant events including disallowance of costs, significantly lower returns on equity or equity ratios or impacts of tax policy changes may impact our cash flows and credit metrics, potentially resulting in a change in our credit ratings. In addition, our credit ratings may change as a result of the differing methodologies or change in the methodologies used by the various rating agencies.
Any downgrade could lead to higher borrowing costs and could impact our ability to access capital markets. Also, our utility subsidiaries may enter into contracts that require the posting of collateral or settlement of applicable contracts if credit ratings fall below investment grade.
We are subject to capital market and interest rate risks.
Utility operations require significant capital investment. As a result, we frequently need to access capital markets. Any disruption in capital markets could have a material impact on our ability to fund our operations. Capital markets are global and impacted by issues and events throughout the world. Capital market disruption events and financial market distress could prevent us from issuing short-term commercial paper, issuing new securities or cause us to issue securities with unfavorable terms and conditions, such as higher interest rates.
Higher interest rates on short-term borrowings with variable interest rates could also have an adverse effect on our operating results. Changes in interest rates may also impact the fair value of the debt securities in the nuclear decommissioning and/or pension funds, as well as our ability to earn a return on short-term investments of excess cash.
We are subject to credit risks.
Credit risk includes the risk that our customers will not pay their bills, which may lead to a reduction in liquidity and an increase in bad debt expense. Credit risk is comprised of numerous factors including the price of products and services provided, the overall economy and local economies in the geographic areas we serve, including local unemployment rates.
Credit risk also includes the risk that various counterparties that owe us money or product will become insolvent and/or breach their obligations. Should the counterparties fail to perform, we may be forced to enter into alternative arrangements. In that event, our financial results could be adversely affected and incur losses.
We may at times have direct credit exposure in our short-term wholesale and commodity trading activity to financial institutions trading for their own accounts or issuing collateral support on behalf of other counterparties. We may also have some indirect credit exposure due to participation in organized markets, such as CAISO, SPP, PJM, MISO and Electric Reliability Council of Texas, in which any credit losses are socialized to all market participants.
We have additional indirect credit exposures to financial institutions in the form of letters of credit provided as security by power suppliers under various purchased power contracts. If any of the credit ratings of the letter of credit issuers were to drop below investment grade, the supplier would need to replace that security with an acceptable substitute. If the security were not replaced, the party could be in default under the contract.
Increasing costs of our defined benefit retirement plans and employee benefits may adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
We have defined benefit pension and postretirement plans that cover most of our employees. Assumptions related to future costs, return on investments, interest rates and other actuarial assumptions have a significant impact on our funding requirements related to these plans. Estimates and assumptions may change. In addition, the Pension Protection Act changed the minimum funding requirements for defined benefit pension plans. Therefore, our funding requirements and related contributions may change in the future. Also, the payout of a significant percentage of pension plan liabilities in a single year due to high retirements or employees leaving could trigger settlement accounting and could require Xcel Energy to recognize incremental pension expense related to unrecognized plan losses in the year liabilities are paid.
Increasing costs associated with health care plans may adversely affect our results of operations.
Our self-insured costs of health care benefits for eligible employees have increased in recent years. Increasing levels of large individual health care claims and overall health care claims could have an adverse impact on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. Changes in industry standards utilized in key assumptions (e.g., mortality tables) could have a significant impact on future liabilities and benefit costs. Legislation related to health care could also significantly change our benefit programs and costs.
We must rely on cash from our subsidiaries to make dividend payments.
We are a holding company and investments in our subsidiaries are our primary assets. Substantially all of our operations are conducted by our subsidiaries. Consequently, our operating cash flow and ability to service our debt and pay dividends depends upon the operating cash flows of our subsidiaries and their payment of dividends. Our subsidiaries are separate legal entities that have no obligation to pay any amounts due pursuant to our obligations or to make any funds available for dividends on our common stock. In addition, each subsidiary’s ability to pay dividends depends on statutory and/or contractual restrictions which may include requirements to maintain minimum levels of equity ratios, working capital or assets. Also, our utility subsidiaries are regulated by state utility commissions, which possess broad powers to ensure that the needs of the utility customers are being met.
If our utility subsidiaries were to cease making dividend payments, our ability to pay dividends on our common stock or otherwise meet our financial obligations could be adversely affected.
Federal tax law may significantly impact our business.
Xcel Energy’s utility subsidiaries collect through regulated rates estimated federal, state and local tax payments. Changes to federal tax law may benefit or adversely affect our earnings and customer costs. Changes to tax depreciable lives and the value of various tax credits may change the economics of resources and our resource selections. There could be timing delays before regulated rates provide for realization of the tax changes in revenues. In addition, certain IRS tax policies such as the requirement to utilize normalization may impact our ability to economically deliver certain types of resources relative to market prices.
Macroeconomic Risks
Economic conditions impact our business.
Our operations are affected by local, national and worldwide economic conditions. Growth in customers and sales are correlated with economic conditions.
Economic conditions may be impacted by insufficient financial sector liquidity leading to potential increased unemployment, which may impact customers’ ability to pay timely, increase customer bankruptcies, and may lead to additional bad debt expense.
Further, worldwide economic activity impacts the demand for basic commodities necessary for utility infrastructure, which may impact our ability to acquire sufficient supplies. We operate in a capital intensive industry and federal policy on trade could significantly impact the cost of materials we use. We could be at risk for higher costs for materials and our workforce. There may be delays before these additional costs can be recovered in rates.
Our operations could be impacted by war, acts of terrorism, and threats of terrorism or disruptions due to events.
Our generation plants, fuel storage facilities, transmission and distribution facilities and information and control systems may be targets of terrorist activities. Any disruption could impact operations or result in a decrease in revenues and additional costs to repair and insure our assets. These disruptions could have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. The potential for terrorism has subjected our operations to increased risks and could have a material effect on our business. We have already incurred increased costs for security and capital expenditures in response to these risks.
The insurance industry has also been affected by these events and the availability of insurance may decrease. In addition, insurance may have higher deductibles, higher premiums and more restrictive policy terms.
A disruption of the regional electric transmission grid, interstate natural gas pipeline infrastructure or other fuel sources, could negatively impact our business, our brand and reputation. Because our facilities are part of an interconnected system, we face the risk of possible loss of business due to a disruption caused by the actions of a neighboring utility or an event (e.g., severe storm, severe temperature extremes, wildfires, generator or transmission facility outage, pipeline rupture, railroad disruption, operator error, sudden and significant increase or decrease in wind generation or a disruption of work force) within our operating systems or on a neighboring system. Any such disruption could result in a significant decrease in revenues and significant additional costs to repair assets, which could have a material impact on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
A cyber incident or security breach could have a material effect on our business.
We operate in an industry that requires the continued operation of sophisticated information technology, control systems and network infrastructure. In addition, we use our systems and infrastructure to create, collect, use, disclose, store, dispose of and otherwise process sensitive information, including company data, customer energy usage data, and personal information regarding customers, employees and their dependents, contractors, shareholders and other individuals.
Our generation, transmission, distribution and fuel storage facilities, information technology systems and other infrastructure or physical assets, as well as information processed in our systems (e.g., information regarding our customers, employees, operations, infrastructure and assets) could be affected by cyber security incidents, including those caused by human error.
Our industry has begun to see an increased volume and sophistication of cyber security incidents from international activist organizations, Nation States and individuals. Cyber security incidents could harm our businesses by limiting our generating, transmitting and distributing capabilities, delaying our development and construction of new facilities or capital improvement projects to existing facilities, disrupting our customer operations or causing the release of customer information, all of which could expose us to liability.
Our generation, transmission systems and natural gas pipelines are part of an interconnected system. Therefore, a disruption caused by the impact of a cyber security incident of the regional electric transmission grid, natural gas pipeline infrastructure or other fuel sources of our third party service providers’ operations, could also negatively impact our business.
Our supply chain for procurement of digital equipment may expose software or hardware to these risks and could result in a breach or significant costs of remediation. In addition, such an event would likely receive federal and state regulatory scrutiny. We are unable to quantify the potential impact of cyber security threats or subsequent related actions. These potential cyber security incidents and regulatory action could result in a material decrease in revenues and may cause significant additional costs (e.g., penalties, third party claims, repairs, insurance or compliance) and potentially disrupt our supply and markets for natural gas, oil and other fuels.
We maintain security measures to protect our information technology and control systems, network infrastructure and other assets. However, these assets and the information they process may be vulnerable to cyber security incidents, including the resulting disability, or failures of assets or unauthorized access to assets or information. If our technology systems or those of our third-party service providers were to fail or be breached, we may be unable to fulfill critical business functions. We are unable to quantify the potential impact of cyber security incidents on our business, our brand, and our reputation. The cyber security threat is dynamic and evolves continually, and our efforts to prioritize network monitoring may not be effective given the constant changes to threat vulnerability.
Our operating results may fluctuate on a seasonal and quarterly basis and can be adversely affected by milder weather.
Our electric and natural gas utility businesses are seasonal and weather patterns can have a material impact on our operating performance. Demand for electricity is often greater in the summer and winter months associated with cooling and heating. Because natural gas is heavily used for residential and commercial heating, the demand depends heavily upon weather patterns. A significant amount of natural gas revenues are recognized in the first and fourth quarters related to the heating season. Accordingly, our operations have historically generated less revenues and income when weather conditions are milder in the winter and cooler in the summer. Unusually mild winters and summers could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Our operations use third party contractors in addition to employees to perform periodic and on-going work.
We rely on third party contractors to perform work for operations, maintenance and construction. We have contractual arrangements with these contractors which typically include performance standards, progress payments, insurance requirements and security for performance.
Cyber security breaches have at times exploited third party equipment or software in order to gain access. Poor vendor performance could impact on going operations, restoration operations, our reputation and could introduce financial risk or risks of fines.
Public Policy Risks
We may be subject to legislative and regulatory responses to climate change, with which compliance could be difficult and costly.
Legislative and regulatory responses related to climate change and new interpretations of existing laws create financial risk as our facilities may be subject to additional regulation at either the state or federal level in the future. Such regulations could impose substantial costs on our system.
We may be subject to climate change lawsuits. An adverse outcome could require substantial capital expenditures and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties or damages. Defense costs associated with such litigation can also be significant. Such payments or expenditures could affect results of operations, financial condition or cash flows if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
Although the United States has not adopted any international or federal GHG emission reduction targets, many states and localities may continue to pursue climate policies in the absence of federal mandates. All of the steps that Xcel Energy has taken to date to reduce GHG emissions, including energy efficiency measures, adding renewable generation or retiring or converting coal plants to natural gas, occurred under state-endorsed resource plans, renewable energy standards and other state policies. While those actions likely would have put Xcel Energy in a good position to meet federal or international standards being discussed, the lack of federal action does not adversely impact these state-endorsed actions and plans.
If our regulators do not allow us to recover all or a part of the cost of capital investment or the O&M costs incurred to comply with the mandates, it could have a material effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
Increased risks of regulatory penalties could negatively impact our business.
The Energy Act increased civil penalty authority for violation of FERC statutes, rules and orders. The FERC can impose penalties of up to $1.3 million per violation per day, particularly as it relates to energy trading activities for both electricity and natural gas. In addition, NERC electric reliability standards and critical infrastructure protection requirements are mandatory and subject to potential financial penalties. Additionally, the PHMSA, Occupational Safety and Health Administration and other federal agencies have penalty authority. In the event of serious incidents, these agencies have become more active in pursuing penalties. Some states have the authority to impose substantial penalties. If a serious reliability or safety incident did occur, it could have a material effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
Environmental Risks
We are subject to environmental laws and regulations, with which compliance could be difficult and costly.
We are subject to environmental laws and regulations that affect many aspects of our operations, including air emissions, water quality, wastewater discharges and the generation, transport and disposal of solid wastes and hazardous substances. Laws and regulations require us to obtain permits, licenses, and approvals and to comply with a variety of environmental requirements.
Environmental laws and regulations can also require us to restrict or limit the output of facilities or the use of certain fuels, shift generation to lower-emitting, install pollution control equipment, clean up spills and other contamination and correct environmental hazards. Environmental regulations may also lead to shutdown of existing facilities.
Failure to meet requirements of environmental mandates may result in fines or penalties. We may be required to pay all or a portion of the cost to remediate (i.e., clean-up) sites where our past activities, or the activities of other parties, caused environmental contamination.
We are subject to mandates to provide customers with clean energy, renewable energy and energy conservation offerings. It could have a material effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows if our regulators do not allow us to recover the cost of capital investment or the O&M costs incurred to comply with the requirements.
In addition, existing environmental laws or regulations may be revised and new laws or regulations may be adopted. We may also incur additional unanticipated obligations or liabilities under existing environmental laws and regulations.
We are subject to physical and financial risks associated with climate change and other weather, natural disaster and resource depletion impacts.
Climate change can create physical and financial risk. Physical risks include changes in weather conditions and extreme weather events.
Our customers’ energy needs vary with weather. To the extent weather conditions are affected by climate change, customers’ energy use could increase or decrease. Increased energy use due to weather changes may require us to invest in generating assets, transmission and infrastructure. Decreased energy use due to weather changes may result in decreased revenues. Extreme weather conditions in general require system backup, costs, and can contribute to increased system stress, including service interruptions. Extreme weather conditions creating high energy demand may raise electricity prices, increasing the cost of energy we provide to our customers.
Severe weather impacts our service territories, primarily when thunderstorms, flooding, tornadoes, wildfires and snow or ice storms occur. To the extent the frequency of extreme weather events increases, this could increase our cost of providing service. Periods of extreme temperatures could impact our ability to meet demand. Changes in precipitation resulting in droughts or water shortages could adversely affect our operations. Drought conditions also contribute to the increase in wildfire risk from our electric generation facilities. While we carry liability insurance, given an extreme event, if Xcel Energy was found to be liable for wildfire damages, amounts that potentially exceed our coverage could negatively impact our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. Drought or water depletion could adversely impact our ability to provide electricity to customers and increase the price paid for energy. We may not recover all costs related to mitigating these physical and financial risks.
Climate change may impact a region’s economy, which could impact our sales and revenues. The price of energy has an impact on the economic health of our communities. The cost of additional regulatory requirements, such as regulation of GHG, could impact the availability of goods and prices charged by our suppliers which would normally be borne by consumers through higher prices for energy and purchased goods. To the extent financial markets view climate change and emissions of GHGs as a financial risk, this could negatively affect our ability to access capital markets or cause us to receive less than ideal terms and conditions.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
Item 2. Properties
Virtually all of the utility plant property of NSP-Minnesota, NSP-Wisconsin, SPS and PSCo is subject to the lien of their first mortgage bond indentures.
Electric Generating Stations:
| NSP-Minnesota Station, Location and Unit | Fuel | Installed | MW (a) | |||||
| Steam: | ||||||||
| A.S. King-Bayport, MN, 1 Unit | Coal | 1968 | 511 | |||||
| Sherco-Becker, MN | ||||||||
| Unit 1 | Coal | 1976 | 680 | |||||
| Unit 2 | Coal | 1977 | 682 | |||||
| Unit 3 | Coal | 1987 | 517 | (b) | ||||
| Monticello, MN, 1 Unit | Nuclear | 1971 | 617 | |||||
| PI-Welch, MN | ||||||||
| Unit 1 | Nuclear | 1973 | 521 | |||||
| Unit 2 | Nuclear | 1974 | 519 | |||||
| Various locations, 4 Units | Wood/Refuse | Various | 36 | (c) | ||||
| Combustion Turbine: | ||||||||
| Angus Anson-Sioux Falls, SD, 3 Units | Natural Gas | 1994 - 2005 | 327 | |||||
| Black Dog-Burnsville, MN, 3 Units | Natural Gas | 1987 - 2002 | 494 | (d) | ||||
| Blue Lake-Shakopee, MN, 6 Units | Natural Gas | 1974 - 2005 | 453 | |||||
| High Bridge-St. Paul, MN, 3 Units | Natural Gas | 2008 | 530 | |||||
| Inver Hills-Inver Grove Heights, MN, 6 Units | Natural Gas | 1972 | 282 | |||||
| Riverside-Minneapolis, MN, 3 Units | Natural Gas | 2009 | 454 | |||||
| Various locations, 14 Units | Natural Gas | Various | 67 | |||||
| Wind: | ||||||||
| Border-Rolette County, ND, 75 Units | Wind | 2015 | 148 | (e) | ||||
| Courtenay Wind, ND, 100 Units | Wind | 2016 | 195 | (e) | ||||
| Grand Meadow-Mower County, MN, 67 Units | Wind | 2008 | 101 | (e) | ||||
| Nobles-Nobles County, MN., 134 Units | Wind | 2010 | 200 | (e) | ||||
| Pleasant Valley-Mower County, MN, 100 Units | Wind | 2015 | 196 | (e) | ||||
| Total | 7,530 |
| (a) | Summer 2018 net dependable capacity. |
| (b) | Based on NSP-Minnesota’s ownership of 59%. |
| (c) | Refuse-derived fuel is made from municipal solid waste. |
| (d) | Black Dog Unit 6 was commissioned and placed into operation in the third quarter of 2018. |
| (e) | Values disclosed are the maximum generation levels for these wind units. Capacity is attainable only when wind conditions are sufficiently available (on-demand net dependable capacity is zero). |
| NSP-Wisconsin Station, Location and Unit | Fuel | Installed | MW (a) | |||||
| Steam: | ||||||||
| Bay Front-Ashland, WI, 3 Units | Coal/Wood/Natural Gas | 1948 - 1956 | 56 | |||||
| French Island-La Crosse, WI, 2 Units | Wood/Refuse | 1940 - 1948 | 16 | (b) | ||||
| Combustion Turbine: | ||||||||
| French Island-La Crosse, WI, 2 Units | Oil | 1974 | 122 | |||||
| Wheaton-Eau Claire, WI, 5 Units | Natural Gas/Oil | 1973 | 234 | |||||
| Hydro: | ||||||||
| Various locations, 63 Units | Hydro | Various | 135 | |||||
| Total | 563 |
| (a) | Summer 2018 net dependable capacity. |
| (b) | Refuse-derived fuel is made from municipal solid waste. |
| PSCo Station, Location and Unit | Fuel | Installed | MW (a) | |||||
| Steam: | ||||||||
| Comanche-Pueblo, CO (b) | ||||||||
| Unit 1 | Coal | 1973 | 325 | |||||
| Unit 2 | Coal | 1975 | 335 | |||||
| Unit 3 | Coal | 2010 | 500 | (c) | ||||
| Craig-Craig, CO, 2 Units (d) | Coal | 1979 - 1980 | 82 | (e) | ||||
| Hayden-Hayden, CO, 2 Units | Coal | 1965 - 1976 | 233 | (f) | ||||
| Pawnee-Brush, CO, 1 Unit | Coal | 1981 | 505 | |||||
| Cherokee-Denver, CO, 1 Unit | Natural Gas | 1968 | 310 | |||||
| Combustion Turbine: | ||||||||
| Blue Spruce-Aurora, CO, 2 Units | Natural Gas | 2003 | 264 | |||||
| Cherokee-Denver, CO, 3 Units | Natural Gas | 2015 | 576 | |||||
| Fort St. Vrain-Platteville, CO, 6 Units | Natural Gas | 1972 - 2009 | 968 | |||||
| Rocky Mountain-Keenesburg, CO, 3 Units | Natural Gas | 2004 | 580 | |||||
| Various locations, 6 Units | Natural Gas | Various | 171 | |||||
| Hydro: | ||||||||
| Cabin Creek-Georgetown, CO | ||||||||
| Pumped Storage, 2 Units | Hydro | 1967 | 210 | |||||
| Various locations, 9 Units | Hydro | Various | 26 | |||||
| Wind: | ||||||||
| Rush Creek, CO, 300 units | Wind | 2018 | 600 | (g) | ||||
| Total | 5,685 |
| (a) | Summer 2018 net dependable capacity. |
| (b) | In 2018, the CPUC approved early retirement of PSCo’s Comanche Units 1 and 2 in 2022 and 2025, respectively. |
| (c) | Based on PSCo’s ownership of 67%. |
| (d) | Craig Unit 1 is expected to be retired early in 2025. |
| (e) | Based on PSCo’s ownership of 10%. |
| (f) | Based on PSCo’s ownership of 75% of Unit 1 and 37% of Unit 2. |
| (g) | Generation capability is based on the maximum output level of wind units, including the Rush Creek Wind Project. Capacity is attainable only when wind conditions are sufficiently available (on-demand net dependable capacity is zero). |
| SPS Station, Location and Unit | Fuel | Installed | MW (a) | |||||
| Steam: | ||||||||
| Cunningham-Hobbs, NM, 2 Units | Natural Gas | 1957 - 1965 | 251 | |||||
| Harrington-Amarillo, TX, 3 Units | Coal | 1976 - 1980 | 1,018 | |||||
| Jones-Lubbock, TX, 2 Units | Natural Gas | 1971 - 1974 | 486 | |||||
| Maddox-Hobbs, NM, 1 Unit | Natural Gas | 1967 | 112 | |||||
| Nichols-Amarillo, TX, 3 Units | Natural Gas | 1960 - 1968 | 457 | |||||
| Plant X-Earth, TX, 4 Units | Natural Gas | 1952 - 1964 | 411 | |||||
| Tolk-Muleshoe, TX, 2 Units | Coal | 1982 - 1985 | 1,067 | |||||
| Combustion Turbine: | ||||||||
| Cunningham-Hobbs, NM, 2 Units | Natural Gas | 1998 | 209 | |||||
| Jones-Lubbock, TX, 2 Units | Natural Gas | 2011 - 2013 | 334 | |||||
| Maddox-Hobbs, TX, 1 Unit | Natural Gas | 1963 - 1976 | 61 | |||||
| Total | 4,406 |
| (a) | Summer 2018 net dependable capacity. |
Electric utility overhead and underground transmission and distribution lines (measured in conductor miles) at Dec. 31, 2018:
| Conductor Miles | NSP-Minnesota | NSP-Wisconsin | PSCo | SPS | ||||||||
| 500 KV | 2,917 | — | — | — | ||||||||
| 345 KV | 13,560 | 3,415 | 4,062 | 9,028 | ||||||||
| 230 KV | 2,202 | — | 12,053 | 9,675 | ||||||||
| 161 KV | 615 | 1,823 | — | — | ||||||||
| 138 KV | — | — | 91 | — | ||||||||
| 115 KV | 7,372 | 1,817 | 5,051 | 14,493 | ||||||||
| Less than 115 KV | 86,185 | 32,831 | 78,446 | 25,820 |
Electric utility transmission and distribution substations at Dec. 31, 2018:
| NSP-Minnesota | NSP-Wisconsin | PSCo | SPS | |||||||||
| Quantity | 348 | 203 | 232 | 459 |
Natural gas utility mains at Dec. 31, 2018:
| Miles | NSP-Minnesota | NSP-Wisconsin | PSCo | SPS | WGI | ||||||||||
| Transmission | 90 | 3 | 2,080 | 20 | 11 | ||||||||||
| Distribution | 10,437 | 2,466 | 22,518 | — | — |
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
Xcel Energy is involved in various litigation matters that are being defended and handled in the ordinary course of business. Assessment of whether a loss is probable or is a reasonable possibility, and whether a loss or a range of loss is estimable, often involves a series of complex judgments regarding future events. Management maintains accruals for losses that are probable of being incurred and subject to reasonable estimation. Management may be unable to estimate an amount or range of a reasonably possible loss in certain situations, including but not limited to, when (1) damages sought are indeterminate, (2) proceedings are in the early stages or (3) matters involve novel or unsettled legal theories. In such cases, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the timing or ultimate resolution of such matters, including a possible eventual loss.
See Note 12 to the consolidated financial statements, Item 1 and Item 7 for further information.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
None.
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Stock Data
Xcel Energy Inc.’s common stock was listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in 2017, but moved to the Nasdaq Global Select Market (Nasdaq) in 2018. The trading symbol is XEL. The number of common stockholders of record as of Dec. 31, 2018 was approximately 57,059.
See Item 7 for further information.
The following compares our cumulative TSR on common stock with the cumulative TSR of the EEI Investor-Owned Electrics Index and the Standard & Poor’s 500 Composite Stock Price Index over the last five years (assuming a $100 investment on Dec. 31, 2013, and the reinvestment of all dividends).
The EEI Investor-Owned Electrics Index (market capitalization-weighted) included 42 companies at year-end and is a broad measure of industry performance.
COMPARISON OF FIVE YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
Xcel Energy Inc., the EEI Investor-Owned Electrics and the Standard & Poor’s 500

| * | $100 invested on Dec. 31, 2013 in stock or index — including reinvestment of dividends. Fiscal years ended Dec. 31. |
Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
Information required under Item 5 — Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans is contained in Xcel Energy Inc.’s Proxy Statement for its 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which is incorporated by reference.
Purchases of Equity Securities by Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers
For the quarter ended Dec. 31, 2018, no equity securities that are registered by Xcel Energy Inc. pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 were purchased by or on behalf of us or any of our affiliated purchasers.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
Selected financial data for Xcel Energy related to the five most recent years ended Dec. 31.
| (Millions of Dollars, Millions of Shares, Except Per Share Data) | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||
| Operating revenues | $ | 11,537 | $ | 11,404 | $ | 11,107 | $ | 11,024 | $ | 11,686 | ||||||||||
| Operating expenses (a) | 9,572 | 9,181 | 8,867 | 9,024 | 9,738 | |||||||||||||||
| Net income | 1,261 | 1,148 | 1,123 | 984 | 1,021 | |||||||||||||||
| Earnings available to common shareholders | 1,261 | 1,148 | 1,123 | 984 | 1,021 | |||||||||||||||
| Diluted earnings per common share | 2.47 | 2.25 | 2.21 | 1.94 | 2.03 | |||||||||||||||
| Financial information | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Dividends declared per common share | 1.52 | 1.44 | 1.36 | 1.28 | 1.20 | |||||||||||||||
| Total assets (b) (c) | 45,987 | 43,030 | 41,155 | 38,821 | 36,958 | |||||||||||||||
| Long-term debt (c) (d) | 15,803 | 14,520 | 14,195 | 12,399 | 11,500 |
| (a) | As a result of adopting ASU No. 2017-07 (Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost, Topic 715), $33 million and $26 million of pension costs were retrospectively reclassified from operating and maintenance expenses to other income, net on the consolidated statements of income for the years ended Dec. 31, 2017 and Dec. 31, 2016, respectively. |
| (b) | As a result of adopting ASU No. 2015-17 (Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes, Topic 740), $140 million of current deferred income taxes was retrospectively reclassified to long-term deferred income tax liabilities on the consolidated balance sheet as of Dec. 31, 2015. |
| (c) | As a result of adopting ASU No. 2015-03 (Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs, Subtopic 835-30), $92 million of deferred debt issuance costs was retrospectively reclassified from other non-current assets to long-term debt on the consolidated balance sheet as of Dec. 31, 2015. |
| (d) | Includes capital lease obligations. |
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Business Segments and Organizational Overview
Xcel Energy Inc. is a public utility holding company. Xcel Energy’s operations include the activity of four utility subsidiaries that serve electric and natural gas customers in eight states. The utility subsidiaries serve customers in portions of Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas and Wisconsin. Along with the utility subsidiaries, the TransCo subsidiaries, WYCO (a joint venture formed with CIG to develop and lease natural gas pipelines, storage and compression facilities) and WGI (an interstate natural gas pipeline company) comprise the regulated utility operations.
Xcel Energy Inc.’s immaterial nonregulated subsidiaries are Eloigne and Capital Services.
Management’s Strategic Priorities
Xcel Energy’s vision is to be the preferred and trusted provider of the energy our customers need. We strive to provide our investors an attractive value proposition and our customers with safe, clean and reliable energy services at a competitive price. This mission is enabled via three key strategic priorities:
| • | Lead the clean energy transition; |
| • | Enhance the customer experience; and, |
| • | Keep bills low. |
Successful execution of our strategic objectives should allow Xcel Energy to continue to deliver a competitive total return for our shareholders.
Lead the clean energy transition
For more than a decade, we have managed the risk of climate change and increasing customer demand for renewable energy through a clean energy strategy that consistently reduces carbon emissions and transitions our operations for the future. As a result, we have successfully reduced our carbon emissions to our customers by approximately 40% from 2005 to 2018. We expect to reduce our carbon footprint by 80% by 2030 (over 2005 levels). We have also announced our vision to serve all customers with 100% zero-carbon emissions by 2050.
Our service territories benefit from the geographic concentration of favorable renewable resources. Strong wind and high solar irradiance yield high generation capacity factors, which lowers the cost of these resources. The combination of high capacity factors, grid options from transmission investment and market operations, improved supply chain, technological improvements and the extension of the renewable tax credits translates into low renewable energy costs for our customers. As a result, we are able to invest in renewable generation, in which the capital costs are largely or completely offset by fuel savings. This provides us the opportunity to lower the emission profile of our generation fleet, grow our renewable portfolio and provide significant fuel savings to our customers. We call this our “Steel for Fuel” strategy.
We are transitioning how we produce, deliver and encourage the efficient use of energy through four primary mechanisms:
| • | Increasing the use of affordable renewable energy; |
| • | Offering energy efficiency programs for customers; |
| • | Retiring or repowering coals units and modernizing our generating plants; and, |
| • | Advancing power grid capabilities. |
We have announced ambitious plans to add approximately 3,600 MW of wind energy on our system by 2021.
In addition, the proposed CEP in Colorado encompasses the retirement of 660 MW from two coal-fired units at Comanche and the addition of up to 1,100 MW of wind, 700 MW of solar and 275 MW of battery storage.
Enhance the customer experience
The utility landscape is changing, and we must continue to thoughtfully anticipate and address the future needs of our stakeholders, including our customers, policymakers, employees and shareholders. Our customers expect to have choices, and we are committed to providing options and solutions that they want and value at a competitive price.
We will continue to expand our production of renewable energy, including wind and solar alternatives, and further develop and promote DSM, conservation and renewable programs. We are also in the process of transforming our transmission and distribution systems to accommodate increased levels of renewables, distributed energy resources and corresponding data growth, while maintaining high levels of reliability and security and keeping customer bills affordable. We also are expanding our RenewableConnect program, which allows customers to choose how much of their energy comes from renewable sources. RenewableConnect has regulatory approval in Minnesota, Colorado and Wisconsin. This is yet another way for us to add renewable energy and meet the needs of our customers. Importantly, Renewable*Connect does not negatively impact the bills of non-participants. Finally, we are improving our communications to enable customers to interact with us in the way they prefer.
Keep bills low
Xcel Energy is very focused on our customers and the impact our actions have on their bill. Our objective is to keep total bill increases at or below the rate of inflation so our prices remain competitive relative to alternatives. We expect to continue to keep our customer bills low by executing on our Steel for Fuel plan, controlling O&M costs and promoting energy efficiency and conservation.
Xcel Energy is working to keep long-term O&M expense relatively consistent without compromising reliability or safety. We intend to accomplish this objective by continually improving our processes, leveraging technology, proactively managing risk and maintaining a workforce that is prepared to meet the needs of our business today and tomorrow. In 2018, we experienced warmer than normal summer weather, which caused us to spend additional O&M for vegetation management and system maintenance due to the hot summer, business systems costs, investments to improve and enhance business processes and customer service, as well as damage prevention and remediation costs. However, we remain committed to our long-term objective of improving operating efficiencies and taking costs out of the business for the benefit of our customers and anticipate that our long-term O&M expense trend will remain relatively consistent.
Provide a competitive total return to investors and maintain strong investment grade credit rating
Through our disciplined approach to business growth, financial investment, operations and safety, we plan to:
| • | Deliver long-term annual EPS growth of 5% to 7%; |
| • | Deliver annual dividend increases of 5% to 7%; |
| • | Target a dividend payout ratio of 60% to 70% of annual ongoing EPS; and, |
| • | Maintain senior secured debt credit ratings in the A range and senior unsecured debt credit ratings in the BBB+ to A range. |
We have consistently achieved our financial objectives, meeting or exceeding our earnings guidance range for fourteen consecutive years, and we believe we are positioned to continue to deliver on our value proposition. Our ongoing earnings have grown approximately 6.1% and our dividend has grown approximately 4.5% annually from 2005 - 2018. In addition, our current senior unsecured debt credit ratings for Xcel Energy and its utility subsidiaries are in the BBB+ to A range, while our secured operating company debt ratings are in the A range.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
The following discussion includes financial information prepared in accordance with GAAP, as well as certain non-GAAP financial measures such as the ongoing return on equity (ROE), electric margin, natural gas margin, ongoing earnings and ongoing diluted EPS. Generally, a non-GAAP financial measure is a measure of a company’s financial performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes (or includes) amounts that are adjusted from measures calculated and presented in accordance
Showing the first 8K of 119K characters. Open the full section
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
See Item 7, incorporated by reference.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
See Item 15-1 for an index of financial statements included herein.
See Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements for further information.
Management Report on Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting
The management of Xcel Energy Inc. is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Xcel Energy Inc.’s internal control system was designed to provide reasonable assurance to Xcel Energy Inc.’s management and board of directors regarding the preparation and fair presentation of published financial statements.
All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.
Xcel Energy Inc. management assessed the effectiveness of Xcel Energy Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of Dec. 31, 2018. In making this assessment, it used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013). Based on our assessment, we believe that, as of Dec. 31, 2018, Xcel Energy Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting is effective at the reasonable assurance level based on those criteria.
Xcel Energy Inc.’s independent registered public accounting firm has issued an audit report on the Xcel Energy Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting. Its report appears herein.
| /s/ BEN FOWKE | /s/ ROBERT C. FRENZEL | |||
| Ben Fowke | Robert C. Frenzel | |||
| Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer | |||
| Feb. 22, 2019 | Feb. 22, 2019 | |||
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Xcel Energy Inc.
Opinions on the Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Xcel Energy Inc. and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2018, and the related notes and the schedules listed in the Index at Item 15 (collectively referred to as the "financial statements"). We also have audited the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2018, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2018, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also, in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2018, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO.
Basis for Opinions
The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management Report on Internal Controls over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud, and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.
Our audits of the financial statements included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures to respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
| /s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP |
| Minneapolis, Minnesota |
| February 22, 2019 |
| We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2002. |
| XCEL ENERGY INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (amounts in millions, except per share data) | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year Ended Dec. 31 | ||||||||||||
| 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | ||||||||||
| Operating revenues | ||||||||||||
| Electric | $ | 9,719 | $ | 9,676 | $ | 9,500 | ||||||
| Natural gas | 1,739 | 1,650 | 1,531 | |||||||||
| Other | 79 | 78 | 76 |
Showing the first 8K of 226K characters. Open the full section
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Xcel Energy maintains a set of disclosure controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in reports that it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms. In addition, the disclosure controls and procedures ensure that information required to be disclosed is accumulated and communicated to management, including the chief executive officer and chief financial officer, allowing timely decisions regarding required disclosure. As of Dec. 31, 2018, based on an evaluation carried out under the supervision and with the participation of Xcel Energy’s management, including the chief executive officer and chief financial officer, of the effectiveness of its disclosure controls and the procedures, the chief executive officer and chief financial officer have concluded that Xcel Energy’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
No change in Xcel Energy’s internal control over financial reporting has occurred during the most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, Xcel Energy’s internal control over financial reporting. Xcel Energy maintains internal control over financial reporting to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of the financial reporting.
Xcel Energy has evaluated and documented its controls in process activities, general computer activities, and on an entity-wide level. During the year and in preparation for issuing its report for the year ended Dec. 31, 2018 on internal controls under section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Xcel Energy conducted testing and monitoring of its internal control over financial reporting. Based on the control evaluation, testing and remediation performed, Xcel Energy did not identify any material control weaknesses, as defined under the standards and rules issued by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board and as approved by the SEC and as indicated in Management Report on Internal Controls herein.
Item 9B. Other Information
None.
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
Information required under this Item with respect to Directors and Corporate Governance is set forth in Xcel Energy Inc.’s Proxy Statement for its 2019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which is incorporated by reference. Information with respect to Executive Officers is included in Item 1 to this report.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
Information required under this Item is set forth in Xcel Energy Inc.’s Proxy Statement for its 2019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which is incorporated by reference.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
Information required under this Item is contained in Xcel Energy Inc.’s Proxy Statement for its 2019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which is incorporated by reference.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
Information required under this Item is contained in Xcel Energy Inc.’s Proxy Statement for its 2019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which is incorporated by reference.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
Information required under this Item is contained in Xcel Energy Inc.’s Proxy Statement for its 2019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which is incorporated by reference.
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules
| 1 | Consolidated Financial Statements | |||
| Management Report on Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting — For the year ended Dec. 31, 2018. | ||||
| Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm — Financial Statements | ||||
| Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm — Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting | ||||
| Consolidated Statements of Income — For the three years ended Dec. 31, 2018, 2017, and 2016. | ||||
| Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income — For the three years ended Dec. 31, 2018, 2017, and 2016. | ||||
| Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows — For the three years ended Dec. 31, 2018, 2017, and 2016. | ||||
| Consolidated Balance Sheets — As of Dec. 31, 2018 and 2017. | ||||
| Consolidated Statements of Common Stockholders’ Equity — For the three years ended Dec. 31, 2018, 2017, and 2016. | ||||
| 2 | Schedule I — Condensed Financial Information of Registrant. | |||
| Schedule II — Valuation and Qualifying Accounts and Reserves for the years ended Dec. 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016. | ||||
| 3 | Exhibits | |||
| * | Indicates incorporation by reference | |||
| + | Executive Compensation Arrangements and Benefit Plans Covering Executive Officers and Directors | |||
| Xcel Energy Inc. | ||||
| Exhibit Number | Description | Report or Registration Statement | SEC File or Registration Number | Exhibit Reference |
| 3.01* | Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of Xcel Energy Inc. | Xcel Energy Inc Form 8-K dated May 16, 2012 | 001-03034 | 3.01 |
| 3.02* | Bylaws of Xcel Energy Inc. | Xcel Energy Inc Form 8-K dated Feb. 17, 2016 | 001-03034 | 3.01 |
| 4.01* | Indenture dated Dec. 1, 2000 between Xcel Energy Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota, National Association, as Trustee | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 8-K dated Dec. 14, 2000 | 001-03034 | 4.01 |
| 4.02* | Supplemental Indenture No. 3 dated June 1, 2006 between Xcel Energy Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 8-K dated June 6, 2006 | 001-03034 | 4.01 |
| 4.03* | Junior Subordinated Indenture, dated as of Jan. 1, 2008, by and between Xcel Energy Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 8-K dated Jan. 16, 2008 | 001-03034 | 4.01 |
| 4.04* | Replacement Capital Covenant, dated Jan. 16, 2008 | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 8-K dated Jan. 16, 2008 | 001-03034 | 4.03 |
| 4.05* | Supplemental Indenture No. 5, dated as of May 1, 2010 between Xcel Energy Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 8-K dated May 10, 2010 | 001-03034 | 4.01 |
| 4.06* | Supplemental Indenture No. 6, dated as of Sept. 1, 2011 between Xcel Energy Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 8-K dated Sept. 12, 2011 | 001-03034 | 4.01 |
| 4.07* | Supplemental Indenture No. 8, dated as of June 1, 2015 between Xcel Energy Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 8-K dated June 1, 2015 | 001-03034 | 4.01 |
| 4.08* | Supplemental Indenture No. 9, dated as of March 1, 2016, by and between Xcel Energy Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 8-K dated March 8, 2016 | 001-03034 | 4.02 |
| 4.09* | Supplemental Indenture No. 10, dated as of Dec. 1, 2016, by and between Xcel Energy Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 8-K dated Dec. 1, 2016 | 001-03034 | 4.01 |
| 4.10* | Supplemental Indenture No. 11, dated as of June 25, 2018, by and between Xcel Energy Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 8-K dated June 25, 2018 | 001-03034 | 4.01 |
| 10.01* | Xcel Energy Inc. Nonqualified Pension Plan (2009 Restatement) | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 10-K for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008 | 001-03034 | 10.02 |
| 10.02*+ | Xcel Energy Senior Executive Severance and Change-in-Control Policy (2009 Restatement) | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 10-K for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008 | 001-03034 | 10.05 |
| 10.03*+ | Xcel Energy Inc. Non-Employee Directors Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and restated Jan. 1, 2009 | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 10-K for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008 | 001-03034 | 10.08 |
| 10.04*+ | Form of Services Agreement between Xcel Energy Services Inc. and utility companies | Xcel Energy Inc. Form U5B dated Nov. 16, 2000 | 001-03034 | H-1 |
| 10.05*+ | Xcel Energy Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan as amended and restated Jan. 1, 2009 | Xcel Energy Inc. Form 10-K for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008 | 001-03034 | 10.17 |
| 10.06*+ | [First Amendment to Exhibit 10.02 dated Aug. 26, 2009](http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/72903/00011046590906 |
Showing the first 8K of 64K characters. Open the full section
Item 16. Form 10-K Summary
None.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this annual report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
| XCEL ENERGY INC. | ||
| Feb. 22, 2019 | By: | /s/ ROBERT C. FRENZEL |
| Robert C. Frenzel | ||
| Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer | ||
| (Principal Financial Officer) |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities on the date indicated above.
| /s/ BEN FOWKE | Chairman, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director | ||
| Ben Fowke | (Principal Executive Officer) | ||
| /s/ ROBERT C. FRENZEL | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer | ||
| Robert C. Frenzel | (Principal Financial Officer) | ||
| /s/ JEFFREY S. SAVAGE | Senior Vice President, Controller | ||
| Jeffrey S. Savage | (Principal Accounting Officer) | ||
| * | Director | ||
| Lynn Casey | |||
| * | Director | ||
| Richard K. Davis | |||
| * | Director | ||
| Richard T. O’Brien | |||
| * | Director | ||
| David K. Owens | |||
| * | Director | ||
| Christopher J. Policinski | |||
| * | Director | ||
| James Prokopanko | |||
| * | Director | ||
| A. Patricia Sampson | |||
| * | Director | ||
| James J. Sheppard | |||
| * | Director | ||
| David A. Westerlund | |||
| * | Director | ||
| Kim Williams | |||
| * | Director | ||
| Timothy V. Wolf | |||
| * | Director | ||
| Daniel Yohannes | |||
| *By: | /s/ ROBERT C. FRENZEL | Attorney-in-Fact | |
| Robert C. Frenzel |