 |  | |
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011
Commission File Number | Exact name of registrants as specified in their charters, address of principal executive offices and registrants' telephone number | IRS Employer Identification Number | ||
1-8841 | NEXTERA ENERGY, INC. | 59-2449419 | ||
2-27612 | FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY 700 Universe Boulevard Juno Beach, Florida 33408 (561) 694-4000 | 59-0247775 | ||
State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization: Florida
Name of exchange on which registered | ||
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: | ||
NextEra Energy, Inc.: | Common Stock, $0.01 Par Value | New York Stock Exchange |
Florida Power & Light Company: None | ||
Indicate by check mark if the registrants are well-known seasoned issuers, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933.
NextEra Energy, Inc. Yes þ No o Florida Power & Light Company Yes þ No o |
Indicate by check mark if the registrants are not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
NextEra Energy, Inc. Yes o No þ Florida Power & Light Company Yes o No þ |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrants (1) have 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, and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
NextEra Energy, Inc. Yes þ No o Florida Power & Light Company Yes þ No o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrants have submitted electronically and posted on their corporate website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrants were required to submit and post such files).
NextEra Energy, Inc. Yes þ No o Florida Power & Light Company Yes þ No o |
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 registrants' 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. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrants are a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
NextEra Energy, Inc. | Large Accelerated Filer þ | Accelerated Filer o | Non-Accelerated Filer o | Smaller Reporting Company o |
Florida Power & Light Company | Large Accelerated Filer o | Accelerated Filer o | Non-Accelerated Filer þ | Smaller Reporting Company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrants are shell companies (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Yes ¨ No þ
Aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity of NextEra Energy, Inc. held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2011 (based on the closing market price on the Composite Tape on June 30, 2011) was $24,179,141,166.
There was no voting or non-voting common equity of Florida Power & Light Company held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2011.
The number of shares outstanding of NextEra Energy, Inc. common stock, as of the latest practicable date: Common Stock, $0.01 par value, outstanding as of January 31, 2012: 416,208,761 shares.
As of January 31, 2012, there were issued and outstanding 1,000 shares of Florida Power & Light Company common stock, without par value, all of which were held, beneficially and of record, by NextEra Energy, Inc.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of NextEra Energy, Inc.'s Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference in Part III hereof.
________________________
This combined Form 10-K represents separate filings by NextEra Energy, Inc. and Florida Power & Light Company. Information contained herein relating to an individual registrant is filed by that registrant on its own behalf. Florida Power & Light Company makes no representations as to the information relating to NextEra Energy, Inc.'s other operations.
Florida Power & Light Company meets the conditions set forth in General Instruction I.(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K and is therefore filing this Form with the reduced disclosure format.
DEFINITIONS
Acronyms and defined terms used in the text include the following:
Term | Meaning |
AFUDC | allowance for funds used during construction |
AFUDC - debt | debt component of allowance for funds used during construction |
AFUDC - equity | equity component of allowance for funds used during construction |
AOCI | accumulated other comprehensive income |
capacity clause | capacity cost recovery clause, as established by the FPSC |
CFTC | U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission |
CO2 | carbon dioxide |
DOE | U.S. Department of Energy |
Duane Arnold | Duane Arnold Energy Center |
EPA | U.S. Environmental Protection Agency |
ERCOT | Electric Reliability Council of Texas |
FDEP | Florida Department of Environmental Protection |
FERC | Federal Energy Regulatory Commission |
FPL | Florida Power & Light Company |
FPL FiberNet | Fiber-optic telecommunications business |
FPSC | Florida Public Service Commission |
fuel clause | fuel and purchased power cost recovery clause, as established by the FPSC |
GAAP | generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. |
GHG | greenhouse gas(es) |
ISO | independent system operator |
ITCs | investment tax credits |
kw | kilowatt |
kwh | kilowatt-hour(s) |
Lone Star | Lone Star Transmission, LLC |
Management's Discussion | Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
mortgage | mortgage and deed of trust dated as of January 1, 1944, from FPL to Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as supplemented and amended |
mw | megawatt(s) |
mwh | megawatt-hour(s) |
NEE | NextEra Energy, Inc. |
NEECH | NextEra Energy Capital Holdings, Inc. |
NEER | NextEra Energy Resources, LLC |
NERC | North American Electric Reliability Corporation |
Note __ | Note __ to consolidated financial statements |
NOx | nitrogen oxide |
NRC | U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission |
O&M expenses | other operations and maintenance expenses in the consolidated statements of income |
OCI | other comprehensive income |
OTC | over-the-counter |
OTTI | other than temporary impairment |
PJM | PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. |
PMI | NextEra Energy Power Marketing, LLC |
Point Beach | Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant |
PTCs | production tax credits |
PUCT | Public Utility Commission of Texas |
PURPA | Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, as amended |
PV | photovoltaic |
RFP | request for proposal |
ROE | return on common equity |
regulatory ROE | return on common equity as determined for regulatory purposes |
RPS | renewable portfolio standards |
RTO | regional transmission organization |
Seabrook | Seabrook Station |
SEC | U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission |
SO2 | sulfur dioxide |
U.S. | United States of America |
WCEC | FPL's West County Energy Center in western Palm Beach County, Florida |
NEE, FPL, NEECH and NEER each has subsidiaries and affiliates with names that may include NextEra Energy, FPL, NextEra Energy Resources, FPL Group Capital, FPL Energy, FPLE and similar references. For convenience and simplicity, in this report the terms NEE, FPL, NEECH and NEER are sometimes used as abbreviated references to specific subsidiaries, affiliates or groups of subsidiaries or affiliates. The precise meaning depends on the context.
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No. | ||
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This report includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements that express, or involve discussions as to, expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions, strategies, future events or performance (often, but not always, through the use of words or phrases such as will, will likely result, are expected to, will continue, is anticipated, aim, believe, could, should, would, estimated, may, plan, potential, future, projection, goals, target, outlook, predict and intend or words of similar meaning) are not statements of historical facts and may be forward-looking. Forward-looking statements involve estimates, assumptions and uncertainties. Accordingly, any such statements are qualified in their entirety by reference to, and are accompanied by, important factors included in Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors (in addition to any assumptions and other factors referred to specifically in connection with such forward-looking statements) that could have a significant impact on NEE's and/or FPL's operations and financial results, and could cause NEE's and/or FPL's actual results to differ materially from those contained or implied in forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of NEE and/or FPL in this combined Form 10-K, in presentations, on their respective websites, in response to questions or otherwise.
Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made, and NEE and FPL undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances, including, but not limited to, unanticipated events, after the date on which such statement is made, unless otherwise required by law. New factors emerge from time to time and it is not possible for management to predict all of such factors, nor can it assess the impact of each such factor on the business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained or implied in any forward-looking statement.
3
PART I
Item 1. Business
OVERVIEW
NextEra Energy, Inc. (hereafter, NEE) is one of the largest electric power companies in North America, with over 41,000 mw of generating capacity in 24 states in the U.S. and 3 provinces in Canada, and employing approximately 14,800 people as of December 31, 2011. NEE provides retail and wholesale electric services to more than 4 million customers and owns generation, transmission and distribution facilities to support its services. It also purchases electric power for resale to its customers and provides risk management services related to power and gas consumption for a limited number of customers. NEE is the largest generator in the U.S. of renewable energy from the wind and sun and owned approximately 18% of the installed base of U.S. wind power production capacity as of December 31, 2011. NEE also produces electricity from solar facilities, and owns and operates one of the largest fleets of nuclear power stations in the U.S., with eight reactors at five sites located in four states, representing approximately 6% of U.S. nuclear power electric generating capacity as of December 31, 2011. NEE's business strategy has emphasized the development, acquisition and operation of renewables, nuclear and natural gas-fired generation facilities in response to long-term federal policy trends supportive of zero and low air emissions sources of power. NEE's generation fleet has significantly lower rates of emissions of CO2, SO2 and NOx than the average rates of the U.S. electric power industry with approximately 93% of its 2011 generation, measured by mwh produced, coming from renewables, nuclear and natural gas-fired facilities. Certain environmental attributes of NEE's electric generating facilities, such as renewable energy credits, emissions reductions, offsets, allowances and the avoided emission of GHG pollutants, have been or likely will be sold or transferred to third parties, who are solely entitled to the reporting rights and ownership of the environmental attributes.
NEE was incorporated in 1984 under the laws of Florida and conducts its operations principally through two wholly-owned subsidiaries, Florida Power & Light Company (hereafter, FPL) and NextEra Energy Resources, LLC (hereafter, NEER). NextEra Energy Capital Holdings, Inc. (hereafter, NEECH), another wholly-owned subsidiary of NEE, owns and provides funding for NEER's and NEE's other operating subsidiaries, other than FPL and its subsidiaries. NEE's two principal businesses also constitute NEE's reportable segments for financial reporting purposes, as illustrated below:
FPL is a rate-regulated electric utility engaged primarily in the generation, transmission, distribution and sale of electric energy in Florida. FPL is the largest electric utility in the state of Florida and one of the largest electric utilities in the U.S. based on generation. FPL is vertically integrated, with approximately 24,500 mw of generating capacity as of December 31, 2011. FPL's investments in its infrastructure since 2001, such as modernizing less efficient generating plants and upgrading its transmission and distribution systems, have allowed FPL to produce more energy with less fuel and fewer air emissions, and deliver service reliability that was among the best of the Florida investor-owned utilities, all while providing residential and commercial bills that were among the lowest in Florida and below the national average based on a rate per kwh as of July 2011. With 85% of its power generation coming from natural gas, nuclear and solar, FPL is also one of the cleanest electric utilities in the nation. Based on 2011 information, FPL's emissions rates for CO2, SO2 and NOx were 36%, 84% and 72% lower, respectively, than the average rates of the U.S. electric power industry.
NEER is one of the largest wholesale generators of electric power in the U.S., with approximately 16,600 mw of generating capacity across 22 states and 3 Canadian provinces as of December 31, 2011. NEER produces the majority of its electricity from clean and renewable sources, including wind, solar and hydro. NEER also provides full energy and capacity requirements services, owns a retail electricity provider serving customers in 13 states and the District of Columbia and engages in power and gas marketing and trading activities.
NEECH's other business activities are primarily conducted through FPL FiberNet and Lone Star. FPL FiberNet delivers wholesale and enterprise telecommunications services in Florida and certain areas of the South Central U.S. Lone Star, a rate-regulated transmission service provider in Texas, is constructing transmission lines and other associated facilities in Texas.
4
NEE seeks to create value in its two principal businesses by meeting its customers' needs more economically and more reliably than its competitors, as described in more detail in the following sections. NEE's strategy has resulted in profitable growth over sustained periods at both FPL and NEER. Management seeks to grow each business in a manner consistent with the varying opportunities open to it and does not maintain any specific goal as to the relative size of the two businesses. However, management believes that the diversification and balance represented by FPL and NEER is a valuable characteristic of the enterprise.
NEE'S OPERATING SUBSIDIARIES
I. FPL
FPL was incorporated under the laws of Florida in 1925, and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of NEE. FPL is a rate-regulated electric utility and is the largest electric utility in the state of Florida and one of the largest electric utilities in the U.S based on generation. FPL, with 24,460 mw of generating capacity at December 31, 2011, supplies electric service throughout most of the east and lower west coasts of Florida, serving nearly 8.9 million people through approximately 4.6 million customer accounts. At December 31, 2011, FPL's service territory and plant locations are as follows (see Item 2 - Generating Facilities):
FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS AND COMPETITION
FPL's service to its retail customers is provided primarily under franchise agreements negotiated with municipalities or counties. Municipalities and counties may form their own utility companies to provide service to their residents. In a few cases, the franchise agreement provides the municipality or county the right to buy the distribution assets serving local residents at the end of the agreement. However, during the term of a franchise agreement, which is typically 30-years, the municipality or county agrees not to form its own utility, and FPL has the right to offer electric service to residents. FPL currently holds 178 franchise agreements with various municipalities and counties in Florida with varying expiration dates through 2042. Four of these franchise agreements expire in 2013 and 174 expire during the period 2014 through 2042. These franchise agreements cover approximately 83% of FPL's retail customer base in Florida. Negotiations are ongoing to renew the franchise agreements that expire in 2013. FPL considers its franchises to be adequate for the conduct of its business. FPL also provides service to 11 other municipalities and to 22 unincorporated areas within its service area without franchise agreements pursuant to the general obligation to serve as a public utility, relying upon Florida law for access to public rights of way.
Because any retail customer may elect to provide his/her own services, FPL effectively must compete for an individual customer's business. As a practical matter, few customers provide their own service at the present time since FPL's cost of service is generally substantially lower than the cost of self-generation for the vast majority of customers. Changing technology and economic conditions could alter the favorable relative cost position that FPL currently enjoys; however, FPL seeks as a matter of strategy to ensure that it delivers superior value, in the form of high reliability, low bills and excellent customer service.
FPL also faces competition from other suppliers of electrical energy to wholesale customers and from alternative energy sources and self-generation for other customer groups, primarily industrial customers. In 2011, 2010 and 2009, operating revenues from wholesale and industrial customers combined represented approximately 3%, 3% and 4%, respectively, of FPL's total operating revenues.
The FPSC promotes cost competitiveness in the building of new steam generating capacity by requiring investor-owned electric utilities, including FPL, to issue a request for proposal (RFP) except when the FPSC determines that an exception from the RFP process is in the public interest. The RFP process allows independent power producers and others to bid to supply the new generating capacity. If a bidder has the most cost-effective alternative, meets other criteria such as financial viability and
5
demonstrates adequate expertise and experience in building and/or operating generating capacity of the type proposed, the investor-owned electric utility would seek to negotiate a purchased power agreement with the selected bidder and request that the FPSC approve the terms of the purchased power agreement and, if appropriate, provide the required authorization for the construction of the bidder's generating capacity. New nuclear power plants are exempt from the RFP requirement. See FPL Sources of Generation - Nuclear Operations below regarding FPL's planned two additional nuclear units at Turkey Point.
CUSTOMERS AND REVENUE
FPL's primary source of operating revenues is from its retail customer base; it also serves a limited number of wholesale customers within Florida. The percentage of FPL's operating revenues and customer accounts by customer class were as follows:
For both retail and wholesale customers, the prices (or rates) that FPL may charge are controlled by regulation, by the FPSC in the case of retail customers, and by the FERC in the case of wholesale customers. In general, under U.S. and Florida law, regulated rates are intended to cover the cost of providing service, including an appropriate rate of return on capital employed. However, the regulatory bodies have authority to determine the relevant cost of providing service and the appropriate rate of return on capital employed and there can be no guarantee that FPL will be able to earn any particular rate of return or recover all or any portion of its costs through regulated rates. See discussion of regulation at FPL Regulation - FPL Rate Regulation below.
As noted above, FPL seeks to maintain attractive rates for its customers. A common benchmark used in the electric power industry for comparing rates across companies is the cost per 1,000 kwh of consumption per month for a residential customer. FPL's 2011 average cost per 1,000 kwh of monthly residential usage was the lowest of the 55 electric utilities within Florida as indicated below:
6
TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION
FPL provides service to its customers through an integrated transmission and distribution system that links all its generation facilities to all its customers. FPL also maintains interconnection facilities with neighboring utilities and wholesale power providers, enabling it to buy and sell wholesale electricity outside its service territory and to enhance the reliability of its own network and support the reliability of neighboring networks. FPL's transmission system carries high voltage electricity from its generating facilities to substations where the electricity is stepped down to lower voltage levels and is sent through the distribution system to its customers.
A key element of FPL's strategy is to provide highly reliable service to its customers. The transmission and distribution system is susceptible to interruptions or outages from a wide variety of sources including weather, animal interference, traffic accidents, equipment failure and many others, and FPL seeks to reduce or eliminate outages where economically practical and to restore service rapidly in the event of an outage. A common benchmark for transmission and distribution system reliability is the system average interruption duration index (SAIDI), which represents the number of minutes the average customer is without power during a time period. During the five years ended 2010, FPL had the best average SAIDI of the Florida investor-owned utilities.
FPL SYSTEM CAPABILITY AND LOAD
At December 31, 2011, FPL's resources for serving load consisted of 26,538 mw, of which 24,460 mw were from FPL-owned facilities (see Item 2 - Generating Facilities) and 2,078 mw were available through purchased power agreements (see FPL Sources of Generation - Purchased Power below). Occasionally, unusually cold temperatures during the winter months result in significant increases in electricity usage for short periods of time. However, customer usage and operating revenues are typically higher during the summer months, largely due to the prevalent use of air conditioning in FPL's service territory. The highest peak load FPL has served to date was 24,346 mw, which occurred on January 11, 2010. FPL had adequate resources available at the time of this peak to meet customer demand.
FPL's projected reserve margin for the summer of 2012 is approximately 28%. This reserve margin is expected to be achieved through the combination of available output from FPL's active generating units, purchased power agreements and the capability to reduce peak demand through the implementation of demand side management programs, including load management which was estimated at December 31, 2011 to be capable of reducing demand by 1,817 mw, and energy efficiency and conservation programs. See FPL Sources of Generation - Fossil Operations and Nuclear Operations below regarding generation projects currently under construction.
FPL SOURCES OF GENERATION
FPL relies upon a diverse mix of fuel sources for its generating facilities, along with purchased power, in order to maintain the flexibility to achieve a more economical fuel mix by responding to market and industry developments. See descriptions of fossil, nuclear and solar operations below and a listing of FPL's generating facilities in Item 2 - Generating Facilities.
FPL's 2011 fuel mix based on mwh produced, including purchased power, was as follows:
7
Fossil Operations (Natural Gas, Coal and Oil)
At December 31, 2011, FPL owned and operated 78 units that used fossil fuels such as natural gas and/or oil, and had a joint ownership interest in three coal units, which combined provided 21,455 mw of generating capacity for FPL. These fossil units are out of service from time to time for routine maintenance or on standby during periods of reduced electricity demand.
FPL's natural gas plants require natural gas transportation, supply and storage. FPL has firm transportation contracts in place with four different transportation suppliers with expiration dates ranging from 2015 to 2036 that together are expected to satisfy substantially all of the anticipated needs for natural gas transportation at existing units. To the extent desirable, FPL also purchases interruptible natural gas transportation service from these natural gas suppliers based on pipeline availability. FPL has several short- and medium-term natural gas supply contracts to provide a portion of FPL's anticipated needs for natural gas. The remainder of FPL's natural gas requirements is purchased in the spot market. FPL has an agreement for the storage of natural gas that expires in 2013. See Note 14 - Contracts. With respect to its oil plants, FPL obtains its fuel requirements in the spot market.
St. Johns River Power Park (SJRPP) Units Nos. 1 and 2, in which FPL has a joint ownership interest, has a coal supply and transportation contract for all of the 2012 fuel needs and a portion of the 2013 and 2014 fuel needs for those units. All of the transportation requirements and a portion of the coal supply needs for Scherer Unit No. 4, the other coal unit in which FPL has a joint ownership interest, are covered by a series of annual and long-term contracts. The remaining fuel requirements for these units will be obtained in the spot market. See Note 14 - Contracts.
Modernization Projects. FPL is in the process of modernizing its Cape Canaveral and Riviera Beach power plants to high-efficiency natural gas-fired units and expects the units to be placed in service by June 2013 and by 2014, respectively. Each modernized plant is expected to provide approximately 1,200 mw of capacity. In November 2011, FPL filed a need petition with the FPSC to modernize its Port Everglades power plant to a high-efficiency natural gas-fired unit. The modernized Port Everglades unit is expected to provide approximately 1,280 mw of capacity, be in service in 2016 and cost approximately $1.2 billion. The modernization of the Port Everglades plant is contingent upon, among other things, FPSC approval. An FPSC decision regarding the modernization of the Port Everglades plant is expected in late March 2012.
Nuclear Operations
At December 31, 2011, FPL owned, or had undivided interests in, and operated the following four nuclear units with a total net generating capacity of 2,970 mw.
Facility | mw | Operating License Expiration Dates | ||
St. Lucie Unit No. 1 | 839 | 2036 | ||
St. Lucie Unit No. 2 | 745 | 2043 | ||
Turkey Point Unit No. 3 | 693 | 2032 | ||
Turkey Point Unit No. 4 | 693 | 2033 | ||
FPL has several contracts for the supply of uranium and the conversion, enrichment and fabrication of nuclear fuel with expiration dates ranging from March 2012 through 2022. See Note 14 - Contracts. NRC regulations require FPL to submit a plan for decontamination and decommissioning five years before the projected end of plant operation. FPL's current plans, under the applicable operating licenses, provide for prompt dismantlement of Turkey Point Units Nos. 3 and 4 with decommissioning activities commencing in 2032 and 2033, respectively. Current plans provide for St. Lucie Unit No. 1 to be mothballed beginning in 2036 with decommissioning activities to be integrated with the prompt dismantlement of St. Lucie Unit No. 2 commencing in 2043. See Management's Discussion - Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates - Nuclear Decommissioning and Fossil/Solar Dismantlement.
Projects to Add Additional Capacity. FPL is in the process of adding approximately 450 mw to 490 mw of capacity at its existing nuclear units at St. Lucie and Turkey Point, which is expected to result in significant fuel cost savings compared to other sources of generation over the lives of the units. The additional capacity is projected to be placed in service by 2013; approximately 31 mw were placed in service in May 2011 at St. Lucie Unit No. 2. As part of the conditions of certification by the FDEP for the Turkey Point project, FPL was required to implement a monitoring plan in and around the Turkey Point cooling canals due to concerns over potential saltwater intrusion beyond FPL's property. Monitoring under the plan includes collection of data prior to and after the additional capacity is placed in service. Data for the first year has been collected and provided to the FDEP. The ultimate results of the monitoring plan are uncertain, and the financial and operational impacts on FPL, if any, cannot be determined at this time. In 2008, the FPSC approved FPL's need petition for two additional nuclear units at its Turkey Point site. The two units combined are expected to add approximately 2,200 mw of capacity and have projected in-service dates between 2022 and 2023. Additional approvals from other regulatory agencies will be required later in the development process.
Nuclear Unit Scheduled Refueling Outages. FPL's nuclear units are periodically removed from service to accommodate normal refueling and maintenance outages, including inspections, repairs and certain other modifications. Scheduled nuclear refueling outages typically require the unit to be removed from service for variable lengths of time. The scheduled nuclear refueling outages
8
for 2012 are all expanded scope outages related to the addition of capacity at the existing nuclear units which are expected to require the unit to be removed from service for between 110 and 160 days. The following table summarizes each unit's current or next scheduled refueling outage:
Facility | Beginning of Current or Next Scheduled Refueling Outage | |
St. Lucie Unit No. 1 | November 2011 | |
St. Lucie Unit No. 2 | August 2012 | |
Turkey Point Unit No. 3 | February 2012 | |
Turkey Point Unit No. 4 | November 2012 | |
Disposition of Spent Nuclear Fuel. FPL's nuclear facilities use both on-site storage pools and dry storage casks to store spent nuclear fuel generated by these facilities, which are expected to allow FPL to store spent nuclear fuel at these facilities through license expiration.
Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended (Nuclear Waste Policy Act), the DOE is responsible for the development of a repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. As required by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, FPL is a party to contracts with the DOE to provide for disposal of spent nuclear fuel from its nuclear units.
The DOE was required to construct permanent disposal facilities and take title to and provide transportation and disposal for spent nuclear fuel by January 31, 1998 for a specified fee based on current generation from nuclear power plants. The DOE did not meet its statutory obligation for disposal of spent nuclear fuel under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. In 2009, FPL and certain nuclear plant joint owners entered into a settlement agreement (spent fuel settlement agreement) with the U.S. government agreeing to dismiss with prejudice lawsuits filed against the U.S. government seeking damages caused by the DOE's failure to dispose of spent nuclear fuel from FPL's nuclear plants. The spent fuel settlement agreement permits FPL to make annual filings to recover certain spent fuel storage costs incurred by FPL which are payable by the U.S. government on an annual basis. In a separate lawsuit filed in 2011, FPL joined the Nuclear Energy Institute and several other nuclear plant owners and operators in petitioning the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) to challenge the DOE's decision to continue to collect the nuclear waste fee, which petition is pending. FPL will continue to pay fees to the U.S. government's nuclear waste fund pending the D.C. Circuit's decision on the fee suspension petition.
In March 2010, the DOE filed a motion with the NRC to withdraw its license application for a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. The DOE's withdrawal motion has been challenged and is being litigated before the NRC and the D.C. Circuit. In light of the Obama Administration's decision not to proceed with the Yucca Mountain repository project, the DOE established a Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and to provide recommendations for developing a safe, long-term solution to managing spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. In January 2012, the BRC issued its report and recommendations which include a consent-based approach, working with all affected units of government, to siting future nuclear waste management facilities, creation of a new organization, independent of the DOE, dedicated solely to assuring the safe storage and ultimate disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste, providing access to the U.S. government's nuclear waste fund for the purpose of nuclear waste storage and disposal and initiating prompt efforts to develop geologic disposal facilities, consolidated interim storage facilities and transportation to those facilities. The BRC's recommendations are not expected to result in any immediate change to the nuclear waste management and disposal situation.
Recent Nuclear Developments. As a result of the impact of the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami on nuclear facilities in Japan, the NRC established a task force to conduct a comprehensive review of processes and regulations relating to nuclear facilities in the U.S. to determine whether the NRC should make additional improvements to its regulatory system and to make recommendations to the NRC for its policy direction. In July 2011, the NRC task force released its recommendations to the NRC and, since then, the NRC staff presented certain conclusions based on their review of the task force recommendations, which conclusions have been approved by the NRC. The NRC staff's report concluded that none of the findings addressed by the task force recommendations rise to the level of an imminent hazard to public health and safety. However, since the recommendations can contribute to safety improvements, the NRC staff proposed the following actions: 1) issue orders within approximately six months to require each nuclear site to purchase portable equipment and revise procedures to address multi-unit events, provide reliable spent fuel pool instrumentation and enhance containment venting capabilities for boiling water reactors (FPL's nuclear units do not use boiling water reactors); 2) request each site to re-evaluate its seismic and flood protection designs in light of current requirements and identify any areas for improvement; and 3) issue new regulations requiring enhancements relating to extended periods of loss of alternating current power, emergency preparedness and spent fuel pool cooling capabilities. The NRC is reviewing the timeline for implementation of all of the actions, but has indicated that all actions should be completed by the end of 2016. FPL is currently reviewing the NRC's directions relating to the NRC staff's recommendations and assessing the potential financial and operational impacts on its nuclear units.
The lessons learned from the events in Japan and the results of the NRC's review of the NRC staff's recommendations may, among other things, result in changes in or new licensing and safety-related requirements for U.S. nuclear facilities. Changes in or new requirements could, among other things, impact the capacity additions (uprates) at FPL's existing nuclear units at St. Lucie and
9
Turkey Point, and future licensing and operations of U.S. nuclear facilities, including FPL's existing nuclear facilities and the NRC approval of two additional nuclear units at FPL's Turkey Point site, and could, among other things, result in increased cost and capital expenditures associated with the operation and maintenance of FPL's nuclear units. While the NRC continues its review, FPL continues to work with industry organizations to understand the events in Japan and apply lessons learned, which may result in FPL proactively making certain modifications to its nuclear facilities to, among other things, improve operational and safety systems prior to any potential requirements being imposed by the NRC. Any modifications could, among other things, result in increased cost and capital expenditures associated with the operation and maintenance of FPL's nuclear units. Third parties have requested that the NRC suspend the approval of nuclear uprates, nuclear license extensions and new licenses, including approval of licenses for two additional nuclear units at FPL's Turkey Point site. Another third party request was filed with the NRC seeking immediate suspension of the NRC operating licenses for all boiling water reactors that use a certain primary containment system pending completion of the NRC review. The NRC denied the request for immediate action related to the suspension of operating licenses for boiling water reactors, and, since the nuclear events in Japan, has continued to grant approvals for nuclear uprates and license extensions. However, it is uncertain at this time how and when the NRC will respond to the other items in these requests or other requests it may receive, or take action with regard to the timing for implementation of all of the NRC staff's recommendations.
Solar Operations
Solar generation can be provided primarily through two conventions, utility-owned and customer-owned. In utility-owned solar generation, the energy generated goes directly to the transmission grid, whereas, customer-owned solar generation goes directly to the location it is serving. There are two principal solar technologies used for utility-scale projects: photovoltaic and thermal. FPL placed its first utility-scale solar generating facility into service in 2009 and placed two additional solar generating facilities in service in 2010. FPL's three solar generating facilities consist of a 25 mw solar PV facility in DeSoto County, Florida, a 10 mw solar PV facility in Brevard County, Florida and a 75 mw solar thermal facility in Martin County, Florida.
Purchased Power
In addition to owning generation facilities, FPL also purchases electricity from other utilities to meet customer demand through long- and short-term purchased power agreements. As of December 31, 2011, FPL's long-term purchased power agreements provided for the purchase of approximately 2,190 mw of power with expiration dates ranging from May 2012 through 2034. See Note 14 - Contracts. FPL also procures short-term capacity for both economic and reliability purposes.
FPL ENERGY MARKETING AND TRADING
FPL's Energy Marketing & Trading division (EMT) buys and sells wholesale energy commodities, such as natural gas, oil and electricity. EMT procures natural gas and oil for FPL's use in power generation and sells excess natural gas, oil and electricity. EMT also uses derivative instruments (primarily swaps, options and forwards) to manage the commodity price risk inherent in the purchase and sale of fuel and electricity. Substantially all of the results of EMT's activities are passed through to customers in the fuel or capacity clauses. See FPL Regulation - FPL Rate Regulation below, Management's Discussion - Energy Marketing and Trading and Market Risk Sensitivity and Note 3.
FPL REGULATION
FPL's operations are subject to regulation by a number of federal, state and other organizations, including, but not limited to, the following:
• | The FPSC, which has jurisdiction over retail rates, service territory, issuances of securities, planning, siting and construction of facilities, among other things. |
• | The FERC, which oversees the acquisition and disposition of facilities, transmission services and wholesale purchases and sales of electric energy, among other things. |
• | The NERC, which, through its regional entities, establishes and enforces mandatory reliability standards, subject to approval by the FERC, to ensure the reliability of the U.S. electric transmission and generation system and to prevent major system blackouts. |
• | The NRC, which has jurisdiction over the operation of FPL's nuclear power plants through the issuance of operating licenses, rules, regulations and orders. See FPL Sources of Generation - Nuclear Operations above. |
• | The EPA, which has the responsibility to maintain and enforce national standards under a variety of environmental laws. The EPA also works with industries and all levels of government in a wide variety of voluntary pollution prevention programs and energy conservation efforts. |
FPL Rate Regulation
The FPSC sets rates at a level that is intended to allow FPL the opportunity to collect from retail customers total revenues (revenue requirements) equal to FPL's cost of providing service, including a reasonable rate of return on invested capital. To accomplish this, the FPSC uses various ratemaking mechanisms, including, among other things, base rates and cost recovery clauses.
10
Base Rates. In general, the basic costs of providing electric service, other than fuel and certain other costs, are recovered through base rates, which are designed to recover the costs of constructing, operating and maintaining the utility system. These basic costs include O&M expenses, depreciation and taxes, as well as a return on FPL's investment in assets used and useful in providing electric service (rate base). At the time base rates are determined, the allowed rate of return on rate base approximates the FPSC's determination of FPL's estimated weighted-average cost of capital, which includes its costs for outstanding debt and an allowed ROE. The FPSC monitors FPL's actual regulatory ROE through a surveillance report that is filed monthly by FPL with the FPSC. The FPSC does not provide assurance that any ROE will be achieved. Base rates are determined in rate proceedings or through negotiated settlements of those proceedings, which occur at the initiative of FPL, the FPSC, the State of Florida Office of Public Counsel or a substantially affected party. Base rates remain in effect until new base rates are approved by the FPSC.
Effective March 1, 2010, pursuant to an FPSC final order (FPSC rate order) new retail base rates for FPL were established, resulting in an increase in retail base revenues of approximately $75 million on an annualized basis. The FPSC rate order also established a regulatory ROE of 10.0% with a range of plus or minus 100 basis points and an adjusted regulatory equity ratio of 59.1%. It also shifted certain costs from retail base rates to the capacity clause. (See Cost Recovery Clauses below for additional information regarding the capacity clause.) In addition, the FPSC rate order directed FPL to reduce depreciation expense (surplus depreciation credit) over the 2010 to 2013 period related to a depreciation reserve surplus. In February 2011, the FPSC issued a final order approving a stipulation and settlement agreement between FPL, the State of Florida Office of Public Counsel, the Florida Attorney General's Office and all other principal parties in FPL's 2009 rate case regarding FPL's base rates (2010 rate agreement), which enables FPL to earn a regulatory ROE of up to 11% per year over the term of the 2010 rate agreement. Key elements of the 2010 rate agreement, which is effective through December 31, 2012, are as follows:
• | Subject to the provisions of the 2010 rate agreement, retail base rates are effectively frozen through the end of 2012. |
• | Incremental cost recovery through FPL's capacity clause for the new combined-cycle natural gas unit at WCEC (WCEC Unit No. 3), which was placed in service in May 2011, is permitted up to the amount of the projected annual fuel savings for customers during the term of the 2010 rate agreement. |
• | Future storm restoration costs would be recoverable on an accelerated basis beginning 60 days from the filing of a cost recovery petition, but capped at an amount that produces a surcharge of no more than $4 for every 1,000 kwh of usage on residential bills during the first 12 months of cost recovery. Any additional costs would be eligible for recovery in subsequent years. If storm restoration costs exceed $800 million in any given calendar year, FPL may request an increase to the $4 surcharge to recover the amount above $800 million. |
• | If FPL's earned regulatory ROE falls below 9%, FPL may seek retail base rate relief. If FPL's earned regulatory ROE rises above 11%, any party to the 2010 rate agreement may seek a reduction in FPL's retail base rates. In determining the regulatory ROE for all purposes under the 2010 rate agreement, earnings will be calculated on an actual, non-weather-adjusted basis. |
• | FPL can vary the amount of surplus depreciation credit taken in any calendar year up to a cap in 2010 of $267 million, a cap in subsequent years of $267 million plus the amount of any unused portion from prior years, and a total cap of $776 million (surplus depreciation credit cap) over the course of the 2010 rate agreement, provided that in any year of the 2010 rate agreement FPL must use at least enough surplus depreciation credit to maintain a 9% earned regulatory ROE but may not use any amount of surplus depreciation credit that would result in an earned regulatory ROE in excess of 11%. |
In January 2012, FPL notified the FPSC of its intent to initiate a base rate proceeding in 2012. See Recent Regulatory Developments below.
Cost Recovery Clauses. Cost recovery clauses, which are designed to permit full recovery of certain costs and provide a return on certain assets allowed to be recovered through the various clauses, include substantially all fuel, purchased power and interchange expenses, conservation and certain environmental-related expenses, certain revenue taxes and franchise fees. Beginning in 2009, pre-construction costs and carrying charges on construction costs for FPL's planned two additional nuclear units at Turkey Point and carrying charges on construction costs for FPL's approximately 450 mw to 490 mw of additional capacity at St. Lucie and Turkey Point are also recoverable through a cost recovery clause. Also beginning in 2009, costs incurred for FPL's three solar generating facilities are recoverable through a cost recovery clause. Cost recovery clause costs are recovered through levelized monthly charges per kwh or kw, depending on the customer's rate class. These cost recovery clause charges are calculated at least annually based on estimated costs and estimated customer usage for the following year, plus or minus a true-up adjustment to reflect the estimated over or under recovery of costs in the current year. An adjustment to the levelized charges may be approved during the course of a year to reflect revised estimates.
Fuel costs are recovered from customers through the fuel clause, the most significant of the cost recovery clauses. FPL uses a risk management fuel procurement program which has been approved by the FPSC. The FPSC reviews the program activities and results for prudence annually as part of its review of fuel costs. The program is intended to manage fuel price volatility by locking in fuel prices for a portion of FPL's fuel requirements. See FPL Energy Marketing and Trading above, Management's Discussion - FPL: Results of Operations, Note 1 - Regulation and Note 3.
Capacity payments to other utilities and generating companies for purchased power are recovered from customers through the capacity clause. In accordance with the FPSC's nuclear cost recovery rule, FPL also recovers pre-construction costs and carrying charges (equal to a pretax AFUDC rate) on construction costs for new nuclear capacity through the capacity clause. As property related to the new nuclear capacity goes into service, construction costs and a return on investment are recovered through base rate increases effective beginning the following January. See FPL Sources of Generation - Nuclear Operations above. In
11
accordance with the 2010 rate agreement, cost recovery for WCEC Unit No. 3, which was placed in service in May 2011, is permitted up to the amount of the projected annual fuel savings for customers during the term of the 2010 rate agreement through FPL's capacity clause and is reported as retail base revenues.
Costs associated with implementing energy conservation programs are recovered from customers through the energy conservation cost recovery clause. Certain costs of complying with federal, state and local environmental regulations enacted after April 1993 and costs associated with FPL's three solar facilities are recovered through the environmental compliance cost recovery clause (environmental clause).
The FPSC has the authority to disallow recovery of costs that it considers excessive or imprudently incurred. These costs may include, among others, fuel and O&M expenses, the cost of replacing power lost when fossil and nuclear units are unavailable, storm restoration costs and costs associated with the construction or acquisition of new facilities.
FERC
The Federal Power Act gives the FERC exclusive ratemaking jurisdiction over wholesale sales of electricity and the transmission of electricity in interstate commerce. Pursuant to the Federal Power Act, electric utilities must maintain tariffs and rate schedules on file with the FERC which govern the rates, terms and conditions for the provision of FERC-jurisdictional wholesale power and transmission services. The Federal Power Act also gives the FERC authority to certify and oversee a national electric reliability organization with authority to develop mandatory reliability standards applicable to all users, owners and operators of bulk-power systems. The FERC also approves reliability standards and makes them enforceable. See NERC below. Electric utilities also are subject to accounting, record-keeping and reporting requirements administered by the FERC. The FERC also places certain limitations on transactions between electric utilities and their affiliates.
NERC
The NERC has been certified by the FERC as the national electric reliability organization. The NERC ensures the reliability and security of the North American bulk power system. The NERC's regional entities establish requirements, approved by the FERC, for reliable operation and maintenance of power generation facilities and transmission systems. FPL is subject to these reliability requirements and can incur significant penalties for failing to comply with them. Each NERC region reports seasonally and annually on the status of generation and transmission in each region.
FPL Environmental Regulation
FPL is subject to environmental laws and regulations, and is affected by some of the emerging issues, described in the NEE Environmental Matters section below. FPL expects to seek recovery through the environmental clause for compliance costs associated with any new environmental laws and regulations.
During 2011, FPL spent approximately $117 million on capital additions related to environmental matters, primarily to comply with existing environmental laws and regulations. FPL's capital expenditures related to environmental matters are estimated to total approximately $325 million for 2012 through 2014, including $118 million in 2012.
Recent Regulatory Developments
In January 2012, FPL filed a formal notification with the FPSC indicating its intent to initiate a base rate proceeding. The notification stated that, based on preliminary estimates, FPL expects to request a base rate increase of approximately $525 million effective January 2013 and an additional base rate increase of approximately $170 million annually commencing when the modernized Cape Canaveral plant becomes operational, which is expected to occur in June 2013. FPL expects to propose an allowed regulatory ROE of 11.25% with a 0.25% ROE adder, which is included in the base rate increase FPL expects to request, if FPL maintains the lowest typical residential customer bill among all the electric utilities in Florida. FPL expects to file its formal request to initiate a base rate proceeding before the end of the first quarter of 2012 with a final FPSC decision expected in the fourth quarter of 2012 in time for new rates to be effective January 1, 2013.
FPL EMPLOYEES
FPL had approximately 9,800 employees at December 31, 2011. Approximately 31% of the employees are represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) under a collective bargaining agreement with FPL that expires October 31, 2014.
12
II. NEER
NEER was formed in 1998 to aggregate NEE's competitive energy businesses. It is a limited liability company organized under the laws of Delaware and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of NEECH. Through its subsidiaries, NEER currently owns, develops, constructs, manages and operates electric generating facilities in wholesale energy markets primarily in the U.S., as well as in Canada and Spain. See Note 15. NEER is one of the largest wholesale generators of electric power in the U.S., with 16,607 mw of generating capacity across 22 states and 3 Canadian provinces as of December 31, 2011. NEER produces the majority of its electricity from clean and renewable sources as described more fully below. NEER is the largest owner of wind and solar energy projects in the U.S. and one of the largest owners and developers of wind projects in Canada. Since 2002, NEER has more than doubled its generating capacity, primarily through the development of new wind projects and acquisition of nuclear projects.
In addition, NEER provides full energy and capacity requirements services primarily to distribution utilities in certain markets, offers customized power and gas and related risk management services to wholesale customers and engages in power and gas marketing and trading activities. NEER also owns a retail electricity provider serving customers in 13 states and the District of Columbia and engages in limited development of natural gas reserves, as well as pipeline infrastructure, through non-operating ownership interests, hereafter referred to as the gas infrastructure business.
MARKETS AND COMPETITION
Electricity markets in the U.S. are regional and diverse in character. All are extensively regulated, and competition in these markets is shaped and constrained by regulation. The nature of the products offered varies based on the specifics of regulation in each region, and the degree of control participants have over pricing also varies. Generally, in addition to the natural constraints on pricing freedom presented by competition, NEER may also face specific constraints in the form of price caps, or maximum allowed prices, for certain products. NEER's ability to sell the output of its generation facilities is also constrained by available transmission capacity, which can vary from time to time and can have a significant impact on pricing.
The degree and nature of competition that NEER faces is different in wholesale markets and in retail markets. The majority of NEER's revenue, roughly 90%, is derived from wholesale markets.
Wholesale power generation is a capital-intensive, commodity-driven business with numerous industry participants. NEER competes on the basis of the location of its plants and ownership of multiple plants in various regions, which increases the reliability of its energy supply. Wholesale power generation is a regional business that is currently highly fragmented relative to other commodity industries and diverse in terms of industry structure. As such, there is a wide variation in terms of the capabilities, resources, nature and identity of the companies NEER competes with depending on the market. In wholesale markets, customers' needs are met through a variety of means, including long-term bilateral contracts, standardized bilateral products such as full requirements service and customized supply and risk management services.
In general, U.S. electricity markets encompass three classes of product: energy, capacity and ancillary services. Energy services relate to the physical delivery of power; capacity services relate to the availability of mw capacity of a power generation asset; and ancillary services are other services related to power generation assets, for example, load-following services, which require the supplier of energy to vary the quantity delivered based on the load demand needs of the customer. The exact nature of these classes of product is defined in part by regulation. Not all regions have a capacity product class, and the specific definitions of ancillary services vary from region to region.
RTOs and ISOs exist in a number of regions within which NEER operates to coordinate generation and transmission across wide geographic areas. NEER also has operations that fall within the Western Electricity Coordinating Council reliability region that are not under the jurisdiction of an established RTO or ISO. Although each RTO and ISO may have differing objectives and structures, some benefits of these entities include regional planning, managing transmission congestion, developing larger wholesale markets for energy and capacity, maintaining reliability and facilitating competition among wholesale electricity providers. NEER has operations that fall within the following RTOs and ISOs:
• | Alberta Electric System Operator |
• | California Independent System Operator |
• | ERCOT |
• | Independent Electricity System Operator |
• | ISO New England |
• | Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator (MISO) |
• | New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) |
• | PJM |
• | Southwest Power Pool |
13
NEER competes in different regions to different degrees, but in general it seeks to enter into long-term bilateral contracts for the full output of its generating facilities, and approximately 55% of NEER's generating capacity is fully committed under long-term contracts. In some regions long-term contracts are not practical and NEER sells the output of its facilities into daily spot markets. In such cases, NEER will frequently enter into shorter term bilateral contracts, typically but not always of one to three years duration, to hedge the price risk associated with selling into a daily spot market. Such bilateral contracts, which may be hedges either for physical delivery or for financial (pricing) offset, may only protect a portion of the revenue that NEER expects to derive from the associated generation facility and may not qualify for hedge accounting under GAAP. Contracts that serve the economic purpose of hedging some portion of the expected revenue of a generation facility but are not recorded as hedges under GAAP are referred to as “non-qualifying hedges” for adjusted earnings purposes. See Management's Discussion - Overview.
While the majority of NEER's revenue is derived from the output of its generating facilities, NEER is also an active competitor in several regions in the wholesale full requirements business and in providing structured and customized power and gas products and services to a variety of customers. In the full requirements service, the supplier agrees to meet the customer's needs for a full range of products for every hour of the day for a fixed period of time, thereby assuming the risk of fluctuations in the customer's volume requirements.
The deregulated retail energy business is typically a highly competitive business. In general, competition in the retail energy business is on the basis of price, service, brand image, product offerings and market perceptions of creditworthiness. Electricity is sold pursuant to a variety of product types, including fixed, indexed and renewable products, and customers elect terms of service typically ranging from one month to five years. Retail energy rates are market-based, and not subject to traditional cost-of-service regulation by public service commissions. Non-affiliated transmission and distribution service companies provide, on a non-discriminatory basis, the wires and metering services necessary to access customers. Subsidiaries of NEER compete in certain states for retail customers, which can be divided into two principal segments: residential and commercial and industrial (C&I). Residential customers largely require only energy services, which may be purchased on a month-to-month basis or under a multi-year contract. Large C&I customers share many of the same characteristics as wholesale utility customers and may require similarly customized and structured products.
In general, competitive retail electric providers are exposed to both volume and price risk: customers' volumes will vary, and competitive retail providers are committed to supplying the customer's full needs at all times and are therefore responsible for purchases in wholesale markets to meet those needs; and wholesale prices will fluctuate in ways that do not necessarily match the retail prices committed to the customer.
Expanded competition in a frequently changing regulatory environment presents both opportunities and risks for NEER. Opportunities exist for the selective acquisition of generation assets and for the construction and operation of efficient facilities that can sell power in competitive markets. NEER seeks to reduce its market risk by having a diversified portfolio by fuel type and location, as well as by contracting for the future sale of a significant amount of the electricity output of its facilities.
14
GENERATION AND OTHER OPERATIONS
The vast majority of NEER's revenue is derived from selling the products (energy, capacity and ancillary services) produced by its own generating facilities. To a limited extent, NEER also meets its customers' needs through purchases of relevant products in wholesale markets and may combine purchases with sales from its own assets in order to meet particular customers' needs.
At December 31, 2011, the locations of NEER's generation facilities in North America are as follows:
At December 31, 2011, NEER managed or participated in the management of essentially all of its projects in which it has an ownership interest.
NEER categorizes its portfolio in a number of different ways for different business purposes. See a listing of NEER's generating facilities in Item 2 - Generating Facilities. The following combination of the presence/absence of long-term contracts, fuel/technology and region is a common presentation that NEE has used in communicating its business:
Contracted, Merchant and Other Operations
NEER's portfolio of operations based on the presence/absence of long-term contracts and other operations is described below.
Contracted Assets. Contracted assets are projects with long-term power sales agreements for substantially all of their output and certain wind assets where long-term power contracts are expected to be executed. At December 31, 2011, NEER had 9,647 mw of contracted assets, substantially all of which have long-term power contracts. Essentially all of the output of these contracted assets were under power sales agreements, with a weighted-average remaining contract life of approximately 16 years, and have firm fuel and transportation agreements with expiration dates ranging from March 2012 through 2022. See Note 14 - Contracts. Approximately 6,860 mw of this capacity is wind generation and 1,621 mw of this capacity is nuclear generation. The remaining 1,166 mw use a variety of fuels and technologies such as natural gas, oil and solar.
Merchant Assets. Merchant assets are projects that do not have long-term power sales agreements to sell their output, or, in the case of certain wind assets, are not expected to have long-term power contracts, and therefore require active marketing and hedging. At December 31, 2011, NEER's portfolio of merchant assets consists of 6,960 mw of owned wind, nuclear, natural gas, oil, solar and hydro generation facilities, including 846 mw of peak generating facilities. Approximately 60% (based on net mw capacity) of the natural gas-fueled merchant assets have natural gas transportation agreements to provide for fluctuating natural
15
gas requirements. See Note 14 - Contracts. Derivative instruments (primarily swaps, options, futures and forwards) are used to lock in pricing and manage the commodity price risk inherent in power sales and fuel purchases. Managing market risk through these instruments introduces other types of risk, primarily counterparty, credit and operational risks.
Other. NEER's operations also include the gas infrastructure and customer supply and proprietary power and gas trading businesses. See NEER Customer Supply and Proprietary Power and Gas Trading below.
NEER Fuel/Technology Mix
NEER's generating capacity is produced using a variety of fuel sources as further described below.
Wind Facilities
At December 31, 2011, NEER had ownership interests in wind generating facilities with a total capacity of 8,569 mw (net ownership). NEER operates substantially all of these wind facilities, which are located in 17 states and Canada. NEER added 379 mw of new wind generation in 2011, including 128 mw related to the repowering of two California wind facilities, and expects to add approximately 1,150 mw to 1,500 mw of new wind generation in 2012.
Natural Gas Facilities
At December 31, 2011, NEER had 3,991 mw of natural gas assets. NEER owns and operates 1,004 mw of natural gas-fired generation from contracted assets located throughout the Northeast. During 2011, subsidiaries of NEER sold their ownership interests in a portfolio of natural gas-fired generating assets totaling approximately 2,700 mw of capacity located in California, Virginia, Alabama, South Carolina and Rhode Island. See Management's Discussion - Overview and Note 4 - Nonrecurring Fair Value Measurements.
Nuclear Facilities
At December 31, 2011, NEER owned, or had undivided interests in, and operated the following four nuclear units with a total net generating capacity of 2,721 mw.
Facility | Location | mw | Portfolio Category | Operating License Expiration Dates | ||||||
Seabrook | New Hampshire | 1,100 | Merchant | 2030 | (a) | |||||
Duane Arnold | Iowa | 431 | Contracted(b) | 2034 | ||||||
Point Beach Unit No. 1 | Wisconsin | 595 | Contracted(c) | 2030 | ||||||
Point Beach Unit No. 2 | Wisconsin | 595 | Contracted(c) | 2033 | ||||||
__________________
(a) | In 2010, NEER filed an application with the NRC to renew Seabrook's operating license for an additional 20 years. |
(b) | NEER sells substantially all of its share of the output of Duane Arnold under a long-term contract expiring in 2014. |
(c) | NEER sells all of the output of Point Beach Units Nos. 1 and 2 under long-term contracts through the current operating license terms. |
16
NEER's nuclear facilities have several contracts for the supply of uranium and conversion, enrichment and fabrication of nuclear fuel with expiration dates ranging from March 2012 through 2022. See Note 14 - Contracts. NEER is responsible for all nuclear unit operations and the ultimate decommissioning of the nuclear units, the cost of which is shared on a pro-rata basis by the joint owners for the jointly owned units. NRC regulations require plant owners to submit a plan for decontamination and decommissioning five years before the projected end of plant operation. See estimated decommissioning cost data in Management's Discussion - Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates - Nuclear Decommissioning and Fossil/Solar Dismantlement.
Nuclear Unit Scheduled Refueling Outages. NEER's nuclear units are periodically removed from service to accommodate normal refueling and maintenance outages, including inspections, repairs and certain other modifications. Scheduled nuclear refueling outages typically require the unit to be removed from service for variable lengths of time. The duration is longer for expanded scope outages, one of which is scheduled at Duane Arnold in 2012 and is expected to last approximately 60 days. The following table summarizes the next scheduled refueling outages:
Facility | Next Scheduled Refueling Outage | |
Seabrook | October 2012 | |
Duane Arnold | October 2012 | |
Point Beach Unit No. 1 | April 2013 | |
Point Beach Unit No. 2 | November 2012 | |
Disposition of Spent Nuclear Fuel. NEER's nuclear facilities use both on-site storage pools and dry storage casks to store spent nuclear fuel generated by these facilities, which are expected to allow NEER to store spent nuclear fuel at these facilities through license expiration.
As owners and operators of nuclear facilities, certain subsidiaries of NEER are subject to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and are parties to the spent fuel settlement agreement and legal actions described in I. FPL - Nuclear Operations. Similar to FPL, these subsidiaries will continue to pay fees to the U.S. government's nuclear waste fund pending the D.C. Circuit's decision on the fee suspension petition.
Recent Nuclear Developments. For discussion of current developments regarding the impact of the 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan as it relates to U.S. nuclear facilities, see I. FPL - Nuclear Operations. NEER's nuclear facilities are subject to the same potential NRC actions as described for FPL. Duane Arnold is NEER's only boiling water reactor unit. NEER is currently reviewing the NRC's directions relating to the NRC staff's recommendations and assessing the potential financial and operational impact on its nuclear units.
Solar Facilities
NEER is one of the largest owners of utility-scale solar energy projects in the U.S., principally through a 310 mw facility in California's Mojave Desert, of which 148 mw is owned by NEER as of December 31, 2011. NEER is in the process of constructing solar thermal facilities with generating capacity of 99.8 mw in Spain (Spain solar project) and 250 mw in California (Genesis solar project), which are expected to be completed in 2013 and 2014, respectively. In addition, a 550 mw solar PV project in California (Desert Sunlight solar project), in which NEER has a 50% equity investment, has commenced construction and commercial operation is expected to be phased in during 2013 through 2015. During 2011, NEER added approximately 5 mw of new solar generation.
Other Assets
At December 31, 2011, NEER had 1,168 mw of generation assets from a variety of other fuel technologies, including oil and hydropower, with facilities located throughout the Northeast.
17
NEER Generation by Geographic Region
NEER's generating capacity spans various geographic regions in North America, thereby reducing overall volatility related to varying market conditions and seasonality on a portfolio basis. NEER's generating facilities at December 31, 2011 are categorized by geographic region (See Item 2 - Generating Facilities) in terms of mw of capacity as follows:
NEER's power generation in terms of mwh produced for the year ended December 31, 2011 by fuel type is as follows:
NEER CUSTOMER SUPPLY AND PROPRIETARY POWER AND GAS TRADING
PMI, a subsidiary of NEER, buys and sells wholesale energy commodities, such as electricity, natural gas and oil. PMI sells the output from NEER's plants that has not been sold under long-term contracts and procures the non-nuclear fuel for use by NEER's generation fleet. Its primary role is to manage the commodity risk of NEER's portfolio. PMI uses derivative instruments such as swaps, options, futures and forwards to manage the risk associated with fluctuating commodity prices and to optimize the value of NEER's power generation assets.
PMI also provides a wide range of electricity and gas commodity products as well as marketing and trading services to electric and gas utilities, municipalities, cooperatives and other load-serving entities, as well as to owners of electric generation facilities. PMI's customer supply business includes providing full energy and capacity requirements and mid-marketing services that include sales and purchases of wholesale commodities-related products and the operations of a retail electricity provider, which during 2011, served approximately 2,200 mw of peak load to approximately 201,800 customers across the ERCOT, New England Power Pool (NEPOOL), PJM, NYISO and MISO markets.
18
The results of PMI's activities are included in NEER's operating results. See Management's Discussion - Energy Marketing and Trading and Market Risk Sensitivity, Note 1 - Energy Trading and Note 3.
NEER REGULATION
Each of the energy markets in which NEER operates is subject to domestic and foreign regulation, including local, state and federal regulation, and other specific rules.
At December 31, 2011, NEER had ownership interests in operating independent power projects located in the U.S. that have received exempt wholesale generator status as defined under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005, which represent approximately 95% of NEER's net generating capacity. Exempt wholesale generators own or operate a facility exclusively to sell electricity to wholesale customers. They are barred from selling electricity directly to retail customers. NEER's exempt wholesale generators produce electricity from wind, hydro, fossil fuels and nuclear facilities. Essentially all of the remaining 5% of NEER's net generating capacity has qualifying facility status under PURPA. NEER's qualifying facilities generate electricity primarily from wind, solar and fossil fuels. Qualifying facility status exempts the projects from, among other things, many of the provisions of the Federal Power Act, as well as state laws and regulations relating to rates and financial or organizational regulation of electric utilities. While projects with qualifying facility and/or exempt wholesale generator status are exempt from various restrictions, each project must still comply with other federal, state and local laws, including, but not limited to, those regarding siting, construction, operation, licensing, pollution abatement and other environmental laws.
Additionally, NEER facilities located in the U.S. are subject to FERC regulations and market rules, the NERC's mandatory reliability standards and the EPA's environmental laws, and its nuclear facilities are also subject to the jurisdiction of the NRC. See FPL - FPL Regulation for additional discussion of FERC, NERC, NRC, and EPA regulations. With the exception of facilities located in ERCOT, the FERC has jurisdiction over various aspects of NEER's business, including the oversight and investigation of competitive wholesale energy markets, regulation of the transmission and sale of natural gas, regulation of hydro projects and oversight of environmental matters related to natural gas and hydro projects and major electricity policy initiatives. The PUCT has jurisdiction, including the regulation of rates and services, oversight of competitive markets, and enforcement of statutes and rules, over NEER facilities located in ERCOT.
NEER is subject to environmental laws and regulations, and is affected by some of the emerging issues related to renewable energy resources as described in the NEE Environmental Matters section below. In order to better anticipate these potential regulatory changes, NEER continues to actively evaluate and participate in regional market redesigns of existing operating rules for the integration of renewable energy resources and for the purchase and sale of energy commodities.
NEER EMPLOYEES
NEER and its subsidiaries had approximately 4,700 employees at December 31, 2011. Subsidiaries of NEER have collective bargaining agreements with various unions which are summarized in the table below.
Union | Location | Contract Expiration Date | % of NEER's Employees Covered | |||||
IBEW | Wisconsin | June 2012 - September 2013(a) | 10 | % | ||||
Utility Workers Union of America | New Hampshire | December 2013 | 5 | |||||
IBEW | Iowa | May 2012 | 3 | |||||
Security Police and Fire Professionals of America | Iowa | July 2012 | 2 | |||||
IBEW | Maine | February 2013 | 2 | |||||
IBEW | California | March 2012 | - | (b) | ||||
Total | 22 | % | ||||||
(a) | Various employees at Point Beach are represented by the IBEW under four separate contracts with different expiration dates. |
(b) | Less than 1% of NEER's employees. |
In addition, the employees of an operating project in Illinois, constituting less than 1% of NEER's employees, are represented by the International Union of Operating Engineers, which is currently negotiating its first collective bargaining agreement.
III. OTHER NEE OPERATING SUBSIDIARIES
NEE's Corporate and Other segment represents other business activities, primarily FPL FiberNet and Lone Star, that are not separately reportable. See Note 15.
FPL FIBERNET
FPL FiberNet conducts its business through two separate wholly-owned subsidiaries of NEECH. One subsidiary was formed in 2000 to enhance the value of NEE's fiber-optic network assets that were originally built to support FPL operations and the other was formed in 2011 to hold fiber-optic network assets which were acquired. Both subsidiaries are limited liability companies organized under the laws of Delaware. FPL FiberNet leases fiber-optic network capacity and dark fiber to FPL and other customers,
19
primarily telephone, wireless, internet and other telecommunications companies. FPL FiberNet's networks cover most of the metropolitan areas in Florida and several in Texas. FPL FiberNet also has a long-haul network providing bandwidth at wholesale rates. The long-haul network connects major cities in Florida and Texas with additional connectivity to Atlanta, Georgia and the South Central U.S., including Arkansas, Louisiana and Oklahoma. At December 31, 2011, FPL FiberNet's network consisted of approximately 7,800 route miles. FPL FiberNet is subject to regulation by the Federal Communications Commission which has jurisdiction over wire and wireless communication networks and by the public utility commissions in the states in which it provides intrastate telecommunication services.
LONE STAR
Lone Star, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of NEECH, is constructing approximately 320 miles of 345 kv transmission lines and other associated facilities in Texas. Lone Star, a limited liability company organized under the laws of Delaware, is a rate-regulated transmission service provider in Texas. Two substations and associated facilities with a total capital investment of approximately $60 million are expected to be placed in service in 2012, with the remaining associated facilities and transmission lines expected to be placed in service in the first quarter of 2013, for a total capital investment of approximately $785 million. Lone Star's transmission lines are part of a transmission grid improvement program that will add approximately 2,300 miles of 345 kv lines to deliver power from the Competitive Renewable Energy Zones in west Texas and the Texas panhandle to the Dallas/Fort Worth area and other population centers in Texas. Lone Star will own the transmission lines and associated facilities and operate them after they are placed in service.
Lone Star is subject to regulation by a number of federal, state and other agencies, including, but not limited to, the PUCT, the ERCOT, the NERC and the EPA, as well as certain limited regulations of the FERC. See I. FPL - FPL Regulation for further discussion of FERC, NERC, and EPA regulations and NEE Environmental Matters. The PUCT has jurisdiction over a wide range of Lone Star's business activities, including, among others, rates charged to customers and certain aspects of siting, construction and operation of transmission systems. The PUCT sets rates at a level that allows Lone Star the opportunity to collect from customers total revenues (revenue requirements) equal to Lone Star's cost of providing service, including a reasonable rate of return on invested capital.
In January 2012, Lone Star filed a petition with the PUCT requesting, among other things, interim rates that would take effect when Lone Star's first substation is placed in service and final rates when the transmission lines are energized. The petition also proposes to limit cost recovery to Lone Star's actual capital costs by making a true-up filing within 120 days of energizing the transmission lines. If approved, based on the expected in-service dates, the requested rates would result in annual revenues of approximately $14 million in 2012 and $110 million in 2013. Lone Star's requested rates are based on a proposed regulatory ROE of 11% with a regulatory equity ratio of 52%. Hearings on this rate proceeding are expected during the second quarter of 2012 and a final decision is expected during the third quarter of 2012. The interim rates would be subject to refund pending the final decision on the rate proceeding. The PUCT has the authority to disallow recovery of costs that it considers excessive or imprudently incurred.
NEE ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS
NEE and FPL are subject to domestic and foreign environmental laws and regulations, including extensive federal, state, and local environmental statutes, rules, and regulations. The U.S. Congress and certain states and regions continue to consider several legislative and regulatory proposals with respect to GHG emissions. The economic and operational impact of climate change legislation on NEE and FPL depends on a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, the allowed emissions, whether emission allowances will be allocated or auctioned, the cost to reduce emissions or buy allowances in the marketplace and the availability of offsets and mitigating factors to moderate the costs of compliance. Based on the most recent reference data available from government sources, NEE is among the lowest emitters, among electric generators, of GHG in the U.S. measured by its rate of emissions expressed as pounds of CO2 per mwh of generation. However, the legislative and regulatory proposals have differing methods of implementation and the impact on FPL's and NEER's generating units and/or the financial impact (either positive or negative) to NEE and FPL could be material, depending on the eventual structure of any legislation enacted or specific implementation rules adopted.
I. Environmental Regulations
The following is a discussion of certain existing and emerging federal and state initiatives and rules, some of which could potentially have a material effect (either positive or negative) on NEE and its subsidiaries. FPL expects to seek recovery through the environmental clause for compliance costs associated with any new environmental laws and regulations.
• | Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). In December 2011, the EPA issued a final MATS rule as required under the Clean Air Act which requires coal-fired and oil-fired generating units to reduce emissions of hazardous air pollutants. The MATS rule includes a limited use provision which excludes low-capacity generating units from the requirements to add pollution control equipment, under which three oil-fired units at FPL and four oil-fired units at NEER are expected to qualify. Based on the provisions of the rule, four oil-fired units and two coal-fired units at FPL are in the process of adding or could be required to add additional pollution control equipment to meet Maximum Achievable Control Technology standards. A third coal-fired unit at FPL is in the process of adding additional pollution control equipment to meet certain state compliance requirements which would also satisfy the Maximum Achievable Control Technology standards under the MATS rule. Units affected by the rule will |
20
be required to comply by April 2015, with a possible one year extension for compliance if required to install pollution control equipment.
• | Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)/Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). The EPA's CAIR requires SO2 and NOx emissions reductions from electric generating units in specified Eastern states and the District of Columbia, where the emissions from electric generating units are deemed to be transported to downwind states. NEER and FPL began complying with the CAIR on January 1, 2009. In July 2011, the EPA issued the CSAPR, a final rule which was to replace the CAIR beginning in January 2012. The CSAPR would limit emissions of SO2 and NOx from power plants in 28 eastern states and provides an allocation methodology for emission allowances and reduction limits for SO2 and NOx beginning in January 2012 and seasonal ozone requirements beginning in May 2012, with a second phase of reductions beginning in January 2014. FPL would only be affected by the seasonal ozone requirements of the rule while NEER would be affected by the annual SO2 and NOx emissions requirements as well as the seasonal ozone requirements in several states. Several groups have petitioned the EPA to reconsider the CSAPR and in December 2011, the D.C. Circuit issued an order staying implementation of the CSAPR pending resolution of legal challenges to the rule and ordered that the CAIR remain in place while the CSAPR is stayed. The case is scheduled for oral argument in April 2012. The ultimate resolution of the issues surrounding the CSAPR is uncertain at this time. |
• | Clean Water Act Section 316(b). In March 2011, the EPA issued a proposed rule under Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act to address the location, design, construction and capacity of intake structures at existing power plants with once-through cooling water systems, with a final rule not expected until the summer of 2012. The proposed rule is intended to require the Best Technology Available to reduce the impact on aquatic organisms from once-through cooling water intake systems. Under the proposed rule, potentially thirteen of FPL's facilities and five of NEER's facilities may be required to add additional controls or make operational changes to comply, the economic and operational impact of which cannot be determined at this time, but could be material. Prior to the passage of a new rule, states are continuing to utilize “Best Professional Judgment” in the application of Section 316(b) compliance requirements. |
• | Avian/Bat Regulations and Wind Turbine Siting Guidelines. NEER and FPL are subject to numerous environmental regulations and guidelines related to threatened and endangered species and their habitats, as well as avian and bat species, for the siting, construction and ongoing operations of their facilities. The facilities most significantly affected are wind facilities and transmission and distribution lines. The environmental laws include, among others, the Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act which provide for protection of migratory birds, eagles and endangered species of birds and bats and their habitats. Regulations have been adopted under some of these laws that contain provisions that allow the owner/operator of a facility to apply for a permit to undertake specific activities including those associated with certain siting decisions, construction activities and operations. In addition to regulations, voluntary wind turbine siting guidelines, which are expected to be finalized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the end of the first quarter of 2012, will set forth siting, monitoring and coordination protocols that are designed to support wind development in the U.S. while also protecting both birds and bats and their habitats. These guidelines will include provisions for specific monitoring and study conditions which will need to be met in order for projects to be in adherence with these voluntary guidelines. Complying with these new environmental regulations and adhering to the provisions set forth in the voluntary wind turbine siting guidelines could result in additional costs at existing and new wind generating facilities and transmission and distribution facilities at NEER and FPL. |
• | Regulation of GHG Emissions. Pursuant to rules issued by the EPA under the Clean Air Act, new facilities emitting 100,000 tons per year (tpy) or more of GHG and modifications to existing facilities resulting in an increase of GHG emissions of 75,000 tpy or more have to perform a Best Available Control Technology review and, based on that review, may have to reduce emissions by adding additional emissions control equipment or implementing energy efficiency projects. Several petitioners have challenged the EPA's GHG regulations and the case is pending review by the D.C. Circuit, the timing and ultimate outcome of which is uncertain at this time. At FPL, the modernization of the Port Everglades facility, if approved by the FPSC, would be affected by this rule, the impact of which cannot be determined at this time. |
II. Other GHG Emissions Reduction Initiatives
NEER's plants operate in certain states and regions that continue to consider and implement regulatory proposals to reduce GHG emissions. RPS, currently in place in approximately 30 states and the District of Columbia, require electricity providers in the state or district to meet a certain percentage of their retail sales with energy from renewable sources. These standards vary, but the majority include requirements to meet 10% to 25% of the electricity providers' retail sales with energy from renewable sources by 2025. NEER's plants operate in 18 states that have a RPS and NEER believes that these standards will create incremental demand for renewable energy in the future.
Other GHG reduction initiatives including, among others, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and the California Greenhouse Gas Regulation aim to reduce emissions through a variety of programs and under varying timelines. Based on its clean generating portfolio, NEER expects to continue experiencing a positive impact on earnings as a result of these GHG reduction initiatives. Additionally, these initiatives provide NEER opportunities with regards to wind and solar development as well as favorable energy pricing.
21
WEBSITE ACCESS TO SEC FILINGS
NEE and FPL make their SEC filings, including the 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 NEE's internet website, www.nexteraenergy.com, as soon as reasonably practicable after those documents are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. The information and materials available on NEE's website (or any of its subsidiaries' websites) are not incorporated by reference into this combined annual report on Form 10-K. The SEC maintains an internet website that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding registrants that file electronically with the SEC at http://www.sec.gov.
22
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF NEE(a)
Name | Age | Position | Effective Date | |||
Christopher A. Bennett | 53 | Executive Vice President & Chief Strategy, Policy & Business Process Improvement Officer of NEE | February 15, 2008(b) | |||
Paul I. Cutler | 52 | Treasurer of NEE Treasurer of FPL Assistant Secretary of NEE and FPL | February 19, 2003 February 18, 2003 December 10, 1997 | |||
Moray P. Dewhurst | 56 | Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer, and Executive Vice President - Finance of NEE Executive Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of FPL | October 5, 2011 | |||
Shaun J. Francis | 40 | Executive Vice President, Human Resources of NEE Executive Vice President, Human Resources of FPL | August 16, 2010 January 31, 2011 | |||
Chris N. Froggatt | 54 | Vice President of NEE Controller and Chief Accounting Officer of NEE | October 19, 2009 February 27, 2010 | |||
Lewis Hay, III | 56 | Chief Executive Officer of NEE Chairman of NEE and FPL | June 11, 2001 January 1, 2002 | |||
Joseph T. Kelliher | 51 | Executive Vice President, Federal Regulatory Affairs of NEE | May 18, 2009 | |||
Robert L. McGrath | 58 | Executive Vice President, Engineering, Construction & Corporate Services of NEE and FPL | February 21, 2005(b) | |||
Manoochehr K. Nazar | 57 | Executive Vice President, Nuclear Division and Chief Nuclear Officer of NEE Executive Vice President, Nuclear Division and Chief Nuclear Officer of FPL | January 1, 2010 January 15, 2010 | |||
Armando J. Olivera | 62 | Chief Executive Officer of FPL | July 17, 2008 | |||
Armando Pimentel, Jr. | 49 | President and Chief Executive Officer of NEER | October 5, 2011 | |||
James L. Robo | 49 | President and Chief Operating Officer of NEE | December 15, 2006 | |||
Antonio Rodriguez | 69 | Executive Vice President, Power Generation Division of NEE Executive Vice President, Power Generation Division of FPL | January 1, 2007(b) July 1, 1999(b) | |||
Charles E. Sieving | 39 | Executive Vice President & General Counsel of NEE Executive Vice President of FPL | December 1, 2008 January 1, 2009 | |||
______________________
(a) | Information is as of February 27, 2012. Executive officers are elected annually by, and serve at the pleasure of, their respective boards of directors. Except as noted below, each officer has held his present position for five years or more and his employment history is continuous. Mr. Bennett was vice president, business strategy & policy of NEE from July 2007 to February 2008. From September 1995 to June 2007, Mr. Bennett was vice president of Dean & Company, a management consulting and investment firm. Mr. Dewhurst has been vice chairman of NEE since August 2009 and was chief of staff of NEE from August 2009 to October 2011. From July 2001 to May 2008, Mr. Dewhurst was vice president, finance and chief financial officer of NEE and senior vice president, finance and chief financial officer of FPL. Mr. Francis was general manager of human resources for a division of General Electric Company, GE Transportation, a supplier to the railroad, marine, drilling, mining and wind power industries from February 2008 to August 2010. From February 2006 to February 2008, Mr. Francis served as general manager of human resources for a division of General Electric Company, GE Equipment Services, a leader in the transportation industry including rail cars, sea containers, tractor trailers, and truck leasing. Mr. Froggatt was the vice president and treasurer of Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, a public utility holding company, and its major subsidiary, Arizona Public Service Company (APS), a regulated electric utility, from December 2008 to October 2009. From October 2002 to December 2008, Mr. Froggatt was vice president, controller and chief accounting officer of APS. Mr. Hay was also chief executive officer of FPL from January 2002 to July 2008. Mr. Kelliher was chairman of the FERC from July 2005 to January 2009. Mr. Nazar was the chief nuclear officer of NEE from January 2009 to December 2009. Mr. Nazar was senior vice president and chief nuclear officer of FPL from November 2007 to January 2009. From October 2003 to November 2007, Mr. Nazar was senior vice president & chief nuclear officer of American Electric Power Company, Inc., a public utility holding company. Mr. Olivera was also president of FPL from June 2003 to December 2011. Mr. Olivera has announced that he will retire from FPL on May 2, 2012. Mr. Pimentel was chief financial officer of NEE and FPL from May 2008 to October 2011 and executive vice president, finance of NEE and FPL from February 2008 to October 2011. Prior to that, Mr. Pimentel was a partner of Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, from June 1998 to February 2008. Mr. Sieving was also assistant secretary of NEE from May 2010 to May 2011 and general counsel of FPL from January 2009 to May 2010. Mr. Sieving was executive vice president, general counsel and secretary of PAETEC Holding Corp., a communications services and solutions provider, from February 2007 to November 2008 and was primarily responsible for all legal and regulatory matters. |
(b) | NEE title changed from vice president to executive vice president effective May 23, 2008. Where applicable, FPL title changed from senior vice president to executive vice president effective July 17, 2008. |
23
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Risks Relating to NEE's and FPL's Business
The business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects of NEE and FPL are subject to a variety of risks, many of which are beyond the control of NEE and FPL. The following is a description of important risks that may adversely affect the business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects of NEE and FPL and may cause actual results of NEE and FPL to differ substantially from those that NEE or FPL currently expects or seeks. In that event, the market price for the securities of NEE or FPL could decline. Accordingly, the risks described below should be carefully considered together with the other information set forth in this report and in future reports that NEE and FPL file with the SEC. The risks described below are not the only risks facing NEE and FPL. Additional risks and uncertainties may also materially adversely affect NEE's or FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Each of NEE and FPL has disclosed the material risks known to it to affect its business at this time. However, there may be further risks and uncertainties that are not presently known or that are not currently believed to be material that may in the future adversely affect the performance or financial condition of NEE and FPL.
Regulatory, Legislative and Legal Risks
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected by the extensive regulation of their business.
The operations of NEE and FPL are subject to complex and comprehensive federal, state and other regulation. This extensive regulatory framework, portions of which are more specifically identified in the following risk factors, regulates, among other things and to varying degrees, NEE's and FPL's industries, rates and cost structures, operation of nuclear power facilities, construction and operation of generation, transmission and distribution facilities and natural gas and oil production, transmission and fuel storage facilities, acquisition, disposal, depreciation and amortization of facilities and other assets, decommissioning costs and funding, service reliability, wholesale and retail competition, and commodities trading and derivatives transactions. In their business planning and in the management of their operations, NEE and FPL must address the effects of regulation on their business and any inability or failure to do so adequately could have a material adverse effect on their business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially adversely affected if they are unable to recover in a timely manner any significant amount of costs, a return on certain assets or an appropriate return on capital through base rates, cost recovery clauses, other regulatory mechanisms or otherwise.
FPL is a regulated entity subject to the jurisdiction of the FPSC over a wide range of business activities, including, among other items, the retail rates charged to its customers through base rates and cost recovery clauses, the terms and conditions of its services, procurement of electricity for its customers, issuance of securities, and aspects of the siting and operation of its generating plants and transmission and distribution systems for the sale of electric energy. The FPSC has the authority to disallow recovery by FPL of costs that it considers excessive or imprudently incurred and to determine the level of return that FPL is permitted to earn on its investments. The regulatory process, which may be adversely affected by the political, regulatory and economic environment in Florida and elsewhere, limits FPL's ability to increase earnings and does not provide any assurance as to achievement of authorized or other earnings levels. NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially adversely affected if any material amount of costs, a return on certain assets or an appropriate return on capital cannot be recovered through base rates, cost recovery clauses, other regulatory mechanisms or otherwise. Lone Star, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of NEE that is a regulated electric transmission utility subject to the jurisdiction of the PUCT, is subject to similar risks.
Regulatory decisions that are important to NEE and FPL may be materially adversely affected by political, regulatory and economic factors.
The local and national political, regulatory and economic environment has had, and may in the future have, an adverse effect on FPSC decisions with negative consequences for FPL. These decisions may require, for example, FPL to cancel or delay planned development activities, to reduce or delay other planned capital expenditures or to pay for investments or otherwise incur costs that it may not be able to recover through rates, each of which could have a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects of NEE and FPL. Lone Star is subject to similar risks.
FPL's use of derivative instruments could be subject to prudence challenges and, if found imprudent, could result in disallowances of cost recovery for such use by the FPSC.
In the event that the FPSC engages in a prudence review of FPL's use of derivative instruments and finds such use to be imprudent, the FPSC could deny cost recovery for such use by FPL. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
24
Any reduction or elimination of existing government support policies, including, but not limited to, tax incentives, RPS or feed-in tariffs, and ultimately any failure to renew or increase these existing support policies, could result in less demand for generation from NEER's renewable energy projects and could have a material adverse effect on NEE's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEER depends heavily on government policies that support renewable energy and enhance the economic feasibility of developing and operating wind and solar energy projects in regions in which NEER operates or plans to develop and operate renewable energy facilities. The federal government, a majority of the 50 U.S. states and portions of Canada and Spain provide incentives, such as tax incentives, RPS or feed-in tariffs, that support the sale of energy from renewable energy facilities owned by NEER, such as wind and solar energy facilities. The applicable legislation often grants the relevant state public utility commission the ability to reduce electric supply companies' obligations to meet renewable energy requirements in specified circumstances. Any changes to, or the elimination of, governmental incentives that support renewable energy could result in less demand for generation from NEE's wind and solar energy projects and could have a material adverse effect on NEER's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEER also depends heavily on investment cost recovery mechanisms currently available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). The Recovery Act includes, among other things, provisions that allow companies building wind and solar energy facilities the option to choose between investment cost recovery mechanisms that make the development of such facilities economically attractive. Any changes to the Recovery Act that eliminate or reduce support for renewable generation projects could impede NEER's ability to economically develop wind and solar energy projects in the future and could have a material adverse effect on NEER's ability to develop renewable energy projects in the future.
If investments in renewable energy and associated projects are perceived less positively by legislators, regulators or the public, this could result in the non-renewal or elimination of beneficial tax policies, among other policies, that benefit NEER. Any such legislative changes could impede NEER's ability to economically develop wind and solar energy projects in the future and could have a material adverse effect on NEE's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially adversely affected as a result of new or revised laws, regulations or interpretations or other regulatory initiatives.
NEE's and FPL's business is influenced by various legislative and regulatory initiatives, including, but not limited to, initiatives regarding deregulation or restructuring of the energy industry, regulation of the commodities trading and derivatives markets, and environmental regulation, such as regulation of air emissions, regulation of water consumption and water discharges, and regulation of gas and oil infrastructure operations, as well as associated environmental permitting. Changes in the nature of the regulation of NEE's and FPL's business could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's results of operations. NEE and FPL are unable to predict future legislative or regulatory changes, initiatives or interpretations, although any such changes, initiatives or interpretations may increase costs and competitive pressures on NEE and FPL, which could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
FPL has limited competition in the Florida market for retail electricity customers. Any changes in Florida law or regulation which introduce competition in the Florida retail electricity market could have a material adverse effect on FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. There can be no assurance that FPL will be able to respond adequately to such regulatory changes, which could have a material adverse effect on FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEER is subject to FERC rules related to transmission that are designed to facilitate competition in the wholesale market on practically a nationwide basis by providing greater certainty, flexibility and more choices to wholesale power customers. NEE cannot predict the impact of changing FERC rules or the effect of changes in levels of wholesale supply and demand, which are typically driven by factors beyond NEE's control. There can be no assurance that NEER will be able to respond adequately or sufficiently quickly to such rules and developments, or to any other changes that reverse or restrict the competitive restructuring of the energy industry in those jurisdictions in which such restructuring has occurred. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on NEE's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially adversely affected if the rules implementing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) broaden the scope of its provisions regarding the regulation of OTC financial derivatives and make them applicable to NEE and FPL.
The Dodd-Frank Act, enacted into law in July 2010, among other things, provides for the regulation of the OTC derivatives market. The Dodd-Frank Act includes provisions that will require certain OTC derivatives, or swaps, to be centrally cleared and executed through an exchange or other approved trading platform. While the legislation is broad and detailed, substantial portions of the legislation require implementing rules to be adopted by federal governmental agencies including, but not limited to, the SEC and the CFTC.
NEE and FPL cannot predict the final rules that will be adopted to implement the OTC derivatives market provisions of the Dodd-
25
Frank Act. Those rules could negatively affect NEE's and FPL's ability to hedge their commodity and interest rate risks, which could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's results of operations. NEE or FPL may have portions of their business that may be required to register as swap dealers or major swap participants and submit to extensive regulation if they wish to continue certain aspects of their derivative activities. The rules could also cause NEER to restructure part of its energy marketing and trading operations or to discontinue certain portions of its business. In addition, if the rules require NEE and FPL to post significant amounts of cash collateral with respect to swap transactions, NEE's and FPL's liquidity could be materially adversely affected, and their ability to enter into OTC derivatives to hedge commodity and interest rate risks could be significantly limited. Reporting and compliance requirements of the rules also could significantly increase operating costs and expose NEE and FPL to penalties for non-compliance. The Dodd-Frank Act or other initiatives also could impede the efficient operation of the commodities trading and derivatives markets, which could also materially adversely affect NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE and FPL are subject to numerous environmental laws and regulations that require capital expenditures, increase their cost of operations and may expose them to liabilities.
NEE and FPL are subject to domestic and foreign environmental laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, extensive federal, state and local environmental statutes, rules and regulations relating to air quality, water quality and usage, climate change, emissions of greenhouse gases, including, but not limited to, CO2, waste management, hazardous wastes, marine, avian and other wildlife mortality and habitat protection, historical artifact preservation, natural resources, health (including, but not limited to, electric and magnetic fields from power lines and substations), safety and RPS that could, among other things, prevent or delay the development of power generation, power or natural gas transmission, or other infrastructure projects, restrict the output of some existing facilities, limit the use of some fuels required for the production of electricity, require additional pollution control equipment, and otherwise increase costs, increase capital expenditures and limit or eliminate certain operations.
There are significant capital, operating and other costs associated with compliance with these environmental statutes, rules and regulations, and those costs could be even more significant in the future as a result of new legislation, the current trend toward more stringent standards, and stricter and more expansive application of existing environmental regulations. For example, among other potential or pending changes, the use of hydraulic fracturing or similar technologies to drill for natural gas and related compounds used by NEE's gas infrastructure business is currently being debated for potential regulation at the state and federal levels.
Violations of current or future laws, rules and regulations could expose NEE and FPL to regulatory and legal proceedings, disputes with, and legal challenges by, third parties, and potentially significant civil fines, criminal penalties and other sanctions.
NEE's and FPL's business could be negatively affected by federal or state laws or regulations mandating new or additional limits on the production of greenhouse gas emissions.
Federal or state laws or regulations may be adopted that would impose new or additional limits on the emissions of greenhouse gases, including, but not limited to, CO2 and methane, from electric generating units using fossil fuels like coal and natural gas. The potential effects of such greenhouse gas emission limits on NEE's and FPL's electric generating units are subject to significant uncertainties based on, among other things, the timing of the implementation of any new requirements, the required levels of emission reductions, the nature of any market-based or tax-based mechanisms adopted to facilitate reductions, the relative availability of greenhouse gas emission reduction offsets, the development of cost-effective, commercial-scale carbon capture and storage technology and supporting regulations and liability mitigation measures, and the range of available compliance alternatives.
While NEE's and FPL's electric generating units emit greenhouse gases at a lower rate of emissions than most of the U.S. electric generation sector, the results of operations of NEE and FPL could be adversely affected to the extent that new federal or state legislation or regulators impose any new greenhouse gas emission limits. Any future limits on greenhouse gas emissions could:
• | create substantial additional costs in the form of taxes or emission allowances; |
• | make some of NEE's and FPL's electric generating units uneconomical to operate in the long term; |
• | require significant capital investment in carbon capture and storage technology, fuel switching, or the replacement of high-emitting generation facilities with lower-emitting generation facilities; or |
• | affect the availability or cost of fossil fuels. |
There can be no assurance that NEE or FPL would be able to completely recover any such costs or investments, which could have a material adverse effect on their business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Extensive federal regulation of the operations of NEE and FPL exposes NEE and FPL to significant and increasing compliance costs and may also expose them to substantial monetary penalties and other sanctions for compliance failures.
NEE and FPL are subject to extensive federal regulation, which imposes significant and increasing compliance costs on their operations. Additionally, any actual or alleged compliance failures could result in significant costs and other potentially adverse effects of regulatory investigations, proceedings, settlements, decisions and claims, including, among other items, potentially significant monetary penalties. As an example, under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, NEE and FPL, as owners and operators of bulk power transmission systems and/or electric generation facilities, are subject to mandatory reliability standards. Compliance
26
with these mandatory reliability standards may subject NEE and FPL to higher operating costs and may result in increased capital expenditures. If FPL or NEE is found not to be in compliance with these standards, it may incur substantial monetary penalties and other sanctions. Both the costs of regulatory compliance and the costs that may be imposed as a result of any actual or alleged compliance failures could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Changes in tax laws, as well as judgments and estimates used in the determination of tax-related asset and liability amounts, could adversely affect NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's provision for income taxes and reporting of tax-related assets and liabilities require significant judgments and the use of estimates. Amounts of tax-related assets and liabilities involve judgments and estimates of the timing and probability of recognition of income, deductions and tax credits, including, but not limited to, estimates for potential adverse outcomes regarding tax positions that have been taken and the ability to utilize tax benefit carryforwards, such as net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. Actual income taxes could vary significantly from estimated amounts due to the future impacts of, among other things, changes in tax laws, regulations and interpretations, the financial condition and results of operations of NEE and FPL, and the resolution of audit issues raised by taxing authorities. Ultimate resolution of income tax matters may result in material adjustments to tax-related assets and liabilities, which could negatively affect NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be materially adversely affected due to adverse results of litigation.
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be materially affected by adverse results of litigation. Unfavorable resolution of legal proceedings in which NEE is involved or other future legal proceedings, including, but not limited to, class action lawsuits, may have a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects of NEE and FPL.
Operational Risks
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could suffer if NEE and FPL do not proceed with projects under development or are unable to complete the construction of, or capital improvements to, electric generation, transmission and distribution facilities, gas infrastructure facilities or other facilities on schedule or within budget.
NEE's and FPL's ability to complete construction of, and capital improvement projects for, their electric generation, transmission and distribution facilities, gas infrastructure facilities and other facilities on schedule and within budget may be adversely affected by escalating costs for materials and labor and regulatory compliance, inability to obtain or renew necessary licenses, rights-of-way, permits or other approvals on acceptable terms or on schedule, disputes involving contractors, labor organizations, land owners, governmental entities, environmental groups, Native American and aboriginal groups, and other third parties, negative publicity, transmission interconnection issues and other factors. If any development project or construction or capital improvement project is not completed, is delayed or is subject to cost overruns, certain associated costs may not be approved for recovery or recoverable through regulatory mechanisms that may otherwise be available, and NEE and FPL could become obligated to make delay or termination payments or become obligated for other damages under contracts, could experience the loss of tax credits or tax incentives and could be required to write-off all or a portion of their investments in the project. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE and FPL may face risks related to project siting, financing, construction, permitting, governmental approvals and the negotiation of project development agreements that may impede their development and operating activities.
NEE and FPL own, develop, construct, manage and operate electric-generating and transmission facilities. A key component of NEE's and FPL's growth is their ability to construct and operate generation and transmission facilities to meet customer needs. As part of these operations, NEE and FPL must periodically apply for licenses and permits from various local, state, federal and other regulatory authorities and abide by their respective conditions. Should NEE or FPL be unsuccessful in obtaining necessary licenses or permits on acceptable terms, should there be a delay in obtaining or renewing necessary licenses or permits or should regulatory authorities initiate any associated investigations or enforcement actions or impose related penalties or disallowances on NEE or FPL, NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially adversely affected. Any failure to negotiate successful project development agreements for new facilities with third parties could have similar results.
The operation and maintenance of NEE's and FPL's electric generation, transmission and distribution facilities, gas infrastructure facilities and other facilities are subject to many operational risks, the consequences of which could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's electric generation, transmission and distribution facilities, gas infrastructure facilities and other facilities are subject to many operational risks. Operational risks could result in, among other things, lost revenues due to prolonged outages, increased expenses due to monetary penalties or fines for compliance failures, liability to third parties for property and personal injury damage,
27
a failure to perform under applicable power sales agreements and associated loss of revenues from terminated agreements or liability for liquidated damages under continuing agreements, and replacement equipment costs or an obligation to purchase or generate replacement power at potentially higher prices.
Uncertainties and risks inherent in operating and maintaining NEE's and FPL's facilities include, but are not limited to:
• | risks associated with facility start-up operations, such as whether the facility will achieve projected operating performance on schedule and otherwise as planned; |
• | failures in the availability, acquisition or transportation of fuel or other necessary supplies; |
• | the impact of unusual or adverse weather conditions, including, but not limited to, natural disasters such as hurricanes, floods, earthquakes and droughts; |
• | performance below expected or contracted levels of output or efficiency; |
• | breakdown or failure, including, but not limited to, explosions, fires or other major events, of equipment, transmission and distribution lines or pipelines; |
• | availability of replacement equipment; |
• | risks of property damage or human injury from energized equipment, hazardous substances or explosions, fires or other events; |
• | availability of adequate water resources and ability to satisfy water intake and discharge requirements; |
• | inability to manage properly or mitigate known equipment defects in NEE's and FPL's facilities; |
• | use of new or unproven technology; |
• | risks associated with dependence on a specific fuel source, such as commodity price risk and lack of available alternative fuel sources; |
• | increased competition due to, among other factors, new facilities, excess supply and shifting demand; and |
• | insufficient insurance, warranties or performance guarantees to cover any or all lost revenues or increased expenses from the foregoing. |
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be negatively affected by a lack of growth or slower growth in the number of customers or in customer usage.
Growth in customer accounts and growth of customer usage each directly influence the demand for electricity and the need for additional power generation and power delivery facilities. Customer growth and customer usage are affected by a number of factors outside the control of NEE and FPL, such as mandated energy efficiency measures, demand side management goals, and economic and demographic conditions, such as population changes, job and income growth, housing starts, new business formation and the overall level of economic activity. A lack of growth, or a decline, in the number of customers or in customer demand for electricity may cause NEE and FPL to fail to fully realize the anticipated benefits from significant investments and expenditures and could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's own growth, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects can be materially adversely affected by weather conditions, including, but not limited to, the impact of severe weather.
Weather conditions directly influence the demand for electricity and natural gas and other fuels and affect the price of energy and energy-related commodities. In addition, severe weather, such as hurricanes, floods and earthquakes, can be destructive and cause power outages and property damage, reduce revenue, affect fuel supply, and require NEE and FPL to incur additional costs, for example, to restore service and repair damaged facilities, obtain replacement power and access available financing sources. Furthermore, NEE's and FPL's physical plant could be placed at greater risk of damage should changes in global climate produce unusual variations in temperature and weather patterns, resulting in more intense, frequent and extreme weather events, abnormal levels of precipitation and, particularly relevant to FPL, a change in sea level. FPL operates in the east and lower west coasts of Florida, an area that historically has been prone to severe weather events, such as hurricanes. A disruption or failure of electric generation, transmission or distribution systems or natural gas production, transmission, storage or distribution systems in the event of a hurricane, tornado or other severe weather event, or otherwise, could prevent NEE and FPL from operating their business in the normal course and could result in any of the adverse consequences described above. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
At FPL and other businesses of NEE where cost recovery is available, recovery of costs to restore service and repair damaged facilities is or may be subject to regulatory approval, and any determination by the regulator not to permit timely and full recovery of the costs incurred could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Changes in weather can also affect the production of electricity at power generating facilities, including, but not limited to, NEER's wind, solar and hydro-powered facilities. For example, the level of wind resource affects the revenue produced by wind generating facilities. Because the levels of wind, solar and hydro resources are variable and difficult to predict, NEER's results of operations for individual wind, solar and hydro facilities specifically, and NEE's results of operations generally, may vary significantly from period to period, depending on the level of available resources. To the extent that resources are not available at planned levels, the financial results from these facilities may be less than expected.
28
Threats of terrorism and catastrophic events that could result from terrorism, cyber attacks, or individuals and/or groups attempting to disrupt NEE's and FPL's business, or the businesses of third parties, may materially adversely affect NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE and FPL are subject to the potentially adverse operating and financial effects of terrorist acts and threats, as well as cyber attacks and other disruptive activities of individuals or groups. NEE's and FPL's generation, transmission and distribution facilities, fuel storage facilities, information technology systems and other infrastructure facilities and systems could be direct targets of, or be indirectly affected by, such activities.
Terrorist acts or other similar events affecting NEE's and FPL's systems and facilities, or those of third parties on which NEE and FPL rely, could harm NEE's and FPL's business, for example, by limiting their ability to generate, purchase or transmit power, by limiting their ability to bill customers and collect and process payments, and by delaying their development and construction of new generating facilities or capital improvements to existing facilities. These events, and governmental actions in response, could result in a material decrease in revenues, significant additional costs (for example, to repair assets, implement additional security requirements or maintain or acquire insurance), and reputational damage, could adversely affect NEE's and FPL's operations (for example, by contributing to disruption of supplies and markets for natural gas, oil and other fuels), and could impair NEE's and FPL's ability to raise capital (for example, by contributing to financial instability and lower economic activity).
The ability of NEE and FPL to obtain insurance and the terms of any available insurance coverage could be adversely affected by international, national, state or local events and company-specific events, as well as the financial condition of insurers. NEE's and FPL's insurance coverage does not provide protection against all significant losses.
Insurance coverage may not continue to be available or may not be available at rates or on terms similar to those presently available to NEE and FPL. The ability of NEE and FPL to obtain insurance and the terms of any available insurance coverage could be adversely affected by international, national, state or local events and company-specific events, as well as the financial condition of insurers. If insurance coverage is not available or obtainable on acceptable terms, NEE or FPL may be required to pay costs associated with adverse future events. NEE and FPL generally are not fully insured against all significant losses. For example, FPL is not fully insured against hurricane-related losses, but would instead seek recovery of such uninsured losses from customers subject to approval by the FPSC, to the extent losses exceed restricted funds set aside to cover the cost of storm damage. A loss for which NEE or FPL is not fully insured could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
If supply costs necessary to provide NEER's full energy and capacity requirement services are not favorable, operating costs could increase and adversely affect NEE's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEER provides full energy and capacity requirements services primarily to distribution utilities, which include load-following services and various ancillary services to satisfy all or a portion of such utilities' power supply obligations to their customers. The supply costs for these transactions may be affected by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, events that may occur after such utilities have committed to supply power, such as weather conditions, fluctuating prices for energy and ancillary services, and the ability of the distribution utilities' customers to elect to receive service from competing suppliers. NEER may not be able to recover all of its increased supply costs, which could have a material adverse effect on NEE's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Due to the potential for significant volatility in market prices for fuel, electricity and renewable and other energy commodities, NEER's inability or failure to hedge effectively its assets or positions against changes in commodity prices, volumes, interest rates, counterparty credit risk or other risk measures could significantly impair NEE's results of operations.
There can be significant volatility in market prices for fuel, electricity and renewable and other energy commodities. NEE's inability to manage properly or hedge the commodity risks within its portfolios, based on factors both from within or wholly or partially outside of NEE's control, may materially adversely affect NEE's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Sales of power on the spot market or on a short-term contractual basis may cause NEE's results of operations to be volatile.
A portion of NEER's power generation facilities operate wholly or partially without long-term power purchase agreements. Power from these facilities is sold on the spot market or on a short-term contractual basis. Spot market sales are subject to market volatility, and the revenue generated from these sales is subject to fluctuation that may cause NEE's results of operations to be volatile. NEER and NEE may not be able to manage volatility adequately, which could then have a material adverse effect on NEE's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Reductions in the liquidity of energy markets may restrict the ability of NEE to manage its operational risks, which, in turn, could negatively affect NEE's results of operations.
29
NEE is an active participant in energy markets. The liquidity of regional energy markets is an important factor in the company's ability to manage risks in these operations. Over the past several years, other market participants have ceased or significantly reduced their activities in energy markets as a result of several factors, including, but not limited to, government investigations, changes in market design and deteriorating credit quality. Liquidity in the energy markets can be adversely affected by price volatility, restrictions on the availability of credit and other factors, and any reduction in the liquidity of energy markets could have a material adverse effect on NEE's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
If price movements significantly or persistently deviate from historical behavior, NEE's and FPL's hedging and trading procedures and associated risk management tools may not protect against significant losses.
NEE and FPL have hedging and trading procedures and associated risk management tools, such as separate but complementary financial, credit, operational, compliance and legal reporting systems, internal controls, management review processes and other mechanisms. NEE and FPL are unable to assure that such procedures and tools will be effective against all potential risks. Additionally, risk management tools and metrics such as daily value at risk, earnings at risk, stop loss limits and liquidity guidelines are based on historical price movements. Due to the inherent uncertainty involved in price movements and potential deviation from historical pricing behavior, NEE and FPL are unable to assure that their risk management tools and metrics will be effective to protect against adverse effects on their business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Such adverse effects could be material.
If power transmission or natural gas, nuclear fuel or other commodity transportation facilities are unavailable or disrupted, FPL's and NEER's ability to sell and deliver power or natural gas may be limited.
FPL and NEER depend upon power transmission and natural gas, nuclear fuel and other commodity transportation facilities, many of which they do not own. Occurrences affecting the operation of these facilities that may or may not be beyond FPL's and NEER's control (such as severe weather or a generator or transmission facility outage, pipeline rupture, or sudden and significant increase or decrease in wind generation) may limit or halt the ability of FPL and NEER to sell and deliver power and natural gas, or to purchase necessary fuels and other commodities, which could materially adversely impact NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE and FPL are subject to credit and performance risk from customers, hedging counterparties and vendors.
NEE and FPL are exposed to risks associated with the creditworthiness and performance of their customers, hedging counterparties and vendors under contracts for the supply of equipment, materials, fuel and other goods and services required for their business operations and for the construction and operation of, and for capital improvements to, their facilities. Adverse conditions in the energy industry or the general economy, as well as circumstances of individual customers, hedging counterparties and vendors, may affect the ability of some customers, hedging counterparties and vendors to perform as required under their contracts with NEE and FPL.
If any hedging, vending or other counterparty fails to fulfill its contractual obligations, NEE and FPL may need to make arrangements with other counterparties or vendors, which could result in financial losses, higher costs, untimely completion of power generation facilities and other projects, and/or a disruption of their operations. If a defaulting counterparty is in poor financial condition, NEE and FPL may not be able to recover damages for any contract breach.
NEE and FPL could recognize financial losses or a reduction in operating cash flows if a counterparty fails to perform or make payments in accordance with the terms of derivative contracts or if NEE or FPL is required to post margin cash collateral under derivative contracts.
NEE and FPL use derivative instruments, such as swaps, options, futures and forwards, some of which are traded in the OTC markets or on exchanges, to manage their commodity and financial market risks, and for NEE to engage in trading and marketing activities. Any failures by their counterparties to perform or make payments in accordance with the terms of those transactions could have a material adverse effect on NEE's or FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Similarly, any requirement for FPL or NEE to post margin cash collateral under its derivative contracts could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE and FPL are highly dependent on sensitive and complex information technology systems, and any failure or breach of those systems could have a material adverse effect on their business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE and FPL operate in a highly regulated industry that requires the continuous functioning of sophisticated information technology systems and network infrastructure. Despite NEE's and FPL's implementation of security measures, all of their technology systems are vulnerable to disability, failures or unauthorized access due to such activities. If NEE's or FPL's information technology systems were to fail or be breached, and NEE or FPL was unable to recover in a timely way, NEE and FPL would be unable to fulfill critical business functions, and sensitive confidential and other data could be compromised.
NEE's and FPL's business is highly dependent on their ability to process and monitor, on a daily basis, a very large number of
30
transactions, many of which are highly complex and cross numerous and diverse markets. Due to the size, scope and geographical reach of NEE's and FPL's business, and due to the complexity of the process of power generation, transmission and distribution, the development and maintenance of information technology systems to keep track of and process this information is both critical and extremely challenging. NEE's and FPL's operating systems and facilities may fail to operate properly or become disabled as a result of events that are either within, or wholly or partially outside, their control, such as operator error, severe weather or terrorist activities. Any such failure or disabling event could adversely affect NEE's and FPL's ability to process transactions and provide services, and their financial results and liquidity.
NEE and FPL add, modify and replace information systems on a regular basis. Modifying existing information systems or implementing new or replacement information systems is costly and involves risks, including, but not limited to, integrating the modified, new or replacement system with existing systems and processes, implementing associated changes in accounting procedures and controls, and ensuring that data conversion is accurate and consistent. Any disruptions or deficiencies in existing information systems, or disruptions, delays or deficiencies in the modification or implementation of new information systems, could result in increased costs, the inability to track or collect revenues, the diversion of management's and employees' attention and resources, and could negatively impact the effectiveness of the companies' control environment, and/or the companies' ability to timely file required regulatory reports.
NEE and FPL also face the risks of operational failure or capacity constraints of third parties, including, but not limited to, those who provide power transmission and natural gas transportation services.
NEE's and FPL's retail businesses are subject to the risk that sensitive customer data may be compromised, which could result in an adverse impact to their reputation and/or the results of operations of the retail business.
NEE's and FPL's retail businesses require access to sensitive customer data in the ordinary course of business. NEE's and FPL's retail businesses may also need to provide sensitive customer data to vendors and service providers who require access to this information in order to provide services, such as call center services, to the retail businesses. If a significant breach occurred, the reputation of NEE and FPL could be adversely affected, customer confidence could be diminished, or customer information could be subject to identity theft. NEE and FPL would be subject to costs associated with the breach and/or NEE and FPL could be subject to fines and legal claims, any of which may have a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects of NEE and FPL.
NEE and FPL could recognize financial losses as a result of volatility in the market values of derivative instruments and limited liquidity in OTC markets.
NEE and FPL execute transactions in derivative instruments on either recognized exchanges or via the OTC markets, depending on management's assessment of the most favorable credit and market execution factors. Transactions executed in OTC markets have the potential for greater volatility and less liquidity than transactions on recognized exchanges. As a result, NEE and FPL may not be able to execute desired OTC transactions due to such heightened volatility and limited liquidity.
In the absence of actively quoted market prices and pricing information from external sources, the valuation of derivative instruments involves management's judgment or use of estimates. As a result, changes in the underlying assumptions or use of alternative valuation methods could affect the reported fair value of these derivative instruments and have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE and FPL may be adversely affected by negative publicity.
From time to time, political and public sentiment may result in a significant amount of adverse press coverage and other adverse public statements affecting NEE and FPL. Adverse press coverage and other adverse statements, whether or not driven by political or public sentiment, may also result in investigations by regulators, legislators and law enforcement officials or in legal claims. Responding to these investigations and lawsuits, regardless of the ultimate outcome of the proceeding, can divert the time and effort of senior management from NEE's and FPL's business.
Addressing any adverse publicity, governmental scrutiny or enforcement or other legal proceedings is time consuming and expensive and, regardless of the factual basis for the assertions being made, can have a negative impact on the reputation of NEE and FPL, on the morale and performance of their employees and on their relationships with their respective regulators. It may also have a negative impact on their ability to take timely advantage of various business and market opportunities. The direct and indirect effects of negative publicity, and the demands of responding to and addressing it, may have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be materially adversely affected if FPL is unable to maintain, negotiate or renegotiate franchise agreements on acceptable terms with municipalities and counties in Florida.
FPL must negotiate franchise agreements with municipalities and counties in Florida to provide electric services within such municipalities and counties, and electricity sales generated pursuant to these agreements represent a very substantial portion of
31
FPL's revenues. If FPL is unable to maintain, negotiate or renegotiate such franchise agreements on acceptable terms, it could contribute to lower earnings and FPL may not fully realize the anticipated benefits from significant investments and expenditures, which could materially adversely affect NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Increasing costs associated with health care plans may materially adversely affect NEE's and FPL's results of operations.
The costs of providing health care benefits to employees and retirees have increased substantially in recent years. NEE and FPL anticipate that their employee benefit costs, including, but not limited to, costs related to health care plans for employees and former employees, will continue to rise. The increasing costs and funding requirements associated with NEE's and FPL's health care plans may materially adversely affect NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be negatively affected by the lack of a qualified workforce or the loss or retirement of key employees.
NEE and FPL may not be able to service customers, grow their business or generally meet their other business plan goals effectively and profitably if they do not attract and retain a qualified workforce. Additionally, the loss or retirement of key executives and other employees may materially adversely affect service and productivity and contribute to higher training and safety costs.
Over the next several years, a significant portion of NEE's and FPL's workforce, including, but not limited to, many workers with specialized skills maintaining and servicing the nuclear generation facilities and electrical infrastructure, will be eligible to retire. Such highly skilled individuals may not be able to be replaced quickly due to the technically complex work they perform. If a significant amount of such workers retire and are not replaced, the subsequent loss in productivity and increased recruiting and training costs could result in a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially adversely affected by work strikes or stoppages and increasing personnel costs.
Employee strikes or work stoppages could disrupt operations and lead to a loss of revenue and customers. Personnel costs may also increase due to inflationary or competitive pressures on payroll and benefits costs and revised terms of collective bargaining agreements with union employees. These consequences could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's ability to successfully identify, complete and integrate acquisitions is subject to significant risks, including, but not limited to, the effect of increased competition for acquisitions resulting from the consolidation of the power industry.
NEE is likely to encounter significant competition for acquisition opportunities that may become available as a result of the consolidation of the power industry in general. In addition, NEE may be unable to identify attractive acquisition opportunities at favorable prices and to complete and integrate them successfully and in a timely manner.
Nuclear Generation Risks
The construction, operation and maintenance of NEE's and FPL's nuclear generation facilities involve environmental, health and financial risks that could result in fines or the closure of the facilities and in increased costs and capital expenditures.
NEE's and FPL's nuclear generation facilities are subject to environmental, health and financial risks, including, but not limited to, those relating to site storage of spent nuclear fuel, the disposition of spent nuclear fuel, leakage and emissions of tritium and other radioactive elements in the event of a nuclear accident or otherwise, the threat of a terrorist attack and other potential liabilities arising out of the ownership or operation of the facilities. NEE and FPL maintain decommissioning funds and external insurance coverage which are intended to reduce the financial exposure to some of these risks; however, the cost of decommissioning nuclear generation facilities could exceed the amount available in NEE's and FPL's decommissioning funds, and the exposure to liability and property damages could exceed the amount of insurance coverage. If NEE or FPL is unable to recover the additional costs incurred through insurance or, in the case of FPL, through regulatory mechanisms, their business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially adversely affected.
In the event of an incident at any nuclear generation facility in the U.S. or at certain nuclear generation facilities in Europe, NEE and FPL could be assessed significant retrospective assessments and/or retrospective insurance premiums as a result of their participation in a secondary financial protection system and nuclear insurance mutual companies.
Liability for accidents at nuclear power plants is governed by the Price-Anderson Act, which limits the liability of nuclear reactor owners to the amount of insurance available from both private sources and an industry retrospective payment plan. In accordance with this Act, NEE maintains $375 million of private liability insurance per site, which is the maximum obtainable, and participates in a secondary financial protection system, which provides up to $12.2 billion of liability insurance coverage per incident at any nuclear reactor in the U.S. Under the secondary financial protection system, NEE is subject to retrospective assessments and/or retrospective insurance premiums of up to $940 million ($470 million for FPL), plus any applicable taxes, per incident at any nuclear
32
reactor in the U.S. or at certain nuclear generation facilities in Europe, regardless of fault or proximity to the incident, payable at a rate not to exceed $140 million ($70 million for FPL) per incident per year. Such assessments, if levied, could materially adversely affect NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NRC orders or new regulations related to increased security measures and any future safety requirements promulgated by the NRC could require NEE and FPL to incur substantial operating and capital expenditures at their nuclear generation facilities.
The NRC has broad authority to impose licensing and safety-related requirements for the operation and maintenance of nuclear generation facilities, the addition of capacity at existing nuclear generation facilities and the construction of nuclear generation facilities, and these requirements are subject to change. In the event of non-compliance, the NRC has the authority to impose fines or shut down a nuclear generation facility, or to take both of these actions, depending upon its assessment of the severity of the situation, until compliance is achieved. Any of the foregoing events could require NEE and FPL to incur increased costs and capital expenditures, and could reduce revenues.
Any serious nuclear incident occurring at a NEE or FPL plant could result in substantial remediation costs and other expenses. A major incident at a nuclear facility anywhere in the world could cause the NRC to limit or prohibit the operation or licensing of any domestic nuclear generation facility. An incident at a nuclear facility anywhere in the world also could cause the NRC to impose additional conditions or other requirements on the industry, which could increase costs, reduce revenues and result in additional capital expenditures.
The inability to operate any of NEER's or FPL's nuclear generation units through the end of their respective operating licenses could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
The operating licenses for NEE's and FPL's nuclear generation facilities extend through at least 2030. If the facilities cannot be operated for any reason through the life of those operating licenses, NEE or FPL may be required to increase depreciation rates, incur impairment charges and accelerate future decommissioning expenditures, any of which could materially adversely affect their business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Various hazards posed to nuclear generation facilities, along with increased public attention to and awareness of such hazards, could result in increased nuclear licensing or compliance costs which are difficult or impossible to predict and could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
The threat of terrorist activity, as well as recent international events implicating the safety of nuclear facilities, could result in more stringent or complex measures to keep facilities safe from a variety of hazards, including, but not limited to, natural disasters such as earthquakes and tsunamis, as well as terrorist or other criminal threats. This increased focus on safety could result in higher compliance costs which, at present, cannot be assessed with any measure of certainty and which could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
NEE's and FPL's nuclear units are periodically removed from service to accommodate normal refueling and maintenance outages, and for other purposes. If planned outages last longer than anticipated or if there are unplanned outages, NEE's and FPL's results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.
NEE's and FPL's nuclear units are periodically removed from service to accommodate normal refueling and maintenance outages, including, but not limited to, inspections, repairs and certain other modifications. In addition, outages may be scheduled, often in connection with a refueling outage, to replace equipment, to increase the generation capacity at a particular nuclear unit, or for other purposes, and those planned activities increase the time the unit is not in operation. In the event that a scheduled outage lasts longer than anticipated or in the event of an unplanned outage due to, for example, equipment failure, such outages could materially adversely affect NEE's or FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Liquidity, Capital Requirements and Common Stock Risks
Disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in the credit and capital markets may negatively affect NEE's and FPL's ability to fund their liquidity and capital needs and to meet their growth objectives, and can also adversely affect the results of operations and financial condition of NEE and FPL.
NEE and FPL rely on access to capital and credit markets as significant sources of liquidity for capital requirements and other operations requirements that are not satisfied by operating cash flows. Disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in those capital and credit markets, including, but not limited to, the conditions of the most recent financial crises in the U.S. and abroad, could increase NEE's and FPL's cost of capital. If NEE or FPL is unable to access regularly the capital and credit markets on terms that are reasonable, it may have to delay raising capital, issue shorter-term securities and incur an unfavorable cost of capital, which, in turn, could adversely affect its ability to grow its business, could contribute to lower earnings and reduced financial flexibility, and could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
33
Although NEE's competitive energy subsidiaries have used non-recourse or limited-recourse, project-specific financing in the past, market conditions and other factors could adversely affect the future availability of such financing. The inability of NEE's subsidiaries to access the capital and credit markets to provide project-specific financing for electric-generating and other energy facilities on favorable terms, whether because of disruptions or volatility in those markets or otherwise, could necessitate additional capital raising or borrowings by NEE and/or NEECH in the future.
The inability of subsidiaries that have existing project-specific financing arrangements to meet the requirements of various agreements relating to those financings could give rise to a project-specific financing default which, if not cured or waived, might result in the specific project, and potentially in some limited instances its parent companies, being required to repay the associated debt or other borrowings earlier than otherwise anticipated, and if such repayment were not made, the lenders or security holders would generally have rights to foreclose against the project assets and related collateral. Such an occurrence also could result in NEE expending additional funds or incurring additional obligations over the shorter term to ensure continuing compliance with project-specific financing arrangements based upon the expectation of improvement in the project's performance or financial returns over the longer term. Any of these actions could materially adversely affect NEE's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, as well as the availability or terms of future financings for NEE or its subsidiaries.
NEE's, NEECH's and FPL's inability to maintain their current credit ratings may adversely affect NEE's and FPL's liquidity and results of operations, limit the ability of NEE and FPL to grow their business, and increase interest costs.
The inability of NEE, NEECH and FPL to maintain their current credit ratings could adversely affect their ability to raise capital or obtain credit on favorable terms, which, in turn, could impact NEE's and FPL's ability to grow their business and service indebtedness and repay borrowings, and would likely increase their interest costs. Some of the factors that can affect credit ratings are cash flows, liquidity, the amount of debt as a component of total capitalization, and political, legislative and regulatory actions. There can be no assurance that one or more of the ratings of NEE, NEECH and FPL will not be lowered or withdrawn entirely by a rating agency.
NEE's and FPL's liquidity may be impaired if their creditors are unable to fund their credit commitments to the companies or to maintain their current credit ratings.
The inability of NEE's, NEECH's and FPL's credit providers to fund their credit commitments or to maintain their current credit ratings could require NEE, NEECH or FPL, among other things, to renegotiate requirements in agreements, find an alternative credit provider with acceptable credit ratings to meet funding requirements, or post cash collateral and could have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's liquidity.
Poor market performance and other economic factors could affect NEE's and FPL's defined benefit pension plan's funded status, which may materially adversely affect NEE's and FPL's liquidity and results of operations.
NEE sponsors a qualified noncontributory defined benefit pension plan for substantially all employees of NEE and its subsidiaries. A decline in the market value of the assets held in the defined benefit pension plan due to poor investment performance or other factors may increase the funding requirements for this obligation.
NEE's and FPL's defined benefit pension plan is sensitive to changes in interest rates, since, as interest rates decrease the funding liabilities increase, potentially increasing benefits costs and funding requirements. Any increase in benefits costs or funding requirements may have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Poor market performance and other economic factors could adversely affect the asset values of NEE's and FPL's nuclear decommissioning funds, which may materially adversely affect NEE's and FPL's liquidity and results of operations.
NEE and FPL are required to maintain decommissioning funds to satisfy their future obligations to decommission their nuclear power plants. A decline in the market value of the assets held in the decommissioning funds due to poor investment performance or other factors may increase the funding requirements for these obligations. Any increase in funding requirements may have a material adverse effect on NEE's and FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Certain of NEE's investments are subject to changes in market value and other risks, which may adversely affect NEE's liquidity and financial results.
NEE holds other investments where changes in the fair value affect NEE's financial results. In some cases there may be no observable market values for these investments, requiring fair value estimates to be based on other valuation techniques. This type of analysis requires significant judgment and the actual values realized in a sale of these investments could differ materially from those estimated. A sale of an investment below previously estimated value, or other decline in the fair value of an investment, could result in losses or the write-off of such investment, and may have an material adverse effect on NEE's financial condition and results of operations.
34
NEE may be unable to meet its ongoing and future financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock if its subsidiaries are unable to pay upstream dividends or repay funds to NEE.
NEE is a holding company and, as such, has no material operations of its own. Substantially all of NEE's consolidated assets are held by its subsidiaries. NEE's ability to meet its financial obligations, including, but not limited to, its guarantees, and to pay dividends on its common stock are primarily dependent on its subsidiaries' net income and cash flows, which are subject to the risks of their respective businesses, and their ability to pay upstream dividends or to repay funds to NEE.
NEE's subsidiaries are separate legal entities and have no independent obligation to provide NEE with funds for its payment obligations. The subsidiaries have financial obligations, including, but not limited to, payment of debt service, which they must satisfy before they can fund NEE. In addition, in the event of a subsidiary's liquidation or reorganization, NEE's right to participate in a distribution of assets is subject to the prior claims of the subsidiary's creditors.
The dividend-paying ability of some of the subsidiaries is limited by contractual restrictions which are contained in outstanding financing agreements and which may be included in future financing agreements. The future enactment of laws or regulations also may prohibit or restrict the ability of NEE's subsidiaries to pay upstream dividends or to repay funds.
NEE may be unable to meet its ongoing and future financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock if NEE is required to perform under guarantees of obligations of its subsidiaries.
NEE guarantees many of the obligations of its consolidated subsidiaries, other than FPL, through guarantee agreements with NEECH. These guarantees may require NEE to provide substantial funds to its subsidiaries or their creditors or counterparties at a time when NEE is in need of liquidity to meet its own financial obligations. Funding such guarantees may materially adversely affect NEE's ability to pay dividends.
Disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in the credit and capital markets may exert downward pressure on the market price of NEE's common stock.
The market price and trading volume of NEE's common stock are subject to fluctuations as a result of, among other factors, general credit and capital market conditions and changes in market sentiment regarding the operations, business and financing strategies of NEE and its subsidiaries. As a result, disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in the credit and capital markets may, for example, have a material adverse effect on the market price of NEE's common stock.
The factors described above, as well as other information set forth in this report, which could materially adversely affect NEE's and FPL's businesses, financial condition, future financial results and/or liquidity should be carefully considered. The risks described above are not the only risks facing NEE and FPL. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to NEE or FPL, or that are currently deemed to be immaterial, also may materially adversely affect NEE's or FPL's business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None
35
Item 2. Properties
NEE and its subsidiaries maintain properties which are adequate for their operations. The principal properties of FPL and NEER are described below.
Generating Facilities
FPL
At December 31, 2011, the electric generating, transmission, distribution and general facilities of FPL represented approximately 48%, 12%, 36% and 4%, respectively, of FPL's gross investment in electric utility plant in service. At December 31, 2011, FPL had the following generating facilities:
FPL Facilities | Location | No. of Units | Fuel | Net Capability (mw)(a) | ||||||
Fossil | ||||||||||
Combined-cycle | ||||||||||
Fort Myers | Fort Myers, FL | 1 | Gas | 1,432 | ||||||
Lauderdale | Dania, FL | 2 | Gas/Oil | 884 | ||||||
Manatee | Parrish, FL | 1 | Gas | 1,111 | ||||||
Martin | Indiantown, FL | 1 | Gas/Oil/Solar Thermal | 1,132 | (b) | |||||
Martin | Indiantown, FL | 2 | Gas | 938 | ||||||
Putnam | Palatka, FL | 2 | Gas/Oil | 498 | ||||||
Sanford | Lake Monroe, FL | 2 | Gas | 1,912 | ||||||
Turkey Point | Florida City, FL | 1 | Gas/Oil | 1,148 | ||||||
West County | West Palm Beach, FL | 3 | Gas/Oil | 3,657 | ||||||
Steam turbines | ||||||||||
Cutler | Miami, FL | 2 | Gas | 205 | ||||||
Manatee | Parrish, FL | 2 | Oil/Gas | 1,624 | ||||||
Martin | Indiantown, FL | 2 | Oil/Gas | 1,652 | ||||||
Port Everglades | Port Everglades, FL | 4 | Oil/Gas | 1,187 | ||||||
St. Johns River Power Park | Jacksonville, FL | 2 | Coal/Petroleum Coke | 254 | (c) | |||||
Sanford | Lake Monroe, FL | 1 | Oil/Gas | 138 | ||||||
Scherer | Monroe County, GA | 1 | Coal | 672 | (d) | |||||
Turkey Point | Florida City, FL | 2 | Oil/Gas | 788 | ||||||
Simple-cycle combustion turbines | ||||||||||
Fort Myers | Fort Myers, FL | 2 | Gas/Oil | 315 | ||||||
Gas turbines | ||||||||||
Fort Myers | Fort Myers, FL | 12 | Oil | 648 | ||||||
Lauderdale | Dania, FL | 24 | Oil/Gas | 840 | ||||||
Port Everglades | Port Everglades, FL | 12 | Oil/Gas | 420 | ||||||
Nuclear | ||||||||||
St. Lucie | Hutchinson Island, FL | 2 | Nuclear | 1,584 | (e) | |||||
Turkey Point | Florida City, FL | 2 | Nuclear | 1,386 | ||||||
Solar PV | ||||||||||
DeSoto | Arcadia, FL | 1 | Solar PV | 25 | ||||||
Space Coast | Cocoa, FL | 1 | Solar PV | 10 | ||||||
TOTAL | 24,460 | (f) | ||||||||
______________________
(a) | Represents FPL's net ownership interest in plant capability. |
(b) | The megawatts generated by the 75 mw solar thermal facility replace steam produced by this unit and therefore are not incremental. |
(c) | Represents FPL's 20% ownership interest in each of SJRPP Units Nos. 1 and 2, which are jointly owned with JEA. |
(d) | Represents FPL's approximately 76% ownership of Scherer Unit No. 4, which is jointly owned with JEA. |
(e) | Excludes Orlando Utilities Commission's and the Florida Municipal Power Agency's combined share of approximately 15% of St. Lucie Unit No. 2. |
(f) | Substantially all of FPL's properties are subject to the lien of FPL's mortgage. |
36
NEER
At December 31, 2011, NEER had the following generating facilities:
NEER Facilities | Location | Geographic Region | No. of Units | Fuel | Net Capability (mw)(a) | |||||||
Wind | ||||||||||||
Ashtabula Wind(b)(c) | Barnes County, ND | Midwest | 99 | Wind | 148 | |||||||
Ashtabula Wind II(c) | Griggs & Steele Counties, ND | Midwest | 80 | Wind | 120 | |||||||
Ashtabula Wind III | Barnes County, ND | Midwest | 39 | Wind | 62 | |||||||
Baldwin Wind(b) | Burleigh County, ND | Midwest | 64 | Wind | 102 | |||||||
Butler Ridge Wind(b)(c) | Dodge County, WI | Midwest | 36 | Wind | 54 | |||||||
Cabazon(b) | Riverside County, CA | West | 53 | Wind | 40 | |||||||
Callahan Divide(b) | Taylor County, TX | ERCOT | 76 | Wind | 114 | |||||||
Capricorn Ridge | Sterling & Coke Counties, TX | ERCOT | 208 | Wind | 364 | |||||||
Capricorn Ridge Expansion | Sterling & Coke Counties, TX | ERCOT | 199 | Wind | 298 | |||||||
Cerro Gordo(b) | Cerro Gordo County, IA | Midwest | 55 | Wind | 41 | |||||||
Crystal Lake I(b)(c) | Hancock County, IA | Midwest | 100 | Wind | 150 | |||||||
Crystal Lake II | Winnebago County, IA | Midwest | 80 | Wind | 200 | |||||||
Crystal Lake III | Winnebago County, IA | Midwest | 44 | Wind | 66 | |||||||
Day County Wind(b) | Day County, SD | Midwest | 66 | Wind | 99 | |||||||
Delaware Mountain | Culberson County, TX | ERCOT | 38 | Wind | 28 | |||||||
Diablo Wind(b) | Alameda County, CA | West | 31 | Wind | 21 | |||||||
Elk City Wind(b) | Roger Mills & Beckham Counties, OK | Other South | 43 | Wind | 99 | |||||||
Elk City Wind II | Roger Mills & Beckham Counties, OK | Other South | 66 | Wind | 101 | |||||||
Endeavor Wind | Osceola County, IA | Midwest | 40 | Wind | 100 | |||||||
Endeavor Wind II | Osceola County, IA | Midwest | 20 | Wind | 50 | |||||||
Ghost Pine Wind | Trochu, Alberta, Canada | West | 51 | Wind | 82 | |||||||
Gray County | Gray County, KS | Other South | 170 | Wind | 112 | |||||||
Green Mountain(b) | Somerset County, PA | Northeast | 8 | Wind | 10 | |||||||
Green Power | Riverside County, CA | West | 22 | Wind | 17 | |||||||
Green Ridge Power | Alameda & Contra Costa Counties, CA | West | 803 | Wind | 87 | |||||||
Hancock County(b) | Hancock County, IA | Midwest | 148 | Wind | 98 | |||||||
High Winds(b) | Solano County, CA | West | 90 | Wind | 162 | |||||||
Horse Hollow Wind(b) | Taylor County, TX | ERCOT | 142 | Wind | 213 | |||||||
Horse Hollow Wind II(b) | Taylor & Nolan Counties, TX | ERCOT | 130 | Wind | 299 | |||||||
Horse Hollow Wind III(b) | Nolan County, TX | ERCOT | 149 | Wind | 224 | |||||||
Indian Mesa | Pecos County, TX | ERCOT | 125 | Wind | 83 | |||||||
King Mountain(b) | Upton County, TX | ERCOT | 214 | Wind | 278 | |||||||
Lake Benton II(b) | Pipestone County, MN | Midwest | 137 | Wind | 103 | |||||||
Langdon Wind(b)(c) | Cavalier County, ND | Midwest | 79 | Wind | 118 | |||||||
Langdon Wind II(b)(c) | Cavalier County, ND | Midwest | 27 | Wind | 41 | |||||||
Lee / DeKalb Wind | Lee & DeKalb Counties, IL | Midwest | 145 | Wind | 217 | |||||||
Logan Wind(c) | Logan County, CO | West | 134 | Wind | 201 | |||||||
Majestic Wind(b)(c) | Carson County, TX | Other South | 53 | Wind | 80 | |||||||
Meyersdale(b) | Somerset County, PA | Northeast | 20 | Wind | 30 | |||||||
Mill Run(b) | Fayette County, PA | Northeast | 10 | Wind | 15 | |||||||
Minco Wind(b) | Grady County, OK | Other South | 62 | Wind | 99 | |||||||
Minco Wind II(b) | Grady & Caddo Counties, OK | Other South | 63 | Wind | 101 | |||||||
Montezuma Wind(b) | Solano County, CA | West | 16 | Wind | 37 | |||||||
Montfort(b) | Iowa County, WI | Midwest | 20 | Wind | 30 | |||||||
Mount Copper(b) | Murdochville, Quebec, Canada | Midwest | 30 | Wind | 54 | |||||||
Mount Miller(b) | Murdochville, Quebec, Canada | Midwest | 30 | Wind | 54 | |||||||
Mountaineer(b) | Preston & Tucker Counties, WV | Northeast | 44 | Wind | 66 | |||||||
Mower County Wind(c) | Mower County, MN | Midwest | 43 | Wind | 99 | |||||||
New Mexico Wind(b) | Quay & Debaca Counties, NM | West | 136 | Wind | 204 | |||||||
North Dakota Wind(b) | LaMoure County, ND | Midwest | 41 | Wind | 62 | |||||||
Northern Colorado(b) | Logan County, CO | West | 81 | Wind | 174 | |||||||
Oklahoma / Sooner Wind(b) | Harper & Woodward Counties, OK | Other South | 68 | Wind | 102 | |||||||
Oliver County Wind I(c) | Oliver County, ND | Midwest | 22 | Wind | 51 | |||||||
Oliver County Wind II(c) | Oliver County, ND | Midwest | 32 | Wind | 48 | |||||||
Peetz Table Wind(c) | Logan County, CO | West | 133 | Wind | 199 | |||||||
Pubnico Point(b) | Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada | Midwest | 17 | Wind | 31 | |||||||
Red Canyon Wind Energy(b) | Borden, Garza & Scurry Counties, TX | ERCOT | 56 | Wind | 84 | |||||||
37
NEER Facilities | Location | Geographic Region | No. of Units | Fuel | Net Capability (mw)(a) | |||||||
Red Mesa Wind | Cibola County, NM | West | 64 | Wind | 102 | |||||||
Sky River(b) | Kern County, CA | West | 342 | Wind | 77 | |||||||
Somerset Wind Power(b) | Somerset County, PA | Northeast | 6 | Wind | 9 | |||||||
South Dakota Wind(b) | Hyde County, SD | Midwest | 27 | Wind | 41 | |||||||
Southwest Mesa(b) | Upton & Crockett Counties, TX | ERCOT | 106 | Wind | 74 | |||||||
Stateline(b) | Umatilla County, OR and Walla Walla County, WA | West | 454 | Wind | 300 | |||||||
Story County Wind(b)(c) | Story County, IA | Midwest | 100 | Wind | 150 | |||||||
Story County Wind II(b) | Story & Hardin Counties, IA | Midwest | 100 | Wind | 150 | |||||||
Vansycle(b) | Umatilla County, OR | West | 38 | Wind | 25 | |||||||
Vansycle II | Umatilla County, OR | West | 43 | Wind | 99 | |||||||
Vasco Winds(c) | Contra Costa County, CA | West | 33 | Wind | 78 | |||||||
Victory Garden(b) | Kern County, CA | West | 96 | Wind | 22 | |||||||
Waymart(b) | Wayne County, PA | Northeast | 43 | Wind | 65 | |||||||
Weatherford Wind(b) | Custer & Washita Counties, OK | Other South | 98 | Wind | 147 | |||||||
Wessington Springs Wind(b)(c) | Jerauld County, SD | Midwest | 34 | Wind | 51 | |||||||
White Oak(c) | McLean County, IL | Midwest | 100 | Wind | 150 | |||||||
Wilton Wind(b) | Burleigh County, ND | Midwest | 33 | Wind | 49 | |||||||
Wilton Wind II(c) | Burleigh County, ND | Midwest | 33 | Wind | 50 | |||||||
Windpower Partners 1990 | Alameda & Contra Costa Counties, CA | West | 141 | Wind | 14 | |||||||
Windpower Partners 1991 | Alameda & Contra Costa Counties, CA | West | 162 | Wind | 16 | |||||||
Windpower Partners 1991-92 | Alameda & Contra Costa Counties, CA | West | 223 | Wind | 22 | |||||||
Windpower Partners 1992 | Alameda & Contra Costa Counties, CA | West | 300 | Wind | 30 | |||||||
Windpower Partners 1993(c) | Riverside County, CA | West | 33 | Wind | 50 | |||||||
Windpower Partners 1993 | Lincoln County, MN | Midwest | 73 | Wind | 26 | |||||||
Windpower Partners 1994 | Culberson County, TX | ERCOT | 107 | Wind | 39 | |||||||
Wolf Ridge Wind | Cooke County, TX | ERCOT | 75 | Wind | 112 | |||||||
Woodward Mountain | Upton & Pecos Counties, TX | ERCOT | 242 | Wind | 160 | |||||||
Wyoming Wind(b) | Uinta County, WY | West | 80 | Wind | 144 | |||||||
Investments in joint ventures(d) | Various | West | 643 | Wind | 95 | |||||||
Total Wind | 8,569 | |||||||||||
Contracted | ||||||||||||
Bayswater(b) | Far Rockaway, NY | Northeast | 2 | Gas | 56 | |||||||
Duane Arnold | Palo, IA | Midwest | 1 | Nuclear | 431 | (e) | ||||||
Hatch Solar | Hatch, NM | West | 1 | CPV Solar | 5 | |||||||
Jamaica Bay(b) | Far Rockaway, NY | Northeast | 2 | Gas/Oil | 54 | |||||||
Marcus Hook 750(b) | Marcus Hook, PA | Northeast | 4 | Gas | 744 | |||||||
Point Beach | Two Rivers, WI | Midwest | 2 | Nuclear | 1,190 | |||||||
Investments in joint ventures: | ||||||||||||
SEGS III-IX(b) | Kramer Junction & Harper Lake, CA | West | 7 | Solar | 148 | |||||||
Other | Various | Northeast | 4 | (f) | 158 | |||||||
Total Contracted | 2,786 | |||||||||||
Merchant | ||||||||||||
Forney | Forney, TX | ERCOT | 8 | Gas | 1,792 | |||||||
Lamar Power Partners | Paris, TX | ERCOT | 6 | Gas | 1,000 | |||||||
Maine - Cape, Wyman | Various - ME | Northeast | 6 | Oil | 796 | (g) | ||||||
Maine(b) | Various - ME | Northeast | 81 | Hydro | 359 | |||||||
Marcus Hook 50 | Marcus Hook, PA | Northeast | 1 | Gas | 50 | |||||||
Paradise Solar | West Deptford, NJ | Northeast | 1 | Solar PV | 5 | |||||||
Seabrook | Seabrook, NH | Northeast | 1 | Nuclear | 1,100 | (h) | ||||||
Investment in joint ventures | Various | Northeast | 4 | (f) | 150 | |||||||
Total Merchant | 5,252 | |||||||||||
TOTAL | 16,607 | |||||||||||
________________________
(a) | Represents NEER's net ownership interest in plant capacity. |
(b) | These generating facilities are encumbered by liens against their assets securing various financings. |
(c) | NEER owns these wind facilities together with third-party investors with differential membership interests. See Note 1 - Sale of Differential Membership Interests. |
(d) | Represents plants with no more than 50% ownership using wind technology. Certain facilities, totaling 57 mw, are encumbered by liens against their assets securing a financing. |
(e) | Excludes Central Iowa Power Cooperative and Cornbelt Power Cooperative's combined share of 30%. |
(f) | Represents plants with no more than 50% ownership using fuels such as natural gas and waste coal. |
(g) | Excludes six other energy-related partners' combined share of 16%. |
(h) | Excludes Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company's, Taunton Municipal Lighting Plant's and Hudson Light & Power Department's combined share of 11.77%. |
38
Transmission and Distribution
At December 31, 2011, FPL owned and operated 587 substations and the following electric transmission and distribution lines:
Nominal Voltage | Overhead Lines Pole Miles | Trench and Submarine Cables Miles | |||||
500 | kv | 1,106 | (a) | — | |||
230 | kv | 3,038 | 25 | ||||
138 | kv | 1,575 | 53 | ||||
115 | kv | 746 | 1 | ||||
69 | kv | 164 | 14 | ||||
Less than 69 kv | 42,334 | 25,111 | |||||
Total | 48,963 | 25,204 | |||||
___________________
(a) Includes approximately 75 miles owned jointly with JEA.
Character of Ownership
Substantially all of FPL's properties are subject to the lien of FPL's mortgage, which secures most debt securities issued by FPL. The majority of FPL's real property is held in fee and is free from other encumbrances, subject to minor exceptions which are not of a nature as to substantially impair the usefulness to FPL of such properties. Some of FPL's electric lines are located on parcels of land which are not owned in fee by FPL but are covered by necessary consents of governmental authorities or rights obtained from owners of private property. The majority of NEER's generating facilities are owned by NEER subsidiaries and a number of those facilities are encumbered by liens securing various financings. Additionally, certain of NEER's generating facilities are located on land leased from owners of private property. See Generating Facilities and Note 1 - Electric Plant, Depreciation and Amortization.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
NEE and FPL are parties to various legal and regulatory proceedings in the ordinary course of their respective businesses. For information regarding legal proceedings that could have a material effect on NEE or FPL, see Note 14 - Legal Proceedings. Such descriptions are incorporated herein by reference.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
Not applicable
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrants' Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Common Stock Data. All of FPL's common stock is owned by NEE. NEE's common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "NEE." The high and low sales prices for the common stock of NEE as reported in the consolidated transaction reporting system of the New York Stock Exchange and the cash dividends per share declared for each quarter during the past two years are as follows:
2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Quarter | High | Low | Cash Dividends | High | Low | Cash Dividends | ||||||||||||||||||
First | $ | 55.86 | $ | 51.54 | $ | 0.55 | $ | 53.75 | $ | 45.29 | $ | 0.50 | ||||||||||||
Second | $ | 58.98 | $ | 54.16 | $ | 0.55 | $ | 53.50 | $ | 47.96 | $ | 0.50 | ||||||||||||
Third | $ | 58.25 | $ | 49.00 | $ | 0.55 | $ | 55.98 | $ | 48.44 | $ | 0.50 | ||||||||||||
Fourth | $ | 61.20 | $ | 51.33 | $ | 0.55 | $ | 56.26 | $ | 50.00 | $ | 0.50 | ||||||||||||
39
The amount and timing of dividends payable on NEE's common stock are within the sole discretion of NEE's Board of Directors. The Board of Directors reviews the dividend rate at least annually (generally in February) to determine its appropriateness in light of NEE's financial position and results of operations, legislative and regulatory developments affecting the electric utility industry in general and FPL in particular, competitive conditions, change in business mix and any other factors the Board of Directors deems relevant. The ability of NEE to pay dividends on its common stock is dependent upon, among other things, dividends paid to it by its subsidiaries. There are no restrictions in effect that currently limit FPL's ability to pay dividends to NEE. In February 2012, NEE announced that it would increase its quarterly dividend on its common stock from $0.55 to $0.60 per share. See Management's Discussion - Liquidity and Capital Resources - Covenants with respect to dividend restrictions and Note 11 - Common Stock Dividend Restrictions regarding dividends paid by FPL to NEE.
As of the close of business on January 31, 2012, there were 25,588 holders of record of NEE's common stock.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities. Information regarding purchases made by NEE of its common stock during the three months ended December 31, 2011 is as follows:
Period | Total Number of Shares Purchased | Average Price Paid Per Share | Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of a Publicly Announced Program | Maximum Number of Shares that May Yet be Purchased Under the Program(a) | ||||||||
10/1/2011 - 10/31/11 | 848 | (b) | $ | 54.82 | — | 20,000,000 | ||||||
11/1/2011 - 11/30/11 | 5,093 | (b) | $ | 55.65 | — | 20,000,000 | ||||||
12/1/2011 - 12/31/11 | 6,725,809 | (c) | $ | 55.76 | 6,725,252 | 13,274,748 | ||||||
Total | 6,731,750 | $ | 55.76 | 6,725,252 | ||||||||
__________________________________
(a) | In February 2005, NEE's Board of Directors authorized a common stock repurchase plan of up to 20 million shares of common stock over an unspecified period, which authorization was most recently reaffirmed and ratified by the Board of Directors in July 2011. |
(b) | Includes shares of common stock withheld from employees to pay certain withholding taxes upon the vesting of stock awards granted to such employees under the NextEra Energy, Inc. Amended and Restated Long-Term Incentive Plan (former LTIP). |
(c) | Includes: (1) 557 shares of common stock purchased as a reinvestment of dividends by the trustee of a grantor trust in connection with NEE's obligation under a February 2006 grant under the former LTIP of deferred retirement share awards to an executive officer; and (2) 6,725,252 shares of common stock purchased under an Accelerated Share Repurchase (ASR) agreement (see Note 11 - ASR of NEE Common Stock). |
40
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
Years Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||
2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||
SELECTED DATA OF NEE (millions, except per share amounts): | |||||||||||||||||||
Operating revenues | $ | 15,341 | $ | 15,317 | $ | 15,643 | $ | 16,410 | $ | 15,263 | |||||||||
Net income(a) | $ | 1,923 | $ | 1,957 | $ | 1,615 | $ | 1,639 | $ | 1,312 | |||||||||
Earnings per share of common stock - basic | $ | 4.62 | $ | 4.77 | $ | 3.99 | $ | 4.10 | $ | 3.30 | |||||||||
Earnings per share of common stock - assuming dilution | $ | 4.59 | $ | 4.74 | $ | 3.97 | $ | 4.07 | $ | 3.27 | |||||||||
Dividends paid per share of common stock | $ | 2.20 | $ | 2.00 | $ | 1.89 | $ | 1.78 | $ | 1.64 | |||||||||
Total assets | $ | 57,188 | $ | 52,994 | $ | 48,458 | $ | 44,821 | $ | 40,123 | |||||||||
Long-term debt, excluding current maturities | $ | 20,810 | $ | 18,013 | $ | 16,300 | $ | 13,833 | $ | 11,280 | |||||||||
SELECTED DATA OF FPL (millions): | |||||||||||||||||||
Operating revenues | $ | 10,613 | $ | 10,485 | $ | 11,491 | $ | 11,649 | $ | 11,622 | |||||||||
Net income | $ | 1,068 | $ | 945 | $ | 831 | $ | 789 | $ | 836 | |||||||||
Total assets | $ | 31,816 | $ | 28,698 | $ | 26,812 | |||||||||||||