e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the Quarterly Period ended September 30, 2010
Commission file number 1-11607
DTE ENERGY COMPANY
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Michigan
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
38-3217752
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.) |
|
|
|
One Energy Plaza, Detroit, Michigan
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
48226-1279
(Zip Code) |
313-235-4000
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, 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 registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is 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 Exchange Act.
(Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer þ |
|
Accelerated filer o |
|
Non-accelerated filer o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
|
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act).
Yes o No þ
At September 30, 2010, 169,117,259 shares of DTE Energys common stock were outstanding,
substantially all of which were held by non-affiliates.
DTE Energy Company
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
Quarter Ended September 30, 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Definitions
|
|
|
ASC
|
|
Accounting Standards Codification |
|
|
|
ASU
|
|
Accounting Standards Update |
|
|
|
Company
|
|
DTE Energy Company and any subsidiary companies |
|
|
|
CTA
|
|
Costs to achieve, consisting of project management, consultant support and
employee severance, related to the Performance Excellence Process. |
|
|
|
Customer Choice
|
|
Michigan legislation giving customers the option to choose alternative
suppliers for electricity and gas. |
|
|
|
Detroit Edison
|
|
The Detroit Edison Company (a direct wholly owned subsidiary of DTE Energy)
and subsidiary companies |
|
|
|
DTE Energy
|
|
DTE Energy Company, directly or indirectly the parent of Detroit Edison,
MichCon and numerous non-utility subsidiaries |
|
|
|
EPA
|
|
United States Environmental Protection Agency |
|
|
|
FASB
|
|
Financial Accounting Standards Board |
|
|
|
FERC
|
|
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission |
|
|
|
FTRs
|
|
Financial transmission rights are financial instruments that entitle the
holder to receive payments related to costs incurred for congestion on the
transmission grid. |
|
|
|
GCR
|
|
A gas cost recovery mechanism authorized by the MPSC that allows MichCon to
recover through rates its natural gas costs. |
|
|
|
MichCon
|
|
Michigan Consolidated Gas Company (an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of DTE
Energy) and subsidiary companies |
|
|
|
MISO
|
|
Midwest Independent System Operator is an Independent System Operator and the
Regional Transmission Organization serving the Midwest United States and
Manitoba, Canada. |
|
|
|
MNRE
|
|
Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment |
|
|
|
MPSC
|
|
Michigan Public Service Commission |
|
|
|
Non-utility
|
|
An entity that is not a public utility. Its conditions of service, prices of
goods and services and other operating related matters are not directly
regulated by the MPSC. |
|
|
|
NRC
|
|
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission |
|
|
|
Production tax credits
|
|
Tax credits as authorized under Sections 45K and 45 of the Internal Revenue
Code that are designed to stimulate investment in and development of
alternate fuel sources. The amount of a production tax credit can vary each
year as determined by the Internal Revenue Service. |
|
|
|
PSCR
|
|
A power supply cost recovery mechanism authorized by the MPSC that allows
Detroit Edison to recover through rates its fuel, fuel-related and purchased
power costs. |
1
|
|
|
RDM
|
|
Revenue Decoupling Mechanism |
|
|
|
Securitization
|
|
Detroit Edison financed specific stranded costs at lower interest rates
through the sale of rate reduction bonds by a wholly-owned special purpose
entity, The Detroit Edison Securitization Funding LLC. |
|
|
|
Subsidiaries
|
|
The direct and indirect subsidiaries of DTE Energy |
|
|
|
Unconventional Gas
|
|
Includes those oil and gas deposits that originated and are stored in coal
bed, tight sandstone and shale formations. |
|
|
|
VIE
|
|
Variable Interest Entity |
|
|
|
Units of Measurement |
|
|
|
|
|
Bcf
|
|
Billion cubic feet of gas |
|
|
|
Bcfe
|
|
Conversion metric of natural gas, the ratio of 6 Mcf of gas to 1 barrel of oil |
|
|
|
GWh
|
|
Gigawatthour of electricity |
|
|
|
kWh
|
|
Kilowatthour of electricity |
|
|
|
Mcf
|
|
Thousand cubic feet of gas |
|
|
|
MMcf
|
|
Million cubic feet of gas |
|
|
|
MW
|
|
Megawatt of electricity |
|
|
|
MWh
|
|
Megawatthour of electricity |
2
Forward-Looking Statements
Certain information presented herein includes forward-looking statements within the meaning
of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 with respect to the financial condition,
results of operations and business of DTE Energy. Forward-looking statements are subject to
numerous assumptions, risks and uncertainties that may cause actual future results to be materially
different from those contemplated, projected, estimated or budgeted. Many factors may impact
forward-looking statements including, but not limited to, the following:
|
|
|
economic conditions resulting in changes in demand, customer conservation and increased
thefts of electricity and gas; |
|
|
|
changes in the economic and financial viability of our customers, suppliers, and
trading counterparties, and the continued ability of such parties to perform their
obligations to the Company; |
|
|
|
economic climate and population growth or decline in the geographic areas where we do
business; |
|
|
|
high levels of uncollectible accounts receivable; |
|
|
|
access to capital markets and capital market conditions and the results of other
financing efforts which can be affected by credit agency ratings; |
|
|
|
instability in capital markets which could impact availability of short and long-term
financing; |
|
|
|
the timing and extent of changes in interest rates; |
|
|
|
the level of borrowings; |
|
|
|
the potential for losses on investments, including nuclear decommissioning and benefit
plan assets and the related increases in future expense and contributions; |
|
|
|
the potential for increased costs or delays in completion of significant construction
projects; |
|
|
|
the effects of weather and other natural phenomena on operations and sales to
customers, and purchases from suppliers; |
|
|
|
environmental issues, laws, regulations, and the increasing costs of remediation and
compliance, including actual and potential new federal and state requirements that include
or could include carbon and more stringent mercury emission controls, a renewable portfolio
standard, energy efficiency mandates, a carbon tax or cap and trade structure and ash
landfill regulations; |
|
|
|
nuclear regulations and operations associated with nuclear facilities; |
|
|
|
impact of electric and gas utility restructuring in Michigan, including legislative
amendments and Customer Choice programs; |
|
|
|
employee relations and the impact of collective bargaining agreements; |
|
|
|
changes in the cost and availability of coal and other raw materials, purchased power
and natural gas; |
|
|
|
volatility in the short-term natural gas storage markets impacting third-party storage
revenues; |
3
|
|
|
cost reduction efforts and the maximization of plant and distribution system
performance; |
|
|
|
the effects of competition; |
|
|
|
the uncertainties of successful exploration of gas shale resources and challenges in
estimating gas reserves with certainty; |
|
|
|
impact of regulation by the FERC, MPSC, NRC and other applicable governmental
proceedings and regulations, including any associated impact on rate structures; |
|
|
|
changes in and application of federal, state and local tax laws and their
interpretations, including the Internal Revenue Code, regulations, rulings, court
proceedings and audits; |
|
|
|
the amount and timing of cost recovery allowed as a result of regulatory proceedings,
related appeals or new legislation; |
|
|
|
the cost of protecting assets against, or damage due to, terrorism or cyber attacks; |
|
|
|
the availability, cost, coverage and terms of insurance and stability of insurance
providers; |
|
|
|
changes in and application of accounting standards and financial reporting regulations; |
|
|
|
changes in federal or state laws and their interpretation with respect to regulation,
energy policy and other business issues; and |
|
|
|
binding arbitration, litigation and related appeals. |
New factors emerge from time to time. We cannot predict what factors may arise or how such factors
may cause our results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement.
Any forward-looking statements refer only as of the date on which such statements are made. We
undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances
after the date on which such statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated
events.
4
DTE Energy Company
Consolidated Statements of Operations (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions, Except per Share Amounts) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Revenues |
|
$ |
2,139 |
|
|
$ |
1,950 |
|
|
$ |
6,384 |
|
|
$ |
5,893 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel, purchased power and gas |
|
|
763 |
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
2,366 |
|
|
|
2,272 |
|
Operation and maintenance |
|
|
649 |
|
|
|
554 |
|
|
|
1,898 |
|
|
|
1,740 |
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization |
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
738 |
|
Taxes other than income |
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
231 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
Other asset (gains) and losses, reserves and
impairments, net |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,753 |
|
|
|
1,618 |
|
|
|
5,270 |
|
|
|
4,951 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income |
|
|
386 |
|
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
1,114 |
|
|
|
942 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other (Income) and Deductions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
418 |
|
|
|
409 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
Other income |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
(74 |
) |
Other expenses |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
379 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Before Income Taxes |
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
607 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Tax Provision |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
483 |
|
|
|
414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Net Income Attributable to Noncontrolling
Interests |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income Attributable to DTE Energy Company |
|
$ |
163 |
|
|
$ |
151 |
|
|
$ |
478 |
|
|
$ |
412 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic Earnings per Common Share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income Attributable to DTE Energy Company |
|
$ |
.97 |
|
|
$ |
.92 |
|
|
$ |
2.85 |
|
|
$ |
2.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted Earnings per Common Share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income Attributable to DTE Energy Company |
|
$ |
.96 |
|
|
$ |
.92 |
|
|
$ |
2.84 |
|
|
$ |
2.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
Dividends Declared per Common Share |
|
$ |
.56 |
|
|
$ |
.53 |
|
|
$ |
1.62 |
|
|
$ |
1.59 |
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
5
DTE Energy Company
Consolidated Statements of Financial Position (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
December 31 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
84 |
|
|
$ |
52 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
Accounts receivable (less allowance for doubtful
accounts of $222 and $262, respectively) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer |
|
|
1,140 |
|
|
|
1,438 |
|
Other |
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
217 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel and gas |
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
309 |
|
Materials and supplies |
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
Derivative assets |
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
Other |
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,741 |
|
|
|
2,877 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nuclear decommissioning trust funds |
|
|
890 |
|
|
|
817 |
|
Other |
|
|
467 |
|
|
|
598 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,357 |
|
|
|
1,415 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment |
|
|
21,370 |
|
|
|
20,588 |
|
Less accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization |
|
|
(8,548 |
) |
|
|
(8,157 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,822 |
|
|
|
12,431 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill |
|
|
2,024 |
|
|
|
2,024 |
|
Regulatory assets |
|
|
4,056 |
|
|
|
4,110 |
|
Securitized regulatory assets |
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
870 |
|
Intangible assets |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
Notes receivable |
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
Derivative assets |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
Other |
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,346 |
|
|
|
7,472 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
24,266 |
|
|
$ |
24,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
6
DTE Energy Company
Consolidated Statements of Financial Position
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
December 31 |
|
(in Millions, Except Shares) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
641 |
|
|
$ |
723 |
|
Accrued interest |
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
Dividends payable |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
Short-term borrowings |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
Current portion long-term debt, including capital leases |
|
|
923 |
|
|
|
671 |
|
Derivative liabilities |
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
Other |
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
502 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,513 |
|
|
|
2,645 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term Debt (net of current portion) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage bonds, notes and other |
|
|
6,099 |
|
|
|
6,237 |
|
Securitization bonds |
|
|
643 |
|
|
|
793 |
|
Trust preferred-linked securities |
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
Capital lease obligations |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,074 |
|
|
|
7,370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
2,307 |
|
|
|
2,096 |
|
Regulatory liabilities |
|
|
1,378 |
|
|
|
1,337 |
|
Asset retirement obligations |
|
|
1,499 |
|
|
|
1,420 |
|
Unamortized investment tax credit |
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
Derivative liabilities |
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
Liabilities from transportation and storage contracts |
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
Accrued pension liability |
|
|
700 |
|
|
|
881 |
|
Accrued postretirement liability |
|
|
1,318 |
|
|
|
1,287 |
|
Nuclear decommissioning |
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
Other |
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,990 |
|
|
|
7,864 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and Contingencies (Notes 7 and 12) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, without par value, 400,000,000 shares
authorized, 169,117,259 and 165,400,045 shares issued
and outstanding, respectively |
|
|
3,422 |
|
|
|
3,257 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
3,374 |
|
|
|
3,168 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
(147 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total DTE Energy Company Equity |
|
|
6,646 |
|
|
|
6,278 |
|
Noncontrolling interests |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Equity |
|
|
6,689 |
|
|
|
6,316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Equity |
|
$ |
24,266 |
|
|
$ |
24,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
7
DTE Energy Company
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
483 |
|
|
$ |
414 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization |
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
738 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
141 |
|
Other asset (gains), losses and reserves, net |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Changes in assets and liabilities, exclusive of changes shown separately (Note 15) |
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
377 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash from operating activities |
|
|
1,509 |
|
|
|
1,674 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant and equipment expenditures utility |
|
|
(743 |
) |
|
|
(772 |
) |
Plant and equipment expenditures non-utility |
|
|
(75 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
Proceeds from sale of other assets, net |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Restricted cash for debt redemption |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
Proceeds from sale of nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets |
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
237 |
|
Investment in nuclear decommissioning trust funds |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(251 |
) |
Consolidation of VIEs |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in Millennium Pipeline Project |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Other |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used for investing activities |
|
|
(834 |
) |
|
|
(795 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of long-term debt |
|
|
595 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
Redemption of long-term debt |
|
|
(660 |
) |
|
|
(420 |
) |
Short-term borrowings, net |
|
|
(307 |
) |
|
|
(539 |
) |
Issuance of common stock |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Dividends on common stock |
|
|
(265 |
) |
|
|
(260 |
) |
Other |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(53 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used for financing activities |
|
|
(643 |
) |
|
|
(882 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period |
|
$ |
84 |
|
|
$ |
83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
8
DTE Energy Company
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity and
Comprehensive Income (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock |
|
Retained |
|
Comprehensive |
|
Noncontrolling |
|
|
|
(Dollars in Millions, Shares in Thousands) |
|
Shares |
|
Amount |
|
Earnings |
|
Loss |
|
Interest |
|
Total |
|
Balance, December 31, 2009 |
|
|
165,400 |
|
|
$ |
3,257 |
|
|
$ |
3,168 |
|
|
$ |
(147 |
) |
|
$ |
38 |
|
|
$ |
6,316 |
|
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
483 |
|
Benefit obligations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
Dividends declared on common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(272 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(272 |
) |
Issuance of common stock |
|
|
574 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
Contribution of common stock to
pension plan |
|
|
2,224 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 |
|
Net change in unrealized losses on
derivatives, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
Net change in unrealized losses on
investments, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
Stock-based compensation and other |
|
|
919 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
Balance, September 30, 2010 |
|
|
169,117 |
|
|
$ |
3,422 |
|
|
$ |
3,374 |
|
|
$ |
(150 |
) |
|
$ |
43 |
|
|
$ |
6,689 |
|
|
The following table displays comprehensive income for the nine-month periods ended September 30:
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
483 |
|
|
$ |
414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit obligations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit obligation, net of taxes of $3 and $4 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Amounts reclassified to benefit obligations related to
consolidation of VIEs (Note 1), net of taxes of $5 and $- |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains (losses) during the period, net of taxes of $1 and $1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Amounts reclassified to income, net of taxes of $1 and $(1) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains (losses) on investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains (losses) during the period, net of taxes of $(6) and $6 |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
11 |
|
Amounts reclassified to income, net of taxes of $- and $2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Amounts reclassified to benefit obligations related to
consolidation of VIEs (Note 1), net of taxes of $(5) and $- |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation, net of taxes of $- and $1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income |
|
|
480 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
Less: Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income attributable to DTE Energy Company |
|
$ |
475 |
|
|
$ |
436 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
9
DTE Energy Company
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
NOTE 1 ORGANIZATION AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION
Corporate Structure
DTE Energy owns the following businesses:
|
|
|
Detroit Edison, an electric utility engaged in the generation, purchase, distribution
and sale of electricity to approximately 2.1 million customers in southeast Michigan; |
|
|
|
MichCon, a natural gas utility engaged in the purchase, storage, transportation,
gathering, distribution and sale of natural gas to approximately 1.2 million customers
throughout Michigan and the sale of storage and transportation capacity; and |
|
|
|
Other businesses involved in (1) natural gas pipelines and storage; (2) unconventional
gas project development and production; (3) power and industrial projects and coal
transportation and marketing; and (4) energy marketing and trading operations. |
Detroit Edison and MichCon are regulated by the MPSC. Certain activities of Detroit Edison and
MichCon, as well as various other aspects of businesses under DTE Energy are regulated by the FERC.
In addition, the Company is regulated by other federal and state regulatory agencies including the
NRC, the EPA and the MNRE.
References in this report to Company or DTE are to DTE Energy and its subsidiaries,
collectively.
Basis of Presentation
These Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction with the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements are prepared using accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. These accounting principles require management
to use estimates and assumptions that impact reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and
expenses, and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. Actual results may differ from
the Companys estimates.
The Consolidated Financial Statements are unaudited, but in the Companys opinion include all
adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of such financial statements. All adjustments are of
a normal recurring nature, except as otherwise disclosed in these Consolidated Financial Statements
and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Financial results for this interim period are not
necessarily indicative of results that may be expected for any other interim period or for the
fiscal year ending December 31, 2010.
Certain prior year balances were reclassified to match the current years financial statement
presentation.
Principles of Consolidation Variable Interest Entity (VIE)
As discussed in Note 3, effective January 1, 2010, the Company adopted the provisions of ASU
2009-17, Amendments to FASB Interpretation 46(R). ASU 2009-17 changed the methodology for
determining the primary beneficiary of a VIE from a quantitative risk and rewards-based model to a
qualitative determination. There is no grandfathering of previous consolidation conclusions. As a
result, the Company re-evaluated all prior VIE and primary beneficiary determinations. The
requirements of ASU 2009-17 were adopted on a prospective basis.
10
The Company evaluates whether an entity is a VIE whenever reconsideration events occur. The Company
consolidates VIEs for which it is the primary beneficiary. If the Company is not the primary
beneficiary and an ownership interest is held, the VIE is accounted for under the equity method of
accounting. When assessing the determination of the primary beneficiary, the Company considers all
relevant facts and circumstances, including: the power, through voting or similar rights, to direct
the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIEs economic performance and the
obligation to absorb the expected losses and/or the right to receive the expected returns of the
VIE. The Company performs ongoing reassessments of all VIEs to determine if the primary beneficiary
status has changed.
Legal entities within the Companys Power and Industrial Projects segments enter into long-term
contractual arrangements with customers to supply energy-related products or services. The entities
are generally designed to pass-through the commodity risk associated with these contracts to the
customers, with the Company retaining operational and customer default risk. These entities
generally are VIEs. The Company re-evaluated prior VIE and primary beneficiary determinations and,
as a result, in 2010 began consolidating five entities that were previously accounted for as equity
investments. The primary reason for the change in the primary beneficiary conclusion was the
determination that the Companys responsibility for the management and operations of the VIEs
afforded the Company the power to direct the significant activities of the VIEs.
In 2001, Detroit Edison financed a regulatory asset related to Fermi 2 and certain other regulatory
assets through the sale of rate reduction bonds by a wholly-owned special purpose entity,
Securitization. Detroit Edison performs servicing activities including billing and collecting
surcharge revenue for Securitization. Under ASU 2009-17, this entity is now a VIE, and continues to
be consolidated as the Company is the primary beneficiary.
DTE Energy has interests in various unconsolidated trusts that were formed for the purpose of
issuing preferred securities and lending the gross proceeds to the Company. The assets of the
trusts are debt securities of DTE Energy with terms similar to those of the related preferred
securities. Payments the Company makes are used by the trusts to make cash distributions on the
preferred securities it has issued. DTE Energy has reviewed these interests and has determined they
are VIEs, but the Company is not the primary beneficiary as it does not have variable interests in
the trusts and therefore, the trusts are not consolidated by the Company.
The maximum risk exposure for consolidated VIEs is reflected on the Companys Consolidated
Statements of Financial Position. For non-consolidated VIEs, the maximum risk exposure is generally
limited to its investment and amounts which it has guaranteed.
The following table summarizes the major balance sheet items for consolidated VIEs as of September
30, 2010 and December 31, 2009. Amounts at September 30, 2010 for consolidated VIEs that are either
(1) assets that can be used only to settle their obligations or (2) liabilities for which creditors
do not have recourse to the general credit of the primary beneficiary are segregated in the
restricted amounts column. Entities, in which the Company holds a majority voting interest and is
the primary beneficiary, that meet the definition of a business and whose assets can be used for
purposes other than the settlement of the entitys obligations have been excluded from the table
below.
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(in Millions) |
|
Securitization |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Amounts |
|
|
2009 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
|
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
Securitized regulatory assets |
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
872 |
|
|
$ |
176 |
|
|
$ |
1,048 |
|
|
$ |
926 |
|
|
$ |
69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued current liabilities |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
$ |
40 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
Current portion long-term debt, including
capital leases |
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Mortgage bonds, notes and other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Securitization bonds |
|
|
643 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
643 |
|
|
|
643 |
|
|
|
|
|
Capital lease obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Other long term liabilities |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
862 |
|
|
$ |
115 |
|
|
$ |
977 |
|
|
$ |
940 |
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts for non-consolidated VIEs as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
December 31, |
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
Other investments |
|
$ |
60 |
|
|
$ |
178 |
|
Bank loan guarantee |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Trust preferred linked securities |
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
NOTE 2 SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Intangible Assets
The Company has certain intangible assets relating to emission allowances, renewable energy credits
and non-utility contracts. Emission allowances and renewable energy credits are charged to expense
as the credits are consumed in the operation of the business. The Companys intangible assets
related to emission allowances were $9 million at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009. The
Companys intangible assets related to renewable energy credits were $12 million at September 30,
2010. The Company had no renewable energy credits at December 31, 2009. The gross carrying amount
and accumulated amortization of contract intangible assets at September 30, 2010 were $63 million
and $21 million, respectively. The gross carrying amount and accumulated amortization of contract
intangible assets at December 31, 2009 were $64 million and $19 million, respectively.
Income Taxes
The Companys effective tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2010 was 36 percent as
compared to 31 percent for the three months ended September 30, 2009, and for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 was 34 percent as compared to 32 percent for the nine months ended September 30,
2009. The 2010 rate is higher than 2009 due primarily to the recognition of tax benefits from the
settlement of tax audits in 2009.
12
The Company had $9 million and $7 million of unrecognized tax benefits at September 30, 2010 and at
December 31, 2009, respectively, that, if recognized, would favorably impact its effective tax
rate. During the next twelve months, it is reasonably possible that the Company will settle certain
federal and state tax examinations and audits. As a result, the Company believes that it is
possible that there will be a decrease in unrecognized tax benefits of up to $50 million within the
next twelve months.
Offsetting Amounts Related to Certain Contracts
The Company offsets the fair value of derivative instruments with cash collateral received or paid
for those derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty under a master netting
agreement, which reduces both the Companys total assets and total liabilities. As of September 30,
2010, the total cash collateral posted, net of cash collateral received, was $57 million.
Derivative assets and derivative liabilities are shown net of collateral of $22 million and $57
million, respectively. At September 30, 2010, the Company recorded cash collateral received of $1
million and cash collateral paid of $23 million not related to unrealized derivative positions.
These amounts are included in accounts receivable and accounts payable and are recorded net by
counterparty.
Government Grants
Grants are recognized when there is reasonable assurance that the grant will be received and that
any conditions associated with the grant will be met. When grants are received related to Property,
Plant and Equipment, the Company reduces the basis of the assets on the Consolidated Statements of
Financial Position, resulting in lower depreciation expense over the life of the associated asset.
Grants received related to expenses are reflected as a reduction of the associated expense in the
period in which the expense is incurred.
NOTE 3 NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
Variable Interest Entity
In June 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-17, Amendments to FASB Interpretation 46(R). This standard
amends the consolidation guidance that applies to VIEs and affects the overall consolidation
analysis under ASC 810-10, Consolidation. The amendments to the consolidation guidance affect all
entities and enterprises currently within the scope of ASC 810-10, as well as qualifying special
purpose entities that are currently outside the scope of ASC 810-10. Accordingly, the Company
reconsidered its previous ASC 810-10 conclusions, including (1) whether an entity is a VIE, (2)
whether the enterprise is the VIEs primary beneficiary, and (3) what type of financial statement
disclosures are required. ASU 2009-17 is effective as of the beginning of the first fiscal year
that begins after November 15, 2009. The Company adopted the standard as of January 1, 2010. The
adoption of the standard resulted in the consolidation of certain entities within the Power and
Industrial Projects segment where the investments in such entities were previously accounted for
under the equity method. See Note 1.
Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-06, Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Measurements.
ASU 2010-06 requires details of transfers in and out of Level 1 and 2 fair value measurements and
the gross presentation of activity within the Level 3 fair value measurement roll forward. The new
disclosures are required of all entities that are required to provide disclosures about recurring
and nonrecurring fair value measurements. The Company adopted ASU 2010-06 effective January 1,
2010, except for the gross presentation of the Level 3 fair value measurement roll forward which is
effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010 and for interim reporting
periods within those years.
13
NOTE 4 FAIR VALUE
Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a
liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date in a
principal or most advantageous market. Fair value is a market-based measurement that is determined
based on inputs, which refer broadly to assumptions that market participants use in pricing assets
or liabilities. These inputs can be readily observable, market corroborated or generally
unobservable inputs. The Company makes certain assumptions it believes that market participants
would use in pricing assets or liabilities, including assumptions about risk, and the risks
inherent in the inputs to valuation techniques. Credit risk of the Company and its counterparties
is incorporated in the valuation of assets and liabilities through the use of credit reserves, the
impact of which was immaterial at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009. The Company believes it
uses valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable market-based inputs and minimize the
use of unobservable inputs.
A fair value hierarchy has been established, which prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques
used to measure fair value in three broad levels. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest
priority to quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level
1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). In some cases, the inputs used to
measure fair value might fall in different levels of the fair value hierarchy. All assets and
liabilities are required to be classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that
is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. Assessing the significance of a
particular input may require judgment considering factors specific to the asset or liability, and
may affect the valuation of the asset or liability and its placement within the fair value
hierarchy. The Company classifies fair value balances based on the fair value hierarchy defined as
follows:
|
|
|
Level 1 Consists of unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets
or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access as of the reporting date. |
|
|
|
Level 2 Consists of inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are
directly observable for the asset or liability or indirectly observable through
corroboration with observable market data. |
|
|
|
Level 3 Consists of unobservable inputs for assets or liabilities whose fair value is
estimated based on internally developed models or methodologies using inputs that are
generally less readily observable and supported by little, if any, market activity at the
measurement date. Unobservable inputs are developed based on the best available information
and subject to cost-benefit constraints. |
14
The following table presents assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on a
recurring basis as of September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Netting |
|
|
Net Balance at |
|
(in Millions) |
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Adjustments(2) |
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nuclear decommissioning trusts |
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
890 |
|
Other investments(1) |
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102 |
|
Derivative assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency exchange contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
Commodity Contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas |
|
|
2,524 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
(2,654 |
) |
|
|
29 |
|
Electricity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
906 |
|
|
|
458 |
|
|
|
(1,119 |
) |
|
|
245 |
|
Other |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivative assets |
|
|
2,553 |
|
|
|
1,074 |
|
|
|
477 |
|
|
|
(3,819 |
) |
|
|
285 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,206 |
|
|
$ |
1,413 |
|
|
$ |
477 |
|
|
$ |
(3,819 |
) |
|
$ |
1,277 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency exchange contracts |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(20 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
Interest rate contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Commodity Contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas |
|
|
(2,497 |
) |
|
|
(292 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
2,629 |
|
|
|
(171 |
) |
Electricity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(978 |
) |
|
|
(333 |
) |
|
|
1,179 |
|
|
|
(132 |
) |
Other |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivative liabilities |
|
|
(2,527 |
) |
|
|
(1,304 |
) |
|
|
(344 |
) |
|
|
3,854 |
|
|
|
(321 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(2,527 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,304 |
) |
|
$ |
(344 |
) |
|
$ |
3,854 |
|
|
$ |
(321 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Assets as of September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
679 |
|
|
$ |
109 |
|
|
$ |
133 |
|
|
$ |
35 |
|
|
$ |
956 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
$ |
1,689 |
|
|
$ |
841 |
|
|
$ |
304 |
|
|
$ |
(2,657 |
) |
|
$ |
177 |
|
Noncurrent(3) |
|
|
1,517 |
|
|
|
572 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
(1,162 |
) |
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
3,206 |
|
|
$ |
1,413 |
|
|
$ |
477 |
|
|
$ |
(3,819 |
) |
|
$ |
1,277 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
$ |
(1,692 |
) |
|
$ |
(945 |
) |
|
$ |
(224 |
) |
|
$ |
2,694 |
|
|
$ |
(167 |
) |
Noncurrent |
|
|
(835 |
) |
|
|
(359 |
) |
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
1,160 |
|
|
|
(154 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities |
|
$ |
(2,527 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,304 |
) |
|
$ |
(344 |
) |
|
$ |
3,854 |
|
|
$ |
(321 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Assets as of September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
679 |
|
|
$ |
109 |
|
|
$ |
133 |
|
|
$ |
35 |
|
|
$ |
956 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
The following table presents assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on a
recurring basis as of December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Netting |
|
|
Net Balance at |
|
(in Millions) |
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Adjustments(2) |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents |
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
Nuclear decommissioning trusts
and Other Investments(1) |
|
|
599 |
|
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
924 |
|
Derivative assets |
|
|
1,080 |
|
|
|
1,207 |
|
|
|
385 |
|
|
|
(2,347 |
) |
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,694 |
|
|
$ |
1,532 |
|
|
$ |
385 |
|
|
$ |
(2,347 |
) |
|
$ |
1,264 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative liabilities |
|
$ |
(1,120 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,370 |
) |
|
$ |
(361 |
) |
|
$ |
2,433 |
|
|
$ |
(418 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(1,120 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,370 |
) |
|
$ |
(361 |
) |
|
$ |
2,433 |
|
|
$ |
(418 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Assets at December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
574 |
|
|
$ |
162 |
|
|
$ |
24 |
|
|
$ |
86 |
|
|
$ |
846 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes cash surrender value of life insurance investments. |
|
(2) |
|
Amounts represent the impact of master netting agreements that allow the Company to net gain
and loss positions and cash collateral held or placed with the same counterparties. |
|
(3) |
|
Includes $102 million of other investments that are included in the Consolidated Statements
of Financial Position in Other Investments. |
The following tables present the fair value reconciliation of Level 3 assets and liabilities
measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010
and 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, 2010 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
Natural Gas |
|
|
Electricity |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
Asset balance as of June 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
155 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
161 |
|
Changes in fair value recorded in income |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Purchases, issuances and settlements |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
Transfers in/out of Level 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset balance as of September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
125 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
133 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amount of total gains (losses)
included in net income attributed to
the change in unrealized gains (losses)
related to assets and liabilities held
at September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
(4 |
) |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, 2009 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
Natural Gas |
|
|
Electricity |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
Asset (Liability) balance as of June 30, 2009 |
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(194 |
) |
Changes in fair value recorded in income |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
Changes in fair value recorded in regulatory assets/liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
Changes in fair value recorded in other comprehensive income |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
Purchases, issuances and settlements |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23 |
|
Transfers in/out of Level 3 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset (Liability) balance as of September 30, 2009 |
|
$ |
(259 |
) |
|
$ |
39 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
(218 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amount of total gains (losses) included in net income
attributed to the change in unrealized gains (losses) related
to assets and liabilities held at September 30, 2009 |
|
$ |
(15 |
) |
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
Natural Gas |
|
|
Electricity |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
Asset balance as of December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
24 |
|
Changes in fair value recorded in income |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
Changes in fair value recorded in regulatory assets/liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Purchases, issuances and settlements |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(69 |
) |
Transfers in/out of Level 3 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset balance as of September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
125 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
133 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amount of total gains (losses) included in net income
attributed to the change in unrealized gains (losses) related
to assets and liabilities held at September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
58 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2009 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
Natural Gas |
|
|
Electricity |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
Asset (Liability) balance as of December 31, 2008 |
|
$ |
(183 |
) |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
(183 |
) |
Changes in fair value recorded in income |
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
152 |
|
Changes in fair value recorded in regulatory assets/liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Changes in fair value recorded in other comprehensive income |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
Purchases, issuances and settlements |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(41 |
) |
Transfers in/out of Level 3 |
|
|
(154 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(151 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset (Liability) balance as of September 30, 2009 |
|
$ |
(259 |
) |
|
$ |
39 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
(218 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amount of total gains (losses) included in net income
attributed to the change in unrealized gains (losses) related
to assets and liabilities held at September 30, 2009 |
|
$ |
50 |
|
|
$ |
136 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
186 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers in/out of Level 3 represent existing assets or liabilities that were either previously
categorized as a higher level and for which the inputs to the model became unobservable or assets
and liabilities that were previously classified as Level 3 for which the lowest significant input
became observable during the period. Transfers in/out of Level 3 are reflected as if they had
occurred at the beginning of the period. No significant transfers between Level 1 and 2 occurred in
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010. Transfers from Level 3 to Level 2 of $22
million reflect inputs related to certain power transactions identified as observable due to
available broker quotes for the three months ended September 30, 2010. Transfers from Level 2 to
Level 3 of $48 million reflect inputs related to certain power transactions identified as
unobservable due to lack of available broker quotes for the nine months ended September 30, 2010.
Transfers out of Level 3 in 2009 reflect increased reliance on broker quotes for certain gas
transactions.
Cash Equivalents
Cash equivalents include investments with maturities of three months or less when purchased. The
cash equivalents shown in the fair value table are comprised of investments in money market funds.
The fair values of the shares of these funds are based on observable market prices and, therefore,
have been categorized as Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy.
Nuclear Decommissioning Trusts and Other Investments
The nuclear decommissioning trusts and other investments hold debt and equity securities directly
and indirectly through commingled funds and institutional mutual funds. Exchange-traded debt and
equity securities held directly are valued using quoted market prices in actively traded markets.
The commingled funds and institutional mutual funds which hold exchange-traded equity or debt
securities are valued based on the underlying securities, using quoted prices in actively traded
markets. Non-exchange-traded fixed income securities are valued based upon quotations available
from brokers or pricing services. A primary price source is identified by asset type, class or
issue for each
17
security. The trustees monitor prices supplied by pricing services and may use a supplemental price
source or change the primary price source of a given security if the trustees determine that
another price source is considered to be preferable. DTE Energy has obtained an understanding of
how these prices are derived, including the nature and observability of the inputs used in deriving
such prices. Additionally, DTE Energy selectively corroborates the fair values of securities by
comparison of market-based price sources.
Derivative Assets and Liabilities
Derivative assets and liabilities are comprised of physical and financial derivative contracts,
including futures, forwards, options and swaps that are both exchange-traded and over-the-counter
traded contracts. Various inputs are used to value derivatives depending on the type of contract
and availability of market data. Exchange-traded derivative contracts are valued using quoted
prices in active markets. DTE Energy considers the following criteria in determining whether a
market is considered active: frequency in which pricing information is updated, variability in
pricing between sources or over time and the availability of public information. Other derivative
contracts are valued based upon a variety of inputs including commodity market prices, broker
quotes, interest rates, credit ratings, default rates, market-based seasonality and basis
differential factors. DTE Energy monitors the prices that are supplied by brokers and pricing
services and may use a supplemental price source or change the primary price source of an index if
prices become unavailable or another price source is determined to be more representative of fair
value. DTE Energy has obtained an understanding of how these prices are derived. Additionally, DTE
Energy selectively corroborates the fair value of its transactions by comparison of market-based
price sources. Mathematical valuation models are used for derivatives for which external market
data is not readily observable, such as contracts which extend beyond the actively traded reporting
period.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The fair value of long-term debt is determined by using quoted market prices when available and a
discounted cash flow analysis based upon estimated current borrowing rates when quoted market
prices are not available. The table below shows the fair value relative to the carrying value for
long-term debt securities. Certain other financial instruments, such as notes payable, customer
deposits and notes receivable are not shown as carrying value approximates fair value. See Note 5
for further information on financial and derivative instruments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Carrying Value |
|
Fair Value |
|
Carrying Value |
Long-Term Debt |
|
$8.8 billion |
|
$7.9 billion |
|
$8.3 billion |
|
$8.0 billion |
Nuclear Decommissioning Trust Funds
Detroit Edison has a legal obligation to decommission its nuclear power plants following the
expiration of their operating licenses. This obligation is reflected as an asset retirement
obligation on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position. See Note 6 for additional
information.
The NRC has jurisdiction over the decommissioning of nuclear power plants and requires
decommissioning funding based upon a formula. The MPSC and FERC regulate the recovery of costs of
decommissioning nuclear power plants and both require the use of external trust funds to finance
the decommissioning of Fermi 2. Rates approved by the MPSC provide for the recovery of
decommissioning costs of Fermi 2 and the disposal of low-level radioactive waste. Detroit Edison is
continuing to fund FERC jurisdictional amounts for decommissioning even though explicit provisions
are not included in FERC rates. The Company believes the MPSC and FERC collections will be adequate
to fund the estimated cost of decommissioning using the NRC formula. The decommissioning assets,
anticipated earnings thereon and future revenues from decommissioning collections will be used to
decommission Fermi 2. The Company expects the liabilities to be reduced to zero at the conclusion
of the decommissioning activities. If amounts remain in the trust funds for Fermi 2 following the
completion of the decommissioning activities, those amounts will be disbursed based on rulings by
the MPSC and FERC.
18
The decommissioning of Fermi 1 is funded by Detroit Edison. Contributions to the Fermi 1 trust are
discretionary.
The following table summarizes the fair value of the nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Fermi 2 |
|
$ |
861 |
|
|
$ |
790 |
|
Fermi 1 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Low level radioactive waste |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
890 |
|
|
$ |
817 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The costs of securities sold are determined on the basis of specific identification. The following
table sets forth the gains and losses and proceeds from the sale of securities by the nuclear
decommissioning trust funds:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
September 30 |
|
September 30 |
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
Realized gains |
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
29 |
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
Realized losses |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
Proceeds from sales of securities |
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
237 |
|
Realized gains and losses from the sale of securities for the Fermi 2 and the low level radioactive
waste funds are recorded to the Regulatory asset and Nuclear decommissioning liability. The
following table sets forth the fair value and unrealized gains for the nuclear decommissioning
trust funds:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
(in Millions) |
|
Value |
|
|
Gains |
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities |
|
$ |
462 |
|
|
$ |
151 |
|
Debt securities |
|
|
417 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
890 |
|
|
$ |
180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities |
|
$ |
420 |
|
|
$ |
135 |
|
Debt securities |
|
|
388 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
817 |
|
|
$ |
152 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The debt securities at both September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 had an average maturity of
approximately 5 years. Securities held in the nuclear decommissioning trust funds are classified as
available-for-sale. As Detroit Edison does not have the ability to hold impaired investments for a
period of time sufficient to allow for the anticipated recovery of market value, all unrealized
losses are considered to be other than temporary impairments.
Impairment charges for unrealized losses incurred by the Fermi 2 trust are recognized as a
Regulatory asset. Detroit Edison recognized $51 million and $48 million of unrealized losses as
Regulatory assets at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively. Since the
decommissioning of Fermi 1 is funded by Detroit Edison rather than through a regulatory recovery
mechanism, there is no corresponding regulatory asset treatment. Therefore, impairment charges for
unrealized losses incurred by the Fermi 1 trust are recognized in earnings immediately. There were
no impairment charges for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and September 30,
2009, for Fermi 1.
19
Other Available-For-Sale Securities
The following table summarizes the fair value of the Companys investment in available-for-sale
debt and equity securities, excluding nuclear decommissioning trust fund assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
December 31, 2009 |
(in Millions) |
|
Fair Value |
|
Carrying value |
|
Fair Value |
|
Carrying Value |
Cash equivalents |
|
$ |
70 |
|
|
$ |
70 |
|
|
$ |
106 |
|
|
$ |
106 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
As of September 30, 2010, these securities are comprised primarily of money-market and equity
securities. During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, no amounts of unrealized losses on
available for sale securities were reclassified out of other comprehensive income into losses for
the period. During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, $3 million of unrealized losses on
available for sale securities were reclassified out of other comprehensive income into earnings for
the period. This reclassification included an other than temporary impairment of equity securities
of $4 million. Gains related to trading securities held at September 30, 2010 and September 30,
2009 were $3 million and $6 million, respectively.
NOTE 5 FINANCIAL AND OTHER DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS
The Company recognizes all derivatives on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position at
their fair value unless they qualify for certain scope exceptions, including the normal purchases
and normal sales exception. Further, derivatives that qualify and are designated for hedge
accounting are classified as either hedges of a forecasted transaction or the variability of cash
flows to be received or paid related to a recognized asset or liability (cash flow hedge), or as
hedges of the fair value of a recognized asset or liability or of an unrecognized firm commitment
(fair value hedge). For cash flow hedges, the portion of the derivative gain or loss that is
effective in offsetting the change in the value of the underlying exposure is deferred in
Accumulated other comprehensive income and later reclassified into earnings when the underlying
transaction occurs. For fair value hedges, changes in fair values for the derivative are recognized
in earnings each period. Gains and losses from the ineffective portion of any hedge are recognized
in earnings immediately. For derivatives that do not qualify or are not designated for hedge
accounting, changes in fair value are recognized in earnings each period.
The Companys primary market risk exposure is associated with commodity prices, credit, interest
rates and foreign currency exchange. The Company has risk management policies to monitor and manage
market risks. The Company uses derivative instruments to manage some of the exposure. The Company
uses derivative instruments for trading purposes in its Energy Trading segment and the coal
marketing activities of its Power and Industrial Projects segment. Contracts classified as
derivative instruments include power, gas, oil and certain coal forwards, futures, options and
swaps, and foreign currency exchange contracts. Items not classified as derivatives include
proprietary gas inventory, unconventional gas reserves, power transmission, pipeline transportation
and certain storage assets. Derivatives are generally recorded at fair value and shown as
Derivative assets or liabilities on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position.
Electric Utility Detroit Edison generates, purchases, distributes and sells electricity. Detroit
Edison uses forward energy and capacity contracts to manage changes in the price of electricity and
fuel. Substantially all of these contracts meet the normal purchases and sales exemption and are
therefore accounted for under the accrual method. Other derivative contracts are recoverable
through the PSCR mechanism when settled. This results in the deferral of unrealized gains and
losses as Regulatory assets or liabilities, until realized.
Gas Utility MichCon purchases, stores, transports, gathers, distributes and sells natural gas and
sells storage and transportation capacity. MichCon has fixed-priced contracts for portions of its
expected gas supply requirements through March 2014. These gas-supply contracts are designated and
qualify for the normal purchases and sales
20
exemption and are therefore accounted for under the accrual method. MichCon may also sell forward
transportation and storage capacity contracts. Forward transportation and storage contracts are not
derivatives and are therefore accounted for under the accrual method.
Gas Storage and Pipelines This segment is primarily engaged in services related to the
transportation and storage of natural gas. Fixed-priced contracts are used in the marketing and
management of transportation and storage services. Generally these contracts are not derivatives
and are therefore accounted for under the accrual method.
Unconventional Gas Production The Unconventional Gas Production business is engaged in
unconventional natural gas and oil project development and production. The Company uses derivative
contracts to manage changes in commodity prices. These derivatives are designated as cash flow
hedges. Amounts recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive income will be reclassified to earnings
as the related production affects earnings through 2010. Management estimates reclassifying an
after-tax gain of approximately $1 million to earnings within the next three months.
Power and Industrial Projects Business units within this segment manage and operate onsite energy
and pulverized coal projects, coke batteries, landfill gas recovery and power generation assets.
These businesses utilize fixed-priced contracts in the marketing and management of their assets.
These contracts are generally not derivatives and are therefore accounted for under the accrual
method. The segment also engages in coal marketing which includes the marketing and trading of
physical coal and coal financial instruments, and forward contracts for the purchase and sale of
emissions allowances. Certain of these physical and financial coal contracts and contracts for the
purchase and sale of emission allowances are derivatives and are accounted for by recording changes
in fair value to earnings.
Energy Trading Commodity Price Risk Energy Trading markets and trades wholesale electricity and
natural gas physical products and energy financial instruments, and provides risk management
services utilizing energy commodity derivative instruments. Forwards, futures, options and swap
agreements are used to manage exposure to the risk of market price and volume fluctuations in its
operations. These derivatives are accounted for by recording changes in fair value to earnings
unless certain hedge accounting criteria are met.
Energy Trading Foreign Currency Exchange Risk Energy Trading has foreign currency exchange
forward contracts to economically hedge fixed Canadian dollar commitments existing under power
purchase and sale contracts and gas transportation contracts. The Company enters into these
contracts to mitigate price volatility with respect to fluctuations of the Canadian dollar relative
to the U.S. dollar. These derivatives are accounted for by recording changes in fair value to
earnings unless certain hedge accounting criteria are met.
Corporate and Other Interest Rate Risk The Company uses interest rate swaps, treasury locks and
other derivatives to hedge the risk associated with interest rate market volatility. In 2004 and
2000, the Company entered into a series of interest rate derivatives to limit its sensitivity to
market interest rate risk associated with the issuance of long-term debt. Such instruments were
designated as cash flow hedges. The Company subsequently issued long-term debt and terminated these
hedges at a cost that is included in other comprehensive loss. Amounts recorded in other
comprehensive loss will be reclassified to interest expense through 2033. In 2010, the Company
estimates reclassifying $3 million of losses to earnings.
Credit Risk The utility and non-utility businesses are exposed to credit risk if customers or
counterparties do not comply with their contractual obligations. The Company maintains credit
policies that significantly minimize overall credit risk. These policies include an evaluation of
potential customers and counterparties financial condition, credit rating, collateral
requirements or other credit enhancements such as letters of credit or guarantees. The Company
generally uses standardized agreements that allow the netting of positive and negative transactions
associated with a single counterparty. The Company maintains a provision for credit losses based on
factors surrounding the credit risk of its customers, historical trends, and other information.
Based on the Companys credit policies and its September 30, 2010 provision for credit losses, the
Companys exposure to counterparty nonperformance is not expected to have a material adverse effect
on the Companys financial statements.
21
Derivative Activities
The Company manages its MTM risk on a portfolio basis based upon the delivery period of its
contracts and the individual components of the risks within each contract. Accordingly, it records
and manages the energy purchase and sale obligations under its contracts in separate components
based on the commodity (e.g. electricity or gas), the product (e.g. electricity for delivery during
peak or off-peak hours), the delivery location (e.g. by region), the risk profile (e.g. forward or
option), and the delivery period (e.g. by month and year). The following describe the four
categories of activities represented by their operating characteristics and key risks:
|
|
|
Asset Optimization Represents derivative activity associated with assets owned and
contracted by DTE Energy, including forward sales of gas production and trades associated
with power transmission, gas transportation and storage capacity. Changes in the value of
derivatives in this category economically offset changes in the value of underlying
non-derivative positions, which do not qualify for fair value accounting. The difference in
accounting treatment of derivatives in this category and the underlying non-derivative
positions can result in significant earnings volatility. |
|
|
|
|
Marketing and Origination Represents derivative activity transacted by originating
substantially hedged positions with wholesale energy marketers, producers, end users,
utilities, retail aggregators and alternative energy suppliers. |
|
|
|
|
Fundamentals Based Trading Represents derivative activity transacted with the intent
of taking a view, capturing market price changes, or putting capital at risk. This activity
is speculative in nature as opposed to hedging an existing exposure. |
|
|
|
|
Other Includes derivative activity associated with the Companys Unconventional Gas
reserves. A portion of the price risk associated with anticipated production from the
Barnett natural gas reserves has been mitigated through 2010. Changes in the value of the
hedges are recorded as Derivative assets or liabilities, with an offset in Other
comprehensive income to the extent that the hedges are deemed effective. The amounts shown
in the following tables exclude the value of the underlying gas reserves including changes
therein. Other also includes derivative activity at Detroit Edison related to FTRs and
forward contracts related to emissions. Changes in the value of derivative contracts at
Detroit Edison are recorded as Derivative assets or liabilities, with an offset to
Regulatory assets or liabilities as the settlement value of these contracts will be
included in the PSCR mechanism when realized. |
The following represents the fair value of derivative instruments as of September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
Derivative Assets |
|
|
Derivative Liabilities |
|
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity Contracts Natural Gas |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Interest rate contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments: |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency exchange contracts |
|
$ |
18 |
|
|
$ |
(20 |
) |
Commodity Contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas |
|
|
2,682 |
|
|
|
(2,800 |
) |
Electricity |
|
|
1,364 |
|
|
|
(1,311 |
) |
Other |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments: |
|
$ |
4,103 |
|
|
$ |
(4,174 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
$ |
2,834 |
|
|
$ |
(2,861 |
) |
Noncurrent |
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
(1,314 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives |
|
$ |
4,104 |
|
|
$ |
(4,175 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative Assets |
|
|
Derivative Liabilities |
|
|
|
Current |
|
|
Noncurrent |
|
|
Current |
|
|
Noncurrent |
|
Reconciliation of
derivative instruments to
Consolidated Statements of
Financial Position: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fair value of derivatives |
|
$ |
2,834 |
|
|
$ |
1,270 |
|
|
$ |
(2,861 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,314 |
) |
Counterparty netting |
|
|
(2,645 |
) |
|
|
(1,152 |
) |
|
|
2,645 |
|
|
|
1,152 |
|
Collateral adjustment |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives as reported |
|
$ |
177 |
|
|
$ |
108 |
|
|
$ |
(167 |
) |
|
$ |
(154 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following represents the fair value of derivative instruments as of December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
Derivative Assets |
|
|
Derivative Liabilities |
|
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity Contracts Natural Gas |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency exchange contracts |
|
$ |
24 |
|
|
$ |
(31 |
) |
Commodity Contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas |
|
|
1,323 |
|
|
|
(1,552 |
) |
Electricity |
|
|
1,304 |
|
|
|
(1,241 |
) |
Other |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments: |
|
$ |
2,670 |
|
|
$ |
(2,851 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
$ |
1,860 |
|
|
$ |
(1,951 |
) |
Noncurrent |
|
|
812 |
|
|
|
(900 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives |
|
$ |
2,672 |
|
|
$ |
(2,851 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative Assets |
|
|
Derivative Liabilities |
|
|
|
Current |
|
|
Noncurrent |
|
|
Current |
|
|
Noncurrent |
|
Reconciliation of
derivative instruments to
Consolidated Statements of
Financial Position: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fair value of derivatives |
|
$ |
1,860 |
|
|
$ |
812 |
|
|
$ |
(1,951 |
) |
|
$ |
(900 |
) |
Counterparty netting |
|
|
(1,644 |
) |
|
|
(669 |
) |
|
|
1,644 |
|
|
|
669 |
|
Collateral adjustment |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives as reported |
|
$ |
209 |
|
|
$ |
116 |
|
|
$ |
(220 |
) |
|
$ |
(198 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The income effect of derivatives designated as cash flow hedging instruments on the Consolidated
Statements of Operations is less than $1 million for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2010 and September 30, 2009.
23
The income effect of derivatives not designated as hedging instruments on the Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010 and September 30,
2009 is as follows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (Loss) |
|
|
Gain (Loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
Recognized in |
|
|
Recognized in |
|
|
|
|
|
Income on |
|
|
Income on |
|
|
|
Location of Gain |
|
Derivatives for |
|
|
Derivatives for |
|
|
|
(Loss) Recognized |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
(in Millions) |
|
in Income |
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
Derivatives Not Designated As Hedging Instruments |
|
On Derivatives |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Foreign currency exchange contracts |
|
Operating Revenue |
|
$ |
(8 |
) |
|
$ |
(9 |
) |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
(20 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity Contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas |
|
Operating Revenue |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas |
|
Fuel, purchased power and gas |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
Electricity |
|
Operating Revenue |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
Other |
|
Operating Revenue |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Other |
|
Operation and maintenance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
$ |
(57 |
) |
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
$ |
130 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effects of derivative instruments recoverable through the PSCR mechanism when realized on the
Consolidated Statements of Financial Position are $1 million in losses related to Emissions
recognized in Regulatory assets and $4 million in gains related to FTRs recognized in Regulatory
liabilities for the nine months ended September 30, 2010.
The following represents the cumulative gross volume of derivative contracts outstanding as of
September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity |
|
Number of Units |
Natural Gas (MMBtu) |
|
|
859,904,377 |
|
Electricity (MWh) |
|
|
64,352,491 |
|
Foreign Currency Exchange ($ CAD) |
|
|
290,920,919 |
|
Various non-utility subsidiaries of the Company have entered into contracts which contain ratings
triggers and are guaranteed by DTE Energy. These contracts contain provisions which allow the
counterparties to request that the Company post cash or letters of credit as collateral in the
event that DTE Energys credit rating is downgraded below investment grade. Certain of these
provisions (known as hard triggers) state specific circumstances under which the Company can be
asked to post collateral upon the occurrence of a credit downgrade, while other provisions (known
as soft triggers) are not as specific. For contracts with soft triggers, it is difficult to
estimate the amount of collateral which may be requested by counterparties and/or which the Company
may ultimately be required to post. The amount of such collateral which could be requested
fluctuates based on commodity prices (primarily gas, power and coal) and the provisions and
maturities of the underlying transactions. As of September 30, 2010, the value of the transactions
for which the Company would have been exposed to collateral requests had DTE Energys credit rating
been below investment grade on such date under both hard trigger and soft trigger provisions was
approximately $297 million. In circumstances where an entity is downgraded below investment grade
and collateral requests are made as a result, the requesting parties often agree to accept less
than the full amount of their exposure to the downgraded entity.
24
NOTE 6 ASSET RETIREMENT OBLIGATIONS
A reconciliation of the asset retirement obligations for the nine months ended September 30, 2010
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
|
|
|
Asset retirement obligations at December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
1,439 |
|
Accretion |
|
|
70 |
|
Liabilities incurred |
|
|
10 |
|
Liabilities settled |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Consolidation of VIEs |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Asset retirement obligations at September 30, 2010 |
|
|
1,515 |
|
Less amount included in current liabilities |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,499 |
|
|
|
|
|
Substantially all of the asset retirement obligations represent nuclear decommissioning liabilities
that are funded through a surcharge to electric customers over the life of the Fermi 2 nuclear
plant.
NOTE 7 REGULATORY MATTERS
2010 Electric Rate Case Filing
Detroit Edison filed a rate case on October 29, 2010 based on a projected twelve-month period
ending March 31, 2012. The filing with the MPSC requested a $443 million increase in base rates
that is required to recover higher costs associated with environmental compliance, operation and
maintenance of the Companys electric distribution system and generation plants, inflation, the
capital costs of plant additions, the reduction in territory sales,
the impact from the expiration of certain wholesale for resale contracts
and the increased migration of
customers to the electric Customer Choice program. Detroit Edison also proposed certain adjustments
which could reduce the
net impact on the required increase in rates
by approximately $190 million. These adjustments relate
to electric Customer Choice migration, pension and other postretirement benefits expenses and the
Nuclear Decommissioning surcharge.
Detroit Edison Uncollectible Expense True-Up Mechanism (UETM)
In March 2010, Detroit Edison filed an application with the MPSC for approval of its UETM for 2009
requesting recovery of approximately $4.5 million consisting of costs related to 2009 uncollectible
expense and associated carrying charges. In August 2010, the MPSC determined that the UETM was
effective with its January 2010 order in Detroit Edisons rate case and dismissed the request for
UETM expenses for 2009.
Power Supply Cost Recovery Proceedings
The PSCR process is designed to allow Detroit Edison to recover all of its power supply costs if
incurred under reasonable and prudent policies and practices. Detroit Edisons power supply costs
include fuel costs, purchased and net interchange power costs, nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide
emission allowances costs, urea costs, transmission costs and MISO costs. The MPSC reviews these
costs, policies and practices for prudence in annual plan and reconciliation filings.
2011 Plan Year In September 2010, Detroit Edison filed its 2011 PSCR plan case seeking approval
of a levelized PSCR factor of 2.98 mills/kWh below the amount included in base rates for all PSCR
customers. The filing supports a total power supply expense forecast of $1.2 billion. The plan
also includes approximately $36 million for the recovery of its projected 2010 PSCR under-recovery.
25
The following table summarizes Detroit Edisons PSCR reconciliation filing currently pending with
the MPSC:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Over-recovery, |
|
PSCR Cost of |
PSCR Year |
|
Date Filed |
|
including interest |
|
Power Sold |
2009 |
|
March 2010 |
|
$15.6 million |
|
$1.1 billion |
2009 Gas Rate Case Order
On June 3, 2010, the MPSC issued an order in MichCons June 9, 2009 rate case filing. The MPSC
approved an annual revenue increase of $119 million. Since the final rate relief ordered was less
than the Companys self-implemented rate increase of $170 million effective on January 1, 2010, the
MPSC ordered refunds for the period the self-implemented rates were in effect. In September 2010,
MichCon filed a refund plan with the MPSC. MichCon has a refund liability of approximately $15
million at September 30, 2010, representing the estimated amount due customers, including interest.
In addition, the order provided for recovery of the regulatory unamortized balance of CTA. In June
2010, MichCon deferred and recognized in income approximately $32 million ($20 million after-tax)
of previously expensed CTA. The non-pension component of CTA of approximately $21 million is
included in Regulatory assets. The pension component of CTA of approximately $11 million is
included in Regulatory liabilities.
2010 Gas Rate Case Filing
MichCon filed a rate case on July 27, 2010 based on a fully projected 2011 test year. The filing
with the MPSC requested a $51 million increase in revenues that is required to recover higher costs
associated with increased investments in net plant, the impact of sales reductions due to customer
conservation and the economic conditions in Michigan, lower projected midstream revenues resulting
from reduced storage capacity and MichCons shift to a lower risk predominantly long-term storage
contract portfolio from a higher risk predominantly short-term storage contract portfolio, and
increasing operating costs.
Gas Cost Recovery Proceedings
The GCR process is designed to allow MichCon to recover all of its gas supply costs if incurred
under reasonable and prudent policies and practices. The MPSC reviews these costs, policies and
practices for prudence in annual plan and reconciliation filings.
2010-2011 Plan Year - In December 2009, MichCon filed its GCR plan case for the 2010-2011 GCR plan
year. The MPSC issued an order in this case in September 2010 authorizing MichCon to charge a
maximum of $7.06 per Mcf, adjustable monthly by a contingent factor. The MPSC also approved
MichCons proposed fixed price gas purchasing program and provided clarification regarding
treatment of certain affiliate purchases.
The following table summarizes MichCons GCR reconciliation filing currently pending with the MPSC:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Over-recovery, |
|
|
GCR Year |
|
Date Filed |
|
including interest |
|
GCR Cost of Gas Sold |
2009-2010
|
|
June 2010
|
|
$5.9 million
|
|
$1.0 billion |
Gas Main Renewal and Gas Meter Move Out Programs
The June 3, 2010 MPSC gas rate case order required MichCon to make filings related to gas main
renewal and meter move-out programs. In a July 30, 2010 filing, MichCon proposed to implement a
10-year gas main renewal program beginning in 2012 which would require capital expenditures of
approximately $17 million per year for renewing gas distribution mains, retiring gas mains, and
where appropriate and when related to the gas main renewal or retirement activity, relocate inside
meters to outside locations and renew service lines.
26
In a
September 30, 2010 filing, MichCon proposed to implement a 10-year gas meter move out program
beginning in 2012 which would require capital expenditures of approximately $22 million per year
primarily for relocation of inside meters to the outside of residents houses. Recovery of costs
associated with these two programs is expected to be provided through future MichCon rate cases.
Other
The Company is unable to predict the outcome of the unresolved regulatory matters discussed herein.
Resolution of these matters is dependent upon future MPSC orders and appeals, which may materially
impact the financial position, results of operations and cash flows of the Company.
NOTE 8 COMMON STOCK
In March 2010, the Company contributed $100 million of DTE Energy common stock to the DTE Energy
Company Affiliates Employee Benefit Plans Master Trust. The common stock was contributed over four
business days from March 26, 2010 through March 31, 2010 and was valued using the closing market
prices of DTE Energy common stock on each of those days in accordance with fair value measurement
and accounting requirements.
27
NOTE 9 EARNINGS PER SHARE
The Company reports both basic and diluted earnings per share. The calculation of diluted earnings
per share assumes the issuance of potentially dilutive common shares outstanding during the period
from the exercise of stock options.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Nine Months |
|
|
|
Ended September 30 |
|
|
Ended September 30 |
|
(in Millions, except per share amounts) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Basic Earnings per Share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to DTE Energy |
|
$ |
163 |
|
|
$ |
151 |
|
|
$ |
478 |
|
|
$ |
412 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of common shares outstanding |
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average net restricted shares outstanding |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared common shares |
|
$ |
94 |
|
|
$ |
87 |
|
|
$ |
271 |
|
|
$ |
259 |
|
Dividends declared net restricted shares |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total distributed earnings |
|
$ |
95 |
|
|
$ |
87 |
|
|
$ |
272 |
|
|
$ |
261 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income less distributed earnings |
|
$ |
68 |
|
|
$ |
64 |
|
|
$ |
206 |
|
|
$ |
151 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributed (dividends per common share) |
|
$ |
.56 |
|
|
$ |
.53 |
|
|
$ |
1.62 |
|
|
$ |
1.59 |
|
Undistributed |
|
|
.41 |
|
|
|
.39 |
|
|
|
1.23 |
|
|
|
.92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Basic Earnings per Common Share |
|
$ |
.97 |
|
|
$ |
.92 |
|
|
$ |
2.85 |
|
|
$ |
2.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted Earnings per Share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to DTE Energy |
|
$ |
163 |
|
|
$ |
151 |
|
|
$ |
478 |
|
|
$ |
412 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of common shares outstanding |
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
Average incremental shares from assumed exercise of options |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shares for dilutive calculation |
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average net restricted shares outstanding |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared common shares |
|
$ |
94 |
|
|
$ |
87 |
|
|
$ |
271 |
|
|
$ |
259 |
|
Dividends declared net restricted shares |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total distributed earnings |
|
$ |
95 |
|
|
$ |
87 |
|
|
$ |
272 |
|
|
$ |
261 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income less distributed earnings |
|
$ |
68 |
|
|
$ |
64 |
|
|
$ |
206 |
|
|
$ |
151 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributed (dividends per common share) |
|
$ |
.56 |
|
|
$ |
.53 |
|
|
$ |
1.62 |
|
|
$ |
1.59 |
|
Undistributed |
|
|
.40 |
|
|
|
.39 |
|
|
|
1.22 |
|
|
|
.92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Diluted Earnings per Common Share |
|
$ |
.96 |
|
|
$ |
.92 |
|
|
$ |
2.84 |
|
|
$ |
2.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options to purchase approximately 0.4 million and 5 million shares of common stock as of September
30, 2010 and September 30, 2009, respectively, were not included in the computation of diluted
earnings per share because the options exercise price was greater than the average market price of
the common shares, thus making these options anti-dilutive.
28
NOTE 10 LONG-TERM DEBT
Debt Issuances
In 2010, the Company has issued the following long-term debt:
(in Millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company |
|
Month Issued |
|
|
Type |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
Maturity |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Detroit Edison |
|
August |
|
Senior Notes(1) |
|
|
3.45 |
% |
|
|
2020 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
Detroit Edison |
|
September |
|
Senior Notes(1)(2) |
|
|
4.89 |
% |
|
|
2020 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Proceeds were used to repay a portion of Detroit Edisons $500 million 6.125% Senior Notes
due October 1, 2010 and for general corporate purposes. |
|
(2) |
|
These bonds were priced in March 2010 in a private placement transaction which was closed and
funded in September 2010. |
Debt Retirements and Redemptions
In 2010, the following debt has been retired:
(in Millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company |
|
Month Retired |
|
|
Type |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
Maturity |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Detroit Edison |
|
September |
|
Senior Notes(1) |
|
|
6.125 |
% |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ |
500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
These Senior Notes, maturing October 1, 2010, were optionally redeemed on September 30,
2010. |
NOTE 11 SHORT-TERM CREDIT ARRANGEMENTS AND BORROWINGS
In August 2010, DTE Energy and its wholly owned subsidiaries, Detroit Edison and MichCon, entered
into amended and restated two-year unsecured revolving credit agreements and new three-year
unsecured revolving credit agreements with a syndicate of 23 banks that may be used for general
corporate borrowings, but are intended to provide liquidity support for each of the companies
commercial paper programs. No one bank provides more than 8.25% of the commitment in any facility.
Borrowings under the facilities are available at prevailing short-term interest rates.
Additionally, DTE Energy has other facilities to support letter of credit issuance.
The above agreements require the Company to maintain a total funded debt to capitalization ratio of
no more than 0.65 to 1. In the agreements, total funded debt means all indebtedness of the
Company and its consolidated subsidiaries, including capital lease obligations, hedge agreements
and guarantees of third parties debt, but excluding contingent obligations, nonrecourse and junior
subordinated debt and certain equity-linked securities and, except for calculations at the end of
the second quarter, certain MichCon short-term debt. Capitalization means the sum of (a) total
funded debt plus (b) consolidated net worth, which is equal to consolidated total stockholders
equity of the Company and its consolidated subsidiaries (excluding pension effects under certain
FASB statements), as determined in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America. At September 30, 2010, the total funded debt to total capitalization
ratios for DTE Energy, Detroit Edison and MichCon are 0.50 to 1, 0.51 to 1 and 0.47 to 1,
respectively, and are in compliance with this financial covenant. The availability under these
combined facilities at September 30, 2010 is shown in the following table:
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
DTE Energy |
|
|
Detroit Edison |
|
|
MichCon |
|
|
Total |
|
Unsecured revolving credit facility, expiring August 2012 |
|
$ |
538 |
|
|
$ |
212 |
|
|
$ |
250 |
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
Unsecured revolving credit facility, expiring August 2013 |
|
|
562 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
800 |
|
Unsecured letter of credit facility, expiring in May 2013 |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50 |
|
Unsecured letter of credit facility, expiring in August 2015 |
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total credit facilities at September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
1,275 |
|
|
$ |
275 |
|
|
$ |
425 |
|
|
$ |
1,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts outstanding at September 30, 2010: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial paper issuances |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Letters of credit |
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net availability at September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
1,053 |
|
|
$ |
275 |
|
|
$ |
405 |
|
|
$ |
1,733 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company has other outstanding letters of credit which are not included in the above described
facilities totaling approximately $27 million which are used for various corporate purposes.
In conjunction with maintaining certain exchange traded risk management positions, the Company may
be required to post cash collateral with its clearing agent. The Company has a demand financing
agreement for up to $100 million with its clearing agent. In April 2010, the agreement was amended
to allow for up to $50 million of additional margin financing provided that the Company posts a
letter of credit for the incremental amount. At September 30, 2010, a $10 million letter of credit
was in place, raising capacity under this facility for up to $110 million. The $10 million letter
of credit is included in the table above. The amount outstanding under this agreement was $65
million and $1 million at September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively.
NOTE 12 COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Environmental
Electric Utility
Air Detroit Edison is subject to the EPA ozone transport and acid rain regulations that limit
power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. Since 2005, the EPA and the State of
Michigan have issued additional emission reduction regulations relating to ozone, fine particulate,
regional haze and mercury air pollution. The new rules will lead to additional controls on
fossil-fueled power plants to reduce nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide and mercury emissions. To
comply with these requirements, Detroit Edison has spent approximately $1.5 billion through 2009.
The Company estimates Detroit Edison will make capital expenditures of approximately $70 million in
2010 and up to $2.2 billion of additional capital expenditures through 2019 based on current
regulations. Further, additional rulemakings are expected over the next few years which could
require additional controls for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and hazardous air pollutants. It is
not possible to quantify the impact of those expected rulemakings at this time.
In July 2009, DTE Energy received a Notice of Violation/Finding of Violation (NOV/FOV) from the EPA
alleging, among other things, that five of Detroit Edisons power plants violated New Source
Performance standards, Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements, and Title V operating
permit requirements under the Clean Air Act. In June 2010, the EPA issued a NOV/FOV making similar
allegations related to a recent project and outage at Unit 2 of the Monroe Power Plant.
On August 5, 2010, the United States Department of Justice, at the request of the EPA, brought a
civil suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan against DTE Energy and
Detroit Edison, related to the June 2010 NOV/FOV and the outage work performed at Unit 2 of the
Monroe Power Plant, but not relating to the July 2009 NOV/FOV. Among other relief, the EPA is
requesting the court to require Detroit Edison to install and operate the best available control
technology at Unit 2 of the Monroe Power Plant. Further, the EPA is requesting the court to
30
issue a preliminary injunction to require Detroit Edison to (i) begin the process of obtaining the
necessary permits for the Monroe Unit 2 modification and (ii) offset the pollution from Monroe Unit
2 through emissions reductions from Detroit Edisons fleet of coal-fired power plants until the new
control equipment is operating.
DTE Energy and Detroit Edison believe that the plants identified by the EPA, including Unit 2 of
the Monroe Power Plant, have complied with all applicable federal environmental regulations.
Depending upon the outcome of discussions with the EPA regarding the NOV/FOV and the result of the
civil action, Detroit Edison could also be required to install additional pollution control
equipment at some or all of the power plants in question, consider early retirement of facilities
where control equipment is not economical, engage in supplemental environmental programs, and/or
pay fines. DTE Energy and Detroit Edison cannot predict the financial impact or outcome of this
matter, or the timing of its resolution.
Water In response to an EPA regulation, Detroit Edison is required to examine alternatives for
reducing the environmental impacts of the cooling water intake structures at several of its
facilities. Based on the results of completed studies and expected future studies, Detroit Edison
may be required to install additional control technologies to reduce the impacts of the water
intakes. Initially, it was estimated that Detroit Edison could incur up to approximately $55
million in additional capital expenditures over the four to six years subsequent to 2008 to comply
with these requirements. However, a January 2007 circuit court decision remanded back to the EPA
several provisions of the federal regulation that has resulted in a delay in compliance dates. The
decision also raised the possibility that Detroit Edison may have to install cooling towers at some
facilities at a cost substantially greater than was initially estimated for other mitigative
technologies. In 2008, the Supreme Court agreed to review the remanded cost-benefit analysis
provision of the rule and in April 2009 upheld the EPAs use of this provision in determining best
technology available for reducing environmental impacts. Concurrently, the EPA continues to develop
a revised rule, a draft of which is expected to be published in the first quarter of 2011, with a
final rule scheduled for mid-2012. The EPA has also issued an information collection request to
begin a review of steam electric effluent guidelines. It is not possible at this time to quantify
the impacts of these developing requirements.
Contaminated Sites Prior to the construction of major interstate natural gas pipelines, gas for
heating and other uses was manufactured locally from processes involving coal, coke or oil. The
facilities, which produced gas, have been designated as manufactured gas plant (MGP) sites. Detroit
Edison conducted remedial investigations at contaminated sites, including three former MGP sites.
The investigations have revealed contamination related to the by-products of gas manufacturing at
each site. In addition to the MGP sites, the Company is also in the process of cleaning up other
contaminated sites, including the area surrounding an ash landfill, electrical distribution
substations, and underground and aboveground storage tank locations. The findings of these
investigations indicated that the estimated cost to remediate these sites is expected to be
incurred over the next several years. At September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the Company had
$9 million accrued for remediation. Any significant change in assumptions, such as remediation
techniques, nature and extent of contamination and regulatory requirements, could impact the
estimate of remedial action costs for the sites and affect the Companys financial position and
cash flows.
Landfill Detroit Edison owns and operates a permitted engineered ash storage facility at the
Monroe Power Plant to dispose of fly ash from the coal fired power plant. Detroit Edison performed
an engineering analysis in 2009 and identified the need for embankment side slope repairs and
reconstruction.
The EPA has published proposed rules to regulate coal ash under the authority of the Resources
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The proposed rule published on June 21, 2010 contains two
primary regulatory options to regulate coal ash residue. The EPA is currently considering either
designating coal ash as a Hazardous Waste as defined by RCRA or regulating coal ash as
non-hazardous waste under RCRA. Agencies and legislatures have urged the EPA to regulate coal ash
as a non-hazardous waste. If the EPA designates coal ash as a hazardous waste, the agency could
apply some, or all, of the disposal and reuse standards that have been applied to other existing
hazardous wastes to disposal and reuse of coal ash. Some of the regulatory actions currently being
contemplated could have a significant impact on our operations and financial position and the rates
we charge our customers. It is not possible to quantify the impact of those expected rulemakings at
this time.
31
Gas Utility
Contaminated Sites Gas Utility owns, or previously owned, 15 former MGP sites. Investigations
have revealed contamination related to the by-products of gas manufacturing at each site. In
addition to the MGP sites, the Company is also in the process of cleaning up other contaminated
sites. Cleanup activities associated with these sites will be conducted over the next several
years.
The MPSC has established a cost deferral and rate recovery mechanism for investigation and
remediation costs incurred at former MGP sites. Accordingly, Gas Utility recognizes a liability and
corresponding regulatory asset for estimated investigation and remediation costs at former MGP
sites. As of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the Company had $37 million and $36 million,
respectively, accrued for remediation.
Any significant change in assumptions, such as remediation techniques, nature and extent of
contamination and regulatory requirements, could impact the estimate of remedial action costs for
the sites and affect the Companys financial position and cash flows. However, the Company
anticipates the cost deferral and rate recovery mechanism approved by the MPSC for MichCon will
prevent environmental costs from having a material adverse impact on the Companys results of
operations.
Non-Utility
The Companys non-utility affiliates are subject to a number of environmental laws and regulations
dealing with the protection of the environment from various pollutants. The Michigan coke battery
facility received and responded to information requests from the EPA resulting in the issuance of a
Notice of Violation in June of 2007 regarding potential maximum achievable control technologies and
new source review violations. The EPA is in the process of reviewing the Companys position of
demonstrated compliance and has not initiated escalated enforcement. At this time, the Company
cannot predict the impact of this issue. Furthermore, the Michigan coke battery facility is the
subject of an investigation by the MNRE concerning visible emissions readings that resulted from
the Company self reporting to MNRE questionable activities by an employee of a contractor to the
Company that was hired to perform the visible emissions readings. At this time, the Company cannot
predict the impact of this investigation. The Company is also in the process of settling
historical air and water violations at its coke battery facility located in Pennsylvania. At this
time, the Company cannot predict the impact of this settlement. The Company is currently seeking a
permit from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PAEDA) to upgrade its
wastewater treatment technology to a biological treatment for the coke battery facility located in
Pennsylvania. This upgrade is expected to be completed over the next two years to meet future
regulatory requirements. The Companys non-utility affiliates are substantially in compliance with
all environmental requirements, other than as noted above.
Other
In February 2008, DTE Energy was named as one of approximately 24 defendant oil, power and coal
companies in a lawsuit filed in a United States District Court. DTE Energy was served with process
in March 2008. The plaintiffs, the Native Village of Kivalina and City of Kivalina, which are home
to approximately 400 people in Alaska, claim that the defendants business activities have
contributed to global warming and, as a result, higher temperatures are damaging the local economy
and leaving the island more vulnerable to storm activity in the fall and winter. As a result, the
plaintiffs are seeking damages of up to $400 million for relocation costs associated with moving
the village to a safer location, as well as unspecified attorneys fees and expenses. On October
15, 2009, the U.S. District Court granted defendants motions dismissing all of plaintiffs federal
claims in the case on two independent grounds: (1) the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to
hear the claims because of the political question doctrine; and (2) plaintiffs lack standing to
bring their claims. The court also dismissed plaintiffs state law claims because the court lacked
supplemental jurisdiction over them after it dismissed the federal claims; the dismissal of the
state law claims was without prejudice. The plaintiffs have appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit.
32
Nuclear Operations
Property Insurance
Detroit Edison maintains property insurance policies specifically for the Fermi 2 plant. These
policies cover such items as replacement power and property damage. The Nuclear Electric Insurance
Limited (NEIL) is the primary supplier of the insurance policies.
Detroit Edison maintains a policy for extra expenses, including replacement power costs
necessitated by Fermi 2s unavailability due to an insured event. This policy has a 12-week waiting
period and provides an aggregate $490 million of coverage over a three-year period.
Detroit Edison has $500 million in primary coverage and $2.25 billion of excess coverage for
stabilization, decontamination, debris removal, repair and/or replacement of property and
decommissioning. The combined coverage limit for total property damage is $2.75 billion.
In 2007, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Extension Act of 2005 (TRIA) was extended through December
31, 2014. A major change in the extension is the inclusion of domestic acts of terrorism in the
definition of covered or certified acts. For multiple terrorism losses caused by acts of
terrorism not covered under the TRIA occurring within one year after the first loss from terrorism,
the NEIL policies would make available to all insured entities up to $3.2 billion, plus any amounts
recovered from reinsurance, government indemnity, or other sources to cover losses.
Under the NEIL policies, Detroit Edison could be liable for maximum assessments of up to
approximately $28 million per event if the loss associated with any one event at any nuclear plant
in the United States should exceed the accumulated funds available to NEIL.
Public Liability Insurance
As of January 1, 2010, as required by federal law, Detroit Edison maintains $375 million of public
liability insurance for a nuclear incident. For liabilities arising from a terrorist act outside
the scope of TRIA, the policy is subject to one industry aggregate limit of $300 million. Further,
under the Price-Anderson Amendments Act of 2005, deferred premium charges up to $117.5 million
could be levied against each licensed nuclear facility, but not more than $17.5 million per year
per facility. Thus, deferred premium charges could be levied against all owners of licensed nuclear
facilities in the event of a nuclear incident at any of these facilities.
Nuclear Fuel Disposal Costs
In accordance with the Federal Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, Detroit Edison has a contract with
the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for the future storage and disposal of spent nuclear fuel from
Fermi 2. Detroit Edison is obligated to pay the DOE a fee of 1 mill per kWh of Fermi 2 electricity
generated and sold. The fee is a component of nuclear fuel expense. Delays have occurred in the
DOEs program for the acceptance and disposal of spent nuclear fuel at a permanent repository and
the proposed fiscal year 2011 federal budget recommends termination of funding for completion of
the governments long-term storage facility. Detroit Edison is a party in the litigation against
the DOE for both past and future costs associated with the DOEs failure to accept spent nuclear
fuel under the timetable set forth in the Federal Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. Detroit Edison
currently employs a spent nuclear fuel storage strategy utilizing a fuel pool. In 2011, the Company
expects to begin loading spent nuclear fuel into an on-site dry cask storage facility which is
expected to provide sufficient storage capability for the life of the plant as defined by
33
the original operating license. Issues relating to long-term waste disposal policy and to the
disposition of funds contributed by Detroit Edison ratepayers to the federal waste fund await
future governmental action.
Guarantees
In certain limited circumstances, the Company enters into contractual guarantees. The Company may
guarantee another entitys obligation in the event it fails to perform. The Company may provide
guarantees in certain indemnification agreements. Finally, the Company may provide indirect
guarantees for the indebtedness of others. Below are the details of specific material guarantees
the Company currently provides.
Detroit Edison has guaranteed a bank term loan of $11 million related to the sale of its steam
heating business to Thermal Ventures II, L.P. At September 30, 2010, the Company has reserves for
the entire amount of the bank loan guarantee.
The Companys other guarantees are not individually material with maximum potential payments
totaling $10 million at September 30, 2010.
The Company is periodically required to obtain performance surety bonds in support of obligations
to various governmental entities and other companies in connection with its operations. As of
September 30, 2010, the Company had approximately $14 million of performance bonds outstanding. In
the event that such bonds are called for nonperformance, the Company would be obligated to
reimburse the issuer of the performance bond. The Company is released from the performance bonds as
the contractual performance is completed and does not believe that a material amount of any
currently outstanding performance bonds will be called.
Millennium Pipeline Project
The Company owns a 26 percent equity interest in the Millennium Pipeline Project (Millennium).
Millennium is accounted for under the equity method. On August 26, 2010, Millennium closed on a
$725 million long-term financing that is non-recourse to the Company. The proceeds thereof, along
with equity contributions from the project sponsors, repaid in full Millenniums $800 million
construction loan and settled certain forward-starting interest rate swaps related to the new
long-term financing. The Companys share of the equity contribution was $49 million. The project
partners guarantee of the $800 million construction loan and forward-starting interest rate swaps
was terminated upon closing of the long-term financing. The project sponsors have agreed to provide
credit support to Millenniums debt service reserve requirement. The Companys share of the credit
support is $9 million and is being satisfied with a letter of credit in favor of the Trustee of the
long-term bond holders.
Labor Contracts
There are several bargaining units for the Companys approximately 5,000 represented employees. In
the 2010 third quarter, a new three-year agreement was ratified covering approximately 3,800
represented employees. The majority of its remaining represented employees are under contracts that
expire in June 2011 and August 2012.
Purchase Commitments
As of September 30, 2010, the Company was party to numerous long-term purchase commitments relating
to a variety of goods and services required for the Companys business. These agreements primarily
consist of fuel supply commitments and energy trading contracts. The Company estimates that these
commitments will be approximately $5 billion from 2010 through 2051. The Company also estimates
that 2010 capital expenditures will be approximately $1.3 billion. The Company has made certain
commitments in connection with expected capital expenditures.
34
Bankruptcies
The Company purchases and sells electricity, gas, coal, coke and other energy products from and to
numerous companies operating in the steel, automotive, energy, retail, financial and other
industries. Certain of its customers have filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of the
U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The Company regularly reviews contingent matters relating to these customers
and its purchase and sale contracts and records provisions for amounts considered at risk of
probable loss. The Company believes its accrued amounts are adequate for probable loss. The final
resolution of these matters may have a material effect on its consolidated financial statements.
Other Contingencies
The Company is involved in certain other legal, regulatory, administrative and environmental
proceedings before various courts, arbitration panels and governmental agencies concerning claims
arising in the ordinary course of business. These proceedings include certain contract disputes,
additional environmental reviews and investigations, audits, inquiries from various regulators, and
pending judicial matters. The Company cannot predict the final disposition of such proceedings. The
Company regularly reviews legal matters and records provisions for claims that it can estimate and
are considered probable of loss. The resolution of these pending proceedings is not expected to
have a material effect on the Companys operations or financial statements in the periods they are
resolved.
See Notes 5 and 7 for a discussion of contingencies related to derivatives and regulatory matters.
NOTE 13 RETIREMENT BENEFITS AND TRUSTEED ASSETS
The following details the components of net periodic benefit costs for pension benefits and other
postretirement benefits:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Postretirement |
|
(in Millions) |
|
Pension Benefits |
|
|
Benefits |
|
Three Months Ended September 30 |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Service cost |
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
Amortization of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net actuarial loss |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Prior service cost |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Net transition liability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost |
|
$ |
28 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
41 |
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30 |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Service cost |
|
$ |
48 |
|
|
$ |
40 |
|
|
$ |
46 |
|
|
$ |
44 |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
(194 |
) |
|
|
(191 |
) |
|
|
(56 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
Amortization of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net actuarial loss |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
Prior service cost |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Net transition liability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost |
|
$ |
84 |
|
|
$ |
44 |
|
|
$ |
123 |
|
|
$ |
153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension and Other Postretirement Contributions
The Company contributed $200 million to its pension plans during the first quarter of 2010,
including a contribution of DTE Energy stock of $100 million (consisting of approximately 2.2
million shares valued at an average price of $44.97 per share).
35
The Company expects to contribute approximately $155 million to its postretirement medical and life
insurance benefit plans during 2010. A contribution was made to the plans in the nine-month period
ended September 30, 2010, by a transfer of $25 million from the MichCon Grantor Trust.
Healthcare Legislation
In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) and the Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act (HCERA) were enacted into law (collectively, the Act). The Act is a
comprehensive health care reform bill. A provision of the PPACA repeals the current rule permitting
deduction of the portion of the drug coverage expense that is offset by the Medicare Part D
subsidy, effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012.
DTE Energys retiree healthcare plan includes the provision of postretirement prescription drug
coverage (coverage) which is included in the calculation of the recorded other postemployment
benefit (OPEB) obligation. Because the Companys coverage meets certain criteria, DTE Energy is
eligible to receive the Medicare Part D subsidy. With the enactment of the Act, the subsidy will
continue to not be subject to tax, but an equal amount of prescription drug coverage expenditures
will not be deductible. Income tax accounting rules require the impact of a change in tax law be
recognized in continuing operations in the Consolidated Statements of Operations in the period that
the tax law change is enacted.
For DTE Energy and its utilities this change in tax law required a remeasurement of the Deferred
Tax Asset related to the OPEB obligation and the Deferred Tax Liability related to the OPEB
Regulatory Asset. The net impact of the remeasurement is $23 million, $18 million and $4 million
for DTE Energy, Detroit Edison and MichCon, respectively. The Detroit Edison and MichCon amounts
have been deferred as Regulatory Assets as the traditional rate setting process allows for the
recovery of income tax costs. Income tax expense of $1 million is being recognized related to
corporate entities in the nine months ended September 30, 2010.
NOTE 14 STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION
The following table summarizes the components of stock-based compensation expense for the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2010 and September 30, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
September 30 |
|
September 30 |
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
38 |
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
Tax benefit |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Stock-based compensation cost
capitalized in property, plant and
equipment |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
36
Stock Options
The following table summarizes the Companys stock option activity for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
|
Options |
|
|
Exercise Price |
|
|
Value |
|
Options outstanding at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
5,593,392 |
|
|
$ |
40.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
611,500 |
|
|
$ |
43.95 |
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(1,192,328 |
) |
|
$ |
39.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
(115,561 |
) |
|
$ |
42.60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options outstanding at September 30, 2010 |
|
|
4,897,003 |
|
|
$ |
41.09 |
|
|
$ |
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercisable at September 30, 2010 |
|
|
3,506,045 |
|
|
$ |
42.55 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010, the weighted average remaining contractual life for the exercisable
shares was 4.34 years and 1,390,958 options were non-vested. During the nine months ended September
30, 2010, 663,754 options vested.
The weighted average grant date fair value of options granted during the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 was $5.62 per share. The intrinsic value of options exercised for the nine
months ended September 30, 2010 was $9 million. Total option expense recognized was $3 million for
the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and September 30, 2009.
The Company determined the fair value for these options at the date of grant using a Black-Scholes
based option pricing model and the following assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
September 30, 2009 |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
2.91 |
% |
|
|
2.04 |
% |
Dividend yield |
|
|
5.08 |
% |
|
|
4.98 |
% |
Expected volatility |
|
|
22.96 |
% |
|
|
27.88 |
% |
Expected life |
|
6 years |
|
6 years |
Restricted Stock Awards
The following summarizes stock awards activity for the nine months ended September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average |
|
|
Restricted |
|
Grant Date |
|
|
Stock |
|
Fair Value |
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
1,024,765 |
|
|
$ |
37.11 |
|
Grants |
|
|
234,655 |
|
|
|
44.03 |
|
Forfeitures |
|
|
(16,570 |
) |
|
|
36.85 |
|
Vested and issued |
|
|
(474,849 |
) |
|
|
40.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at September 30, 2010 |
|
|
768,001 |
|
|
|
37.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37
Performance Share Awards
The following summarizes performance share activity for the nine months ended September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance Shares |
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
1,455,042 |
|
Grants |
|
|
576,063 |
|
Forfeitures |
|
|
(73,696 |
) |
Payouts |
|
|
(406,821 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at September 30, 2010 |
|
|
1,550,588 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized Compensation Cost
As of September 30, 2010, the Company had $47 million of total unrecognized compensation cost
related to non-vested stock incentive plan arrangements. These costs are expected to be recognized
over a weighted-average period of 1.51 years.
NOTE 15 SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION
The following provides detail of the changes in assets and liabilities that are reported in the
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, and supplementary non-cash information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Changes in Assets and Liabilities, Exclusive of Changes Shown Separately |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
$ |
357 |
|
|
$ |
527 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
(200 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
Accrued/prepaid pensions |
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
(94 |
) |
Accounts payable |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(214 |
) |
Income taxes payable |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
Derivative assets and liabilities |
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(99 |
) |
Postretirement obligation |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
120 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
73 |
|
|
$ |
377 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncash financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock issued for employee benefit plans |
|
$ |
147 |
|
|
$ |
32 |
|
38
NOTE 16 SEGMENT INFORMATION
The Company sets strategic goals, allocates resources and evaluates performance based on the
following structure:
|
|
Electric Utility segment consists of Detroit Edison, which is engaged in the generation,
purchase, distribution and sale of electricity to approximately 2.1 million customers in
southeastern Michigan. |
|
|
|
Gas Utility segment consists of MichCon and Citizens. MichCon is engaged in the purchase,
storage, transportation, gathering, distribution and sale of natural gas to approximately 1.2
million customers throughout Michigan and the sale of storage and transportation capacity.
Citizens distributes natural gas in Adrian, Michigan to approximately 17,000 customers. |
|
|
|
Gas Storage and Pipelines consists of natural gas pipelines and storage businesses. |
|
|
|
Unconventional Gas Production is engaged in unconventional gas and oil project development and
production. |
|
|
|
Power and Industrial Projects is comprised of coke batteries and pulverized coal projects,
reduced emission fuel and steel industry fuel-related projects, on-site energy services, power
generation and coal transportation and marketing. |
|
|
|
Energy Trading consists of energy marketing and trading operations. |
|
|
|
Corporate & Other, includes various holding company activities, holds certain non-utility debt
and energy-related investments. |
The federal income tax provisions or benefits of DTE Energys subsidiaries are determined on an
individual company basis and recognize the tax benefit of production tax credits and net operating
losses if applicable. The Michigan Business Tax provision of the utility subsidiaries is determined
on an individual company basis and recognizes the tax benefit of various tax credits and net
operating losses if applicable. The subsidiaries record federal and state income taxes payable to
or receivable from DTE Energy based on the federal and state tax provisions of each company.
Inter-segment billing for goods and services exchanged between segments is based upon tariffed or
market-based prices of the provider and primarily consists of power sales, gas sales and coal
transportation services in the following segments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Electric Utility |
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
Gas Utility |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Gas Storage and Pipelines |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Power and Industrial Projects |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Energy Trading |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
Corporate & Other |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
(56 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
63 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
163 |
|
|
$ |
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
Financial data of the business segments follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electric Utility |
|
$ |
1,444 |
|
|
$ |
1,289 |
|
|
$ |
3,798 |
|
|
$ |
3,515 |
|
Gas Utility |
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
1,157 |
|
|
|
1,253 |
|
Gas Storage and Pipelines |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
Unconventional Gas Production |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Power and Industrial Projects |
|
|
303 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
846 |
|
|
|
450 |
|
Energy Trading |
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
661 |
|
|
|
638 |
|
Corporate & Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation & Eliminations |
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(163 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,139 |
|
|
$ |
1,950 |
|
|
$ |
6,384 |
|
|
$ |
5,893 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income (Loss) Attributable to
DTE Energy by Segment: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electric Utility |
|
$ |
165 |
|
|
$ |
149 |
|
|
$ |
343 |
|
|
$ |
306 |
|
Gas Utility |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Gas Storage and Pipelines |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
Unconventional Gas Production |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Power and Industrial Projects |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Energy Trading |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73 |
|
Corporate & Other |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income Attributable to DTE Energy |
|
$ |
163 |
|
|
$ |
151 |
|
|
$ |
478 |
|
|
$ |
412 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40
DTE ENERGY COMPANY
Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
OVERVIEW
DTE Energy is a diversified energy company and is the parent company of Detroit Edison and MichCon,
regulated electric and gas utilities engaged primarily in the business of providing electricity and
natural gas sales, distribution and storage services throughout southeastern Michigan. We operate
four energy-related non-utility segments with operations throughout the United States.
Net income attributable to DTE Energy in the third quarter of 2010 was $163 million, or $0.96 per
diluted share, compared to net income attributable to DTE Energy of $151 million, or $0.92 per
diluted share, in the third quarter of 2009. Net income attributable to DTE Energy in the nine
months ended September 30, 2010 was $478 million, or $2.84 per diluted share, compared to net
income attributable to DTE Energy of $412 million, or $2.51 per diluted share, in the comparable
period of 2009. The increases in net income are primarily due to improved results in the electric
and gas utilities and in the Power and Industrial Projects segment, partially offset by lower
earnings in Energy Trading.
Please see detailed explanations of segment performance in the following Results of Operations
section.
The items discussed below influenced our current financial performance and/or may affect future
results.
Reference in this report to we, us, our, Company or DTE are to DTE Energy and its
subsidiaries, collectively.
UTILITY OPERATIONS
Our Electric Utility segment consists of Detroit Edison, which is engaged in the generation,
purchase, distribution and sale of electricity to approximately 2.1 million customers in
southeastern Michigan.
Our Gas Utility segment consists of MichCon and Citizens. MichCon is engaged in the purchase,
storage, transportation, gathering, distribution and sale of natural gas to approximately 1.2
million customers throughout Michigan and the sale of storage and transportation capacity. Citizens
distributes natural gas in Adrian, Michigan to approximately 17,000 customers.
Detroit Edison has experienced increased electric sales in 2010 driven by higher residential and
interconnection sales, partially offset by decreases in industrial and commercial sales. The
residential sales increase is a result of warmer summer weather. Industrial sales are lower due to
reduced demand from customers in the automotive and steel industries and their related suppliers
and other ancillary businesses. Commercial sales continue to be lower due primarily to customers
participating in the electric Customer Choice program. The impact of customers participating in the
electric Customer Choice program is mitigated by the Choice Incentive Mechanism (CIM). The CIM is
an over/under recovery mechanism which measures non-fuel revenues that are lost or gained as a
result of fluctuations in electric Customer Choice sales. If annual electric Customer Choice sales
exceed the baseline amount from Detroit Edisons most recent rate case, 90 percent of its lost
non-fuel revenues associated with sales above that level may be recovered from bundled customers.
If annual electric Customer Choice sales decrease below the baseline, the Company must refund 100
percent of its increase in non-fuel revenues associated with sales below that level to bundled
customers. MichCons sales were lower due primarily to a decrease in the number of customers,
reduced natural gas usage by customers due to economic conditions and an increased emphasis on
conservation of energy usage.
41
We have Revenue Decoupling Mechanisms (RDMs) in place at both utilities. The RDMs are designed to minimize the impact on revenues of changes in average customer usage of electricity and natural gas.
The January 2010 MPSC order in
Detroit Edisons 2009 rate case
provided for, among other items, the implementation of a pilot electric RDM effective February 1, 2010. The electric RDM enables Detroit Edison to recover or
refund the change in revenue resulting from the difference between actual average sales per
customer compared to the base level of average sales per customer established in the MPSC order.
The June 2010 MPSC order in MichCons 2009 rate case provided for, among other items, the
implementation of a pilot gas RDM effective July 1, 2010. The gas RDM enables MichCon to recover or
refund the change in distribution revenue resulting from the difference in weather-adjusted average
sales per customer by rate schedule compared to the base average sales per customer by rate
schedule established in the MPSC order. The RDMs for Detroit Edison and MichCon address changes in
customer usage due to general economic conditions and conservation, but do not shield the utilities
from the impacts of lost customers. In addition, the pilot electric RDM materially shields Detroit
Edison from the impact of weather on customer usage. The pilot gas RDM does not shield MichCon from
the impact of weather on customer usage. The electric and gas RDMs are subject to review by the
MPSC after the initial one-year pilot programs.
As discussed further below, economic conditions impact our ability to collect amounts due from our
electric and gas customers and drive increased thefts of electricity and natural gas. In the face
of these economic conditions, we are continuing our efforts to identify opportunities to improve
cash flow through working capital initiatives and maintaining flexibility in the timing and extent
of our long-term capital projects. We are actively managing our cash, capital expenditures, cost
structure and liquidity to maintain our financial strength. See the Capital Resources and Liquidity
section in this Managements Discussion and Analysis for further discussion of our liquidity
outlook.
Both utilities continue to experience high levels of past due receivables primarily attributable to
economic conditions. Our service territories continue to experience high levels of unemployment,
underemployment and low income households, home foreclosures and a lack of adequate levels of
assistance for low-income customers. We have taken actions to manage the level of past due
receivables, including customer assistance forums, contracting with collection agencies, working
with Michigan officials and others to increase the share of low-income funding allocated to our
customers, and increasing customer disconnections. As a result of actions taken to manage the level
of past due receivables, arrears were reduced in 2010 in our electric and gas utilities. Detroit
Edison has an uncollectible expense tracking mechanism that enables it to recover or refund 80
percent of the difference between the actual uncollectible expense for each year and the $66
million level reflected in base rates. In the June 2010 MPSC rate order, the base amount of
MichCons uncollectible expense tracking mechanism was increased prospectively from $37 million to
$70 million and MichCons portion of recovery or refund of the expenses above or below the base
amount was modified to 80 percent from 90 percent. The Detroit Edison and MichCon uncollectible
tracking mechanisms require annual reconciliation proceedings before the MPSC.
NON-UTILITY OPERATIONS
We have significant investments in non-utility businesses. We employ disciplined investment
criteria when assessing opportunities that leverage our assets, skills and expertise. Specifically,
we invest in targeted energy markets with attractive competitive dynamics where meaningful scale is
in alignment with our risk profile. We expect growth opportunities in the Gas Storage and Pipelines
and Power and Industrial Projects segments in the future. Expansion of these businesses will also
result in our ability to further diversify geographically.
Gas Storage and Pipelines owns partnership interests in two natural gas storage fields and two
interstate pipelines serving the Midwest, Ontario and Northeast markets. Much of the growth in
demand for natural gas is expected to occur in the Eastern Canada and the Northeast U.S. regions.
Our Vector and Millennium pipelines are well positioned to provide access routes and low-cost
expansion options to these markets. In addition, Millennium Pipeline is well positioned for growth
related to the Marcellus shale, especially with respect to Marcellus production in Northern
Pennsylvania and along the southern tier of New York.
42
Our Unconventional Gas Production business is engaged in natural gas and oil exploration,
development and production primarily within the Barnett shale in north Texas. We continue to
develop our holdings and to seek opportunities for additional monetization of select properties,
when conditions are appropriate. Our acreage covers an area that produces high Btu gas which
provides a significant contribution to revenues from the value of natural gas liquids extracted
from the gas stream. During this period of low natural gas prices, these natural gas liquids, with
prices correlated to crude oil prices, have provided a significant increase to our realized
wellhead price. Our drilling efforts this year have and will continue to target liquids rich gas
and oil producing locations. We expect total capital investment to remain consistent with 2009
levels. We also continue to evaluate and execute on leasing opportunities to optimize our existing
portfolio. We have acquired approximately 14,000 net acres in 2010, bringing our total net acreage
position to 69,000 acres, net of impairments and expirations.
Power and Industrial Projects is comprised primarily of projects that deliver energy and products
and services to industrial, commercial and institutional customers; provide coal transportation and
marketing; and sell electricity from biomass-fired energy projects. This business segment provides
services using project assets usually located on or near the customers premises in the steel,
automotive, pulp and paper, airport and other industries. Renewable energy, environmental and
economic trends are creating growth opportunities. The increasing number of states with renewable
portfolio standards and energy efficiency mandates provides the opportunity to market the expertise
of the Power and Industrial Projects segment in landfill gas, on-site energy management, waste-wood
power generation, and other related services.
Energy Trading focuses on physical and financial power and gas marketing and trading, structured
transactions, enhancement of returns from DTE Energys asset portfolio, and optimization of
contracted natural gas pipeline transportation and storage, and power transmission and generating
capacity positions. Energy Trading also provides natural gas, power and ancillary services to
various utilities which may include the management of associated storage and transportation
contracts on the customers behalf.
CAPITAL INVESTMENTS
We anticipate significant capital investments during the next three years concentrated primarily in
Detroit Edison. Our utility businesses require significant capital investments each year in order
to maintain and improve the reliability of their asset bases, including power generation plants,
distribution systems, storage fields and other facilities and fleets. In addition, Detroit Edisons
investments (excluding investments in new base-load generation capacity, if any) will be driven by
renewable investment and environmental controls expenditures. We plan to seek regulatory approval
to include these capital expenditures within our regulatory rate base consistent with prior
treatment.
In April 2010, the Company signed an agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy for a grant of
approximately $84 million in matching funds on total anticipated spending of approximately $168
million related to the accelerated deployment of smart grid technology in Michigan through 2012.
The smart grid technology includes the establishment of an advanced metering infrastructure and
other technologies that address improved electric distribution service. See Note 2 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Non-utility investments are expected primarily in continued investment in gas storage and pipeline
assets and renewable opportunities in the Power and Industrial Projects businesses.
ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS
We are subject to extensive environmental regulation. Additional costs may result as the effects of
various substances on the environment are studied and governmental regulations are developed and
implemented. Actual costs to comply could vary substantially. We expect to continue recovering
environmental costs related to utility operations through rates charged to our customers.
Air Detroit Edison is subject to the EPA ozone transport and acid rain regulations that limit
power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. Since 2005, the EPA and the State of
Michigan have issued additional emission
43
reduction regulations relating to ozone, fine particulate,
regional haze and mercury air pollution. The new rules will lead to additional controls on
fossil-fueled power plants to reduce nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide and mercury emissions. To
comply with these requirements, Detroit Edison has spent approximately $1.5 billion through 2009.
The Company estimates Detroit Edison will make capital expenditures of approximately $70 million in
2010 and up to $2.2 billion of additional capital expenditures through 2019 based on current
regulations. Further, additional rulemakings are expected over the next few years which could
require additional controls for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and hazardous air pollutants. It is
not possible to quantify the impact of those expected rulemakings at this time.
In July 2009, DTE Energy received a Notice of Violation/Finding of Violation (NOV/FOV) from the EPA
alleging, among other things, that five Detroit Edison power plants violated New Source Performance
standards, Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements, and Title V operating permit
requirements under the Clean Air Act. An additional NOV/FOV was received in June 2010 related to a
recent project and outage at Unit 2 of the Monroe Power Plant.
On August 5, 2010, the United States Department of Justice, at the request of the EPA, brought a
civil suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan against DTE Energy and
Detroit Edison, related to the June 2010 NOV/FOV and the outage work performed at Unit 2 of the
Monroe Power Plant, but not relating to the July 2009 NOV/FOV. Among other relief, the EPA is
requesting the court to require Detroit Edison to install and operate the best available control
technology at Unit 2 of the Monroe Power Plant. Further, the EPA is requesting the court to issue
a preliminary injunction to require Detroit Edison to (i) begin the process of obtaining the
necessary permits for the Monroe Unit 2 modification and (ii) offset the pollution from Monroe Unit
2 through emissions reductions from Detroit Edisons fleet of coal-fired power plants until the new
control equipment is operating.
DTE Energy and Detroit Edison believe that the plants identified by the EPA, including Unit 2 of
the Monroe Power Plant, have complied with all applicable federal environmental regulations.
Depending upon the outcome of discussions with the EPA regarding the NOV/FOV and the result of the
civil action, the Company could also be required to install additional pollution control equipment
at some or all of the power plants in question, consider early retirement of facilities where
control equipment is not economical, engage in supplemental environmental programs, and/or pay
fines. The Company cannot predict the financial impact or outcome of this matter, or the timing of
its resolution.
Water In response to an EPA regulation, Detroit Edison is required to examine alternatives for
reducing the environmental impacts of the cooling water intake structures at several of its
facilities. Based on the results of completed studies and expected future studies, Detroit Edison
may be required to install additional control technologies to reduce the impacts of the water
intakes. Initially, it was estimated that Detroit Edison could incur up to approximately $55
million in additional capital expenditures over the four to six years subsequent to 2008 to comply
with these requirements. However, a January 2007 circuit court decision remanded back to the EPA
several provisions of the federal regulation that has resulted in a delay in compliance dates. The
decision also raised the possibility that Detroit Edison may have to install cooling towers at some
facilities at a cost substantially greater than was initially estimated for other mitigative
technologies. In 2008, the Supreme Court agreed to review the remanded cost-benefit analysis
provision of the rule and in April 2009 upheld the EPAs use of this provision in determining best
technology available for reducing environmental impacts. Concurrently, the EPA continues to develop
a revised rule, a draft of which is expected to be published in the first quarter of 2011, with a
final rule scheduled for mid-2012. The EPA has also issued an information collection request to
begin a review of steam electric effluent guidelines. It is not possible at this time to quantify
the impacts of these developing requirements.
Manufactured Gas Plant (MGP) and Other Sites Prior to the construction of major interstate
natural gas pipelines, gas for heating and other uses was manufactured locally from processes
involving coal, coke or oil. The facilities, which produced gas, have been designated as MGP sites.
Gas Utility owns, or previously owned, fifteen such former MGP sites. Detroit Edison owns, or
previously owned, three former MGP sites. In addition to the MGP sites, we are also in the process
of cleaning up other sites where contamination is present as a result of historical and ongoing
utility operations. These other sites include an engineered ash storage facility, electrical
distribution substations, gas pipelines, and underground and aboveground storage tank locations.
Cleanup activities associated with these sites will be conducted over the next several years.
44
Any significant change in assumptions, such as remediation techniques, nature and extent of
contamination and regulatory requirements, could impact the estimate of remedial action costs for
the sites and affect the Companys financial position and cash flows. However, the Company
anticipates the cost deferral and rate recovery mechanism approved by the MPSC for MichCon will
prevent environmental costs from having a material adverse impact on the Companys results of
operations.
Landfill Detroit Edison owns and operates a permitted engineered ash storage facility at the
Monroe Power Plant to dispose of fly ash from the coal fired power plant. Detroit Edison performed
an engineering analysis in 2009 and identified the need for embankment side slope repairs and
reconstruction.
The EPA has published proposed rules to regulate coal ash under the authority of the Resources
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The proposed rule published on June 21, 2010 contains two
primary regulatory options to regulate coal ash residue. The EPA is currently considering either,
to designate coal ash as a Hazardous Waste as defined by RCRA or to regulate coal ash as
non-hazardous waste under RCRA. However, agencies and legislatures have urged the EPA to regulate
coal ash as a non-hazardous waste. If the EPA were to designate coal ash as a hazardous waste, the
agency could apply some, or all, of the disposal and reuse standards that have been applied to
other existing hazardous wastes. Some of the regulatory actions currently being contemplated could
have a significant impact on our operations and financial position and the rates we charge our
customers. It is not possible to quantify the impact of those expected rulemakings at this time.
Non-Utility
The Companys non-utility affiliates are subject to a number of environmental laws and regulations
dealing with the protection of the environment from various pollutants. The Michigan coke battery
facility received and responded to information requests from the EPA resulting in the issuance of a
Notice of Violation in June of 2007 regarding potential maximum achievable control technologies and
new source review violations. The EPA is in the process of reviewing the Companys position of
demonstrated compliance and has not initiated escalated enforcement. At this time, the Company
cannot predict the impact of this issue. Furthermore, the Michigan coke battery facility is the
subject of an investigation by the MNRE concerning visible emissions readings that resulted from
the Company self reporting to MNRE questionable activities by an employee of a contractor to the
Company that was hired to perform the visible emissions readings. At this time, the Company cannot
predict the impact of this investigation. The Company is also in the process of settling
historical air and water violations at its coke battery facility located in Pennsylvania. At this
time, the Company cannot predict the impact of this settlement. The Company is currently seeking a
permit from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PAEDA) to upgrade its
wastewater treatment technology to a biological treatment for the coke battery facility located in
Pennsylvania. This upgrade is expected to be completed over the next two years to meet future
regulatory requirements. The Companys non-utility affiliates are substantially in compliance with
all environmental requirements, other than as noted above.
Global Climate Change
Climate regulation and/or legislation is being proposed and discussed within the U.S. Congress and
the EPA. In June 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and
Security Act (ACESA). The ACESA includes a cap and trade program that would start in 2012 and
provides for costs to emit greenhouse gases. Despite action by the Senate Environmental and Public
Works Committee to pass a similar but more stringent bill in October 2009 and the release of the
American Power Act discussion draft by Senators Kerry and Lieberman in 2010, full Senate action on
a climate bill is unlikely in 2010. Meanwhile, the EPA is beginning to implement regulatory actions
under the Clean Air Act to address emission of greenhouse gases. Pending or future legislation or
other regulatory actions could have a material impact on our operations and financial position and
the rates we charge our customers. Impacts include expenditures for environmental equipment beyond
what is currently planned, financing costs related to additional capital expenditures and the
purchase of emission allowances from market sources. We would seek to recover these incremental
costs through increased rates charged to our utility customers. Increased costs for energy produced
from traditional sources could also increase the economic viability of energy produced from
renewable
45
and/or nuclear sources and energy efficiency initiatives and the development of
market-based trading of carbon offsets providing business opportunities for our utility and
non-utility segments. It is not possible to quantify these impacts on DTE Energy or its customers
at this time.
OUTLOOK
The next few years will be a period of rapid change for DTE Energy and for the energy industry. Our
strong utility base, combined with our integrated non-utility operations, position us well for
long-term growth.
Looking forward, we will focus on several areas that we expect will improve future performance:
|
|
|
improving Electric and Gas Utility customer satisfaction; |
|
|
|
|
continuing to pursue regulatory stability and investment recovery for our utilities; |
|
|
|
|
managing the growth of our utility asset base; |
|
|
|
|
optimizing our cost structure across all business segments; |
|
|
|
|
managing cash, capital and liquidity to maintain or improve our financial strength; and |
|
|
|
|
investing in businesses that integrate our assets and leverage our skills and expertise. |
We will continue to pursue opportunities to grow our businesses in a disciplined manner if we can
secure opportunities that meet our strategic, financial and risk criteria.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following sections provide a detailed discussion of the operating performance and future
outlook of our segments.
Net income attributable to DTE Energy by segment for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2010 and September 30, 2009 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net Income (Loss) Attributable
to DTE Energy by Segment: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electric Utility |
|
$ |
165 |
|
|
$ |
149 |
|
|
$ |
343 |
|
|
$ |
306 |
|
Gas Utility |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Gas Storage and Pipelines |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
Unconventional Gas Production |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Power and Industrial Projects |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Energy Trading |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73 |
|
Corporate & Other |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income Attributable to DTE Energy |
|
$ |
163 |
|
|
$ |
151 |
|
|
$ |
478 |
|
|
$ |
412 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46
ELECTRIC UTILITY
Our Electric Utility segment consists of Detroit Edison.
Electric Utility results are discussed below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Revenues |
|
$ |
1,444 |
|
|
$ |
1,289 |
|
|
$ |
3,798 |
|
|
$ |
3,515 |
|
Fuel and Purchased Power |
|
|
484 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
1,217 |
|
|
|
1,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Margin |
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
889 |
|
|
|
2,581 |
|
|
|
2,403 |
|
Operation and Maintenance |
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
928 |
|
Depreciation and Amortization |
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
607 |
|
Taxes Other Than Income |
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
Other Asset (Gains) and Losses, Net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income |
|
|
351 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
798 |
|
|
|
721 |
|
Other (Income) and Deductions |
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
236 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
Income Tax Provision |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income Attributable to DTE Energy Company |
|
$ |
165 |
|
|
$ |
149 |
|
|
$ |
343 |
|
|
$ |
306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income as a Percentage of Operating Revenues |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
25 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
Gross margin increased $71 million in the third quarter of 2010 and $178 million in the nine-month
period ended September 30, 2010. Revenues associated with certain tracking mechanisms and
surcharges are offset by related expenses elsewhere in the Statement of Operations. The following
table details changes in various gross margin components relative to the comparable prior period:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
Three Months |
|
|
Nine Months |
|
Weather, net
of RDM |
|
$ |
50 |
|
|
$ |
50 |
|
Restoration and line clearance tracker |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Customer
choice, net of CIM |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
2010 rate order,
surcharges and other |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in gross margin |
|
$ |
71 |
|
|
$ |
178 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Thousands of MWh) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Electric Sales |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential |
|
|
5,034 |
|
|
|
4,107 |
|
|
|
12,301 |
|
|
|
10,992 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
4,730 |
|
|
|
4,806 |
|
|
|
12,660 |
|
|
|
13,764 |
|
Industrial |
|
|
2,357 |
|
|
|
2,562 |
|
|
|
7,438 |
|
|
|
7,584 |
|
Other |
|
|
798 |
|
|
|
799 |
|
|
|
2,398 |
|
|
|
2,399 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,919 |
|
|
|
12,274 |
|
|
|
34,797 |
|
|
|
34,739 |
|
Interconnections sales (1) |
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
1,644 |
|
|
|
4,031 |
|
|
|
3,868 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Electric Sales |
|
|
14,189 |
|
|
|
13,918 |
|
|
|
38,828 |
|
|
|
38,607 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electric Deliveries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail and Wholesale |
|
|
12,919 |
|
|
|
12,274 |
|
|
|
34,797 |
|
|
|
34,739 |
|
Electric Customer Choice,
including self generators (2) |
|
|
1,289 |
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
3,675 |
|
|
|
998 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Electric Sales and Deliveries |
|
|
14,208 |
|
|
|
12,611 |
|
|
|
38,472 |
|
|
|
35,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents power that is not distributed by Detroit Edison. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes deliveries for self generators who have purchased power from alternative energy
suppliers to supplement their power requirements. |
Power Generated and Purchased
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Thousands of MWh) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Power Plant Generation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fossil |
|
|
11,224 |
|
|
|
10,729 |
|
|
|
30,339 |
|
|
|
30,424 |
|
Nuclear |
|
|
2,368 |
|
|
|
2,367 |
|
|
|
6,656 |
|
|
|
6,106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,592 |
|
|
|
13,096 |
|
|
|
36,995 |
|
|
|
36,530 |
|
Purchased Power |
|
|
1,669 |
|
|
|
1,753 |
|
|
|
4,465 |
|
|
|
4,569 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
System Output |
|
|
15,261 |
|
|
|
14,849 |
|
|
|
41,460 |
|
|
|
41,099 |
|
Less Line Loss and Internal Use |
|
|
(1,072 |
) |
|
|
(931 |
) |
|
|
(2,632 |
) |
|
|
(2,492 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net System Output |
|
|
14,189 |
|
|
|
13,918 |
|
|
|
38,828 |
|
|
|
38,607 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Unit Cost ($/MWh) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Generation (1) |
|
$ |
19.81 |
|
|
$ |
18.01 |
|
|
$ |
19.22 |
|
|
$ |
18.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased Power |
|
$ |
51.07 |
|
|
$ |
35.50 |
|
|
$ |
43.71 |
|
|
$ |
37.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overall Average Unit Cost |
|
$ |
23.23 |
|
|
$ |
20.08 |
|
|
$ |
21.85 |
|
|
$ |
20.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents fuel costs associated with power plants. |
Operation and maintenance expense increased $19 million in the third quarter of 2010 and $32
million in the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010. The increase for the third quarter is
primarily due to higher restoration and line clearance expenses of $28 million and higher energy
optimization and renewable energy expenses of $3 million, partially offset by lower generation
expenses of $6 million, lower employee benefit-related expenses of $3 million and reduced
uncollectible expenses of $3 million. The increase for the nine-month period is primarily due to
higher restoration and line clearance expenses of $33 million, higher energy optimization and
renewable energy expenses of $16 million, higher legal expenses of $11 million and higher employee
benefit-related expenses of $6 million, partially offset by reduced uncollectible expenses of $22
million and lower generation expenses of $14 million.
Taxes other than income were higher by $11 million in the 2010 third quarter and $33 million in the
2010 nine-month period due primarily to a $17 million and $30 million, respectively, reduction in
property tax expense in 2009 due to refunds received in partial settlement of appeals of
assessments for prior years.
Outlook We continue to move forward in our efforts to improve the operating performance and cash
flow of Detroit Edison. The 2010 MPSC order provided for an uncollectible expense tracking
mechanism which assists in mitigating the impacts of economic conditions in our service territory
and a revenue decoupling mechanism that addresses changes in customer usage due to general economic
conditions and conservation. These and other tracking mechanisms and surcharges are expected to
result in lower earnings volatility in the future. We expect that our planned significant
environmental and renewable expenditures will result in earnings growth. Looking forward, we face
additional issues, such as higher levels of capital spending, volatility in prices for coal and
other commodities, increased transportation costs, investment returns and changes in discount rate
assumptions in benefit plans and health care costs, and uncertainty of legislative or regulatory
actions regarding climate change. We expect to continue an intense focus on our continuous
improvement efforts to improve productivity and decrease our costs while improving customer
satisfaction with consideration of customer rate affordability.
48
GAS UTILITY
Our Gas Utility segment consists of MichCon and Citizens.
Gas Utility results are discussed below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Revenues |
|
$ |
170 |
|
|
$ |
190 |
|
|
$ |
1,157 |
|
|
$ |
1,253 |
|
Cost of Gas |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
586 |
|
|
|
720 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Margin |
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
571 |
|
|
|
533 |
|
Operation and Maintenance |
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
341 |
|
Depreciation and Amortization |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
Taxes Other Than Income |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Other Asset Losses and Reserves, Net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income (Loss) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
Other (Income) and Deductions |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
Income Tax Provision (Benefit) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income (Loss) Attributable to DTE Energy Company |
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
|
$ |
(23 |
) |
|
$ |
92 |
|
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income as a Percentage of Operating Revenues |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
(9 |
)% |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
6 |
% |
Gross margin increased $10 million in the third quarter of 2010 and increased $38 million in the
nine-month period ended September 30, 2010. Revenues associated with certain tracking mechanisms
and surcharges are offset by related expenses elsewhere in the Statement of Operations. The
following table details changes in various gross margin components relative to the comparable prior
period:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
Three Months |
|
|
Nine Months |
|
2010 rate order |
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
98 |
|
Lost and stolen gas |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Midstream transportation and storage revenues |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
Customer conservation |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
Uncollectible tracking mechanism |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
Weather |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
Other |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in gross margin |
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
$ |
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Gas Markets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas sales |
|
$ |
96 |
|
|
$ |
121 |
|
|
$ |
887 |
|
|
$ |
1,013 |
|
End user transportation |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
1,023 |
|
|
|
1,115 |
|
Intermediate transportation |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Storage and other |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
170 |
|
|
$ |
190 |
|
|
$ |
1,157 |
|
|
$ |
1,253 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas Markets (in Bcf) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gas sales |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
End user transportation |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
Intermediate transportation |
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
473 |
|
|
|
553 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49
Operation and maintenance expense decreased $3 million in the third quarter of 2010 and $67 million
in the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010. The decrease for the 2010 three-month period is
due primarily to lower uncollectible expenses. The decrease for the nine-month period is primarily
due to reduced uncollectible expenses of $38 million and the deferral of $32 million of previously
expensed CTA restructuring expenses. See Note 7 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Depreciation and amortization expense decreased $7 million and $12 million in the 2010 three-month
and nine-month periods due to the March 2010 MPSC order that reduced MichCons depreciation rates
effective April 1, 2010.
Outlook We continue to move forward in our efforts to improve the operating performance and cash
flow of Gas Utility. Unfavorable economic trends have resulted in a decrease in the number of
customers in our service territory, customer conservation and continued high levels of theft and
uncollectible accounts receivable. The MPSC has provided for an uncollectible expense tracking
mechanism which assists in mitigating the impacts of economic conditions in our service territory
and a revenue decoupling mechanism that addresses changes in customer usage due to general economic
conditions and conservation. These and other tracking mechanisms and surcharges are expected to
result in lower earnings volatility in the future. Looking forward, we face additional issues, such
as volatility in gas prices, investment returns and changes in discount rate assumptions in benefit
plans and health care costs. We expect
to continue an intense focus on our continuous improvement efforts to improve productivity,
minimize lost and stolen gas, and decrease our costs while improving customer satisfaction with
consideration of customer rate affordability.
GAS STORAGE AND PIPELINES
Our Gas Storage and Pipelines segment consists of our non-utility gas pipelines and storage
businesses.
Gas Storage and Pipelines results were consistent with those of the prior periods and are presented
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Revenues |
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
62 |
|
|
$ |
61 |
|
Operation and Maintenance |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Depreciation and Amortization |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Taxes Other Than Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
Other (Income) and Deductions |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
Income Tax Provision |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Noncontrolling Interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income Attributable to DTE Energy Company |
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
$ |
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outlook Our Gas Storage and Pipelines business expects to continue its steady growth plan and is
evaluating new pipeline and storage investment opportunities.
UNCONVENTIONAL GAS PRODUCTION
Our Unconventional Gas Production business is engaged in natural gas and oil exploration,
development and production primarily within the Barnett shale in northern Texas.
Unconventional Gas Production results were consistent with those of the prior year with the
exception of a $4 million higher impairment in the 2010 nine-month period of expired or expiring
leasehold positions that the Company does not intend to drill.
50
Unconventional Gas Production results are discussed below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Revenues |
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
$ |
23 |
|
Operation and Maintenance |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Taxes Other Than Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other Asset (Gains) and Losses, Net |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Loss |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Other (Income) and Deductions |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Income Tax Benefit |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Loss Attributable to DTE Energy Company |
|
$ |
(4 |
) |
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
(9 |
) |
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outlook In the longer-term, we plan to continue to develop our holdings in the western portion of
the Barnett shale and to seek opportunities for additional monetization of select properties when
conditions are appropriate. Our strategy for 2010 is to maintain our focus on reducing operating
expenses and optimizing production volume. Given the current outlook of low natural gas prices,
drilling efforts will continue to target liquids rich gas and oil production. During 2010, we
expect total capital investment of $25 million to drill 10 to 15 new wells and continue to acquire
select acreage and achieve production of approximately 5 Bcfe of natural gas, compared with 5 Bcfe
in 2009.
POWER AND INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS
Power and Industrial Projects is comprised primarily of projects that deliver energy and
utility-type products and services to industrial, commercial and institutional customers; provide
coal transportation services and marketing; and sell electricity from biomass-fired energy
projects.
Power and Industrial Projects results are discussed below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Revenues |
|
$ |
303 |
|
|
$ |
157 |
|
|
$ |
846 |
|
|
$ |
450 |
|
Operation and Maintenance |
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
720 |
|
|
|
417 |
|
Depreciation and Amortization |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Taxes Other Than Income |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Other Asset (Gains) Losses and Reserves and
Impairments, Net |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income (Loss) |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Other (Income) and Deductions |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Income Taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (Benefit) |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
Production Tax Credits |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Noncontrolling Interests |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income Attributable to DTE Energy Company |
|
$ |
26 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
$ |
66 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIEs As discussed in Notes 1 and 3 of Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, effective
January 1, 2010, we adopted the provisions of ASU 2009-17, Amendments to FASB Interpretation 46(R).
ASU 2009-17 changed the methodology for determining the primary beneficiary of a VIE from a
quantitative risk and rewards-based model to a qualitative determination. The Company re-evaluated
prior VIE and primary beneficiary determinations and, as a result, began consolidating five
entities. Since these entities were previously accounted for under the equity method,
51
the VIE
consolidation had no impact on Net Income Attributable to DTE Energy. As a result of the
consolidation of these VIEs, Operating Revenues and Operations and Maintenance expense increased
$43 million and $32 million, respectively, for the third quarter of 2010, and $130 million and $98
million, respectively, for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010.
Operating revenues increased $103 million and $266 million, net of VIE adjustments, in the third
quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 compared to the same periods in 2009. The
increase in the third quarter of 2010 is attributed primarily to $53 million of higher coke sales
and a $51 million increase in on-site services. The increase in the nine-month period is attributed
primarily to $160 million of higher coke sales and a $121 million increase in on-site services,
partially offset by a $13 million decrease in coal trading and transportation services.
Operation and maintenance expense increased $88 million and $205 million, net of VIE adjustments,
in the third quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 compared to the same periods in
2009. The increase in the third quarter of 2010 is due primarily to $37 million of higher coke
production and a $47 million increase in on-site services. The increase in the nine-month period is
due primarily to $98 million of higher coke production and a $118 million increase in on-site
services, partially offset by $11 million of lower coal trading and transportation services.
Outlook We expect sustained production levels of metallurgical coke and pulverized coal
supplied to steel industry customers for the remainder of 2010 and 2011. During 2010,
available production was sold at market prices, which exceeded contract pricing. Beginning in
2011, substantially all of the metallurgical coke will be under a long-term contract. We
supply on-site energy services to the domestic automotive manufacturers who have also
experienced stabilized demand for automobiles. Our on-site energy services will continue to be
delivered in accordance with the terms of long-term contracts.
In 2010, we will capture benefits from production tax credits of approximately $30 million
generated from our steel industry fuel projects. The tax credits are available through 2010 with
the potential of being extended by Congress for an additional year. In late 2009, we began
operating reduced emission fuel facilities located at Detroit Edison owned coal-fired power plants.
The facilities reduce NOx, SOx and mercury emissions and qualify for production tax credits when
the fuel is sold to an unrelated party through 2019. Therefore, we continue to optimize these
facilities by seeking investors for facilities operating at Detroit Edison sites and intend to
relocate other facilities to alternative sites which may provide increased production and emission
reduction opportunities in 2011 and future years. The Company has entered into an agreement to
sell a membership interest in one of these reduced emission fuel facilities that is located at a
Detroit Edison site. The sale of the membership interest is subject to the satisfaction of certain
conditions.
Environmental and economic trends are creating growth opportunities for renewable power. The
increasing number of states with renewable portfolio standards and energy efficiency mandates
provides investment opportunity in waste-wood power generation. In addition to the two facilities
in operation, we will convert and place into service two additional facilities in 2010 and 2013. We
will continue to look for additional investment opportunities for waste-wood renewable power
generation and other energy projects at favorable prices.
In 2011, our existing long-term rail transportation contract, which is at rates significantly
below the current market, will expire and we anticipate a decrease in annual
transportation-related revenue of approximately $120 million as a result. The decrease in revenue
will be mostly offset by lower variable costs incurred to provide the transportation.
We will continue to work with suppliers and the railroads to promote secure and competitive
access to coal to meet the energy requirements of our customers. Power and Industrial Projects
will continue to leverage its extensive energy-related operating experience and project
management capability to develop additional energy projects to serve energy intensive industrial
customers.
ENERGY TRADING
Energy Trading focuses on physical and financial power and gas marketing and trading, structured
transactions, enhancement of returns from DTE Energys asset portfolio, and optimization of
contracted natural gas pipeline transportation and storage, and power transmission and generating
capacity positions. Energy Trading also provides
52
natural gas, power and ancillary services to
various utilities which may include the management of associated storage and transportation
contracts on the customers behalf.
Energy Trading results are discussed below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Revenues |
|
$ |
258 |
|
|
$ |
306 |
|
|
$ |
661 |
|
|
$ |
638 |
|
Fuel, Purchased Power and Gas |
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
597 |
|
|
|
464 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Margin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
Operation and Maintenance |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Depreciation and Amortization |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Taxes Other Than Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income (Loss) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
Other (Income) and Deductions |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Income Tax Provision (Benefit) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income (Loss) Attributable to DTE Energy Company |
|
$ |
(12 |
) |
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin decreased $32 million in the third quarter of 2010 and decreased $110 million in the
nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 as compared to the same periods in 2009. The overall
decrease in gross margin for the third quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 was
the result of lower economic performance, lower commodity prices, and lower volatility in the
markets we participate in relative to the same periods
in 2009, coupled with the absence of prior year timing-related gains. We experienced timing-related
volatility based on market movement related to derivative contracts. The third quarter 2010
decrease represents a $25 million decrease in unrealized margins and a $7 million decrease in
realized margins. The $25 million
decrease in unrealized margins is due to $45 million of unfavorable results, primarily in our power
trading and power transmission strategies, offset by $20 million of favorable results, primarily in
our gas full requirements strategy. The $7 million decrease in realized margins is due to $13
million of unfavorable results, primarily in our gas trading strategy, offset by $6 million of
favorable results, primarily in our gas storage strategy.
The decrease for the nine-month period represents a $68 million decrease in unrealized margins and
$42 million decrease in realized margins. The $68 million decrease in unrealized margins is due to
$83 million of unfavorable results, primarily in our power transmission, power full requirements,
gas transportation and gas trading strategies, offset by $15 million of favorable results,
primarily in our gas full requirements strategy. The $42 million decrease in realized margins is
due to $77 million of unfavorable results, primarily in our power trading, gas trading and gas
transportation strategies, offset by $35 million of favorable results, primarily in our power full
requirements, power origination and gas storage strategies.
Income tax provision decreased $9 million for the third quarter and $33 million for the nine-month
period ended September 30, 2010. This decrease is due to a decrease in income taxes attributable to
lower pretax income for both the third quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010. For
the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010, this decrease was partially offset by $7 million of
favorable tax-related adjustments in 2009 resulting from the settlement of federal income tax
audits.
Outlook In the near term, we expect market conditions to remain challenging and the profitability
of this segment may be impacted by volatility or the lack thereof in commodity prices in the markets we participate in
and the uncertainty of regulatory changes associated with financial reform. We continue to
maintain our overall strategy and risk profile in this segment.
The Energy Trading portfolio includes financial instruments, physical commodity contracts and gas
inventory, as well as contracted natural gas pipeline transportation and storage, and power
transmission and generation capacity
53
positions. Energy Trading also provides natural gas, power and
ancillary services to various utilities which may include the management of associated storage and
transportation contracts on the customers behalf. Significant portions of the Energy Trading
portfolio are economically hedged. Most financial instruments and physical power and gas contracts
are deemed derivatives, whereas proprietary gas inventory, power transmission, pipeline
transportation and certain storage assets are not derivatives. As a result, we will experience
earnings volatility as derivatives are marked-to-market without revaluing the underlying
non-derivative contracts and assets. Our strategy is to economically
manage the price risk of these underlying non-derivative contracts and assets with futures,
forwards, swaps and options. This results in gains and losses that are recognized in
different interim and annual accounting periods.
See also the Fair Value section that follows.
CORPORATE & OTHER
Corporate & Other includes various holding company activities and holds certain non-utility debt
and energy-related investments.
The net loss for the third quarter of 2010 and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 increased
by $16 million and $21 million, respectively. The increases were due primarily to an increase in
state and local taxes, lower interest income and other tax-related adjustments resulting from the
recognition of tax benefits from the settlement of tax audits in 2009.
CAPITAL RESOURCES AND LIQUIDITY
Cash Requirements
We use cash to maintain and expand our electric and gas utilities, grow our non-utility businesses,
to retire and pay interest on long-term debt and to pay dividends. We believe that we will have
sufficient internal and external capital resources to fund anticipated capital and operating
requirements. In 2010, we expect that cash from operations will be lower due primarily to working
capital requirements. We anticipate base level capital investments and expenditures
for existing businesses in 2010 of up to $1.3 billion. We expect over $2.2 billion of future
environmental capital expenditures through 2019 to satisfy both existing and proposed new
requirements. The capital needs of our utilities will also increase due primarily to renewable and
energy optimization related expenditures. We plan to seek regulatory approval to include these
capital expenditures within our regulatory rate base consistent with prior treatment. Capital
spending for growth of existing or new non-utility businesses will depend on the existence of
opportunities that meet our strict risk-return and value creation criteria.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flow From (Used For) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
483 |
|
|
$ |
414 |
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization |
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
738 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
141 |
|
Other assets (gains), losses and reserves, net |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Working capital and other |
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
377 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,509 |
|
|
|
1,674 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant and equipment expenditures utility |
|
|
(743 |
) |
|
|
(772 |
) |
Plant and equipment expenditures non-utility |
|
|
(75 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
Proceeds from sale of other assets, net |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Restricted cash and other investments |
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(834 |
) |
|
|
(795 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54
Financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30 |
|
(in Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Issuance of long-term debt |
|
|
595 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
Redemption of long-term debt |
|
|
(660 |
) |
|
|
(420 |
) |
Short-term borrowings, net |
|
|
(307 |
) |
|
|
(539 |
) |
Issuance of common stock |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Dividends on common stock and other |
|
|
(297 |
) |
|
|
(313 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(643 |
) |
|
|
(882 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents |
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash from Operating Activities
A majority of our operating cash flow is provided by our electric and gas utilities, which are
significantly influenced by factors such as weather, electric Customer Choice, regulatory
deferrals, regulatory outcomes, economic conditions and operating costs.
Cash from operations in the nine months ended September 30, 2010 decreased $165 million from the
comparable 2009 period primarily due to lower cash provided by working capital items in 2010. See
Note 15 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Cash from Investing Activities
Cash inflows associated with investing activities are primarily generated from the sale of assets,
while cash outflows are primarily generated from plant and equipment expenditures. In any given
year, we will look to realize cash from under-performing or non-strategic assets or matured fully
valued assets. Capital spending within the utility business is primarily to maintain our generation
and distribution infrastructure, comply with environmental regulations and gas pipeline
replacements. Capital spending within our non-utility businesses is for ongoing maintenance and
expansion. The balance of non-utility spending is for growth, which we manage very carefully. We
look to make investments that meet strict criteria in terms of strategy, management skills, risks
and returns. All new investments are analyzed for their rates of return and cash payback on a risk
adjusted basis. We have been disciplined in how we deploy capital and will not make investments
unless they meet our criteria. For new business lines, we initially invest based on research and
analysis. We start with a limited investment, we evaluate results and either expand or exit the
business based on
those results. In any given year, the amount of growth capital will be determined by the underlying
cash flows of the Company with a clear understanding of any potential impact on our credit ratings.
Net cash used for investing activities increased in the nine months ended September 30, 2010 by $39
million primarily due to the investment in Millennium Pipeline Project. See Note 12 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Cash from Financing Activities
We rely on both short-term borrowing and long-term financing as a source of funding for our capital
requirements not satisfied by our operations.
Our strategy is to have a targeted debt portfolio blend of fixed and variable interest rates and
maturity. We continually evaluate our leverage target, which is currently 50 percent to 52 percent,
to ensure it is consistent with our objective to have a strong investment grade debt rating.
Net cash used for financing activities decreased $239 million during the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 due to decreased payments for short-term borrowings. Increases in issuances of
long-term debt were offset by increased long-term debt redemptions.
55
Outlook
We expect cash flow from operations to increase over the long-term primarily as a result of growth
from our utilities and the non-utility businesses. We expect growth in our utilities to be driven
primarily by new and existing state and federal regulations that will result in additional
environmental and renewable energy investments which will increase the base from which rates are
determined. Our non-utility growth is expected from additional investments in energy projects as
economic conditions improve.
We may be impacted by the delayed collection of underrecoveries of our PSCR and GCR costs and the
impact of the UETM on electric and gas accounts receivable as a result of MPSC orders. Energy
prices are likely to be a source of volatility with regard to working capital requirements for the
foreseeable future. We are continuing our efforts to identify opportunities to improve cash flow
through working capital initiatives and maintaining flexibility in the timing and extent of our
long-term capital projects.
In August 2010, DTE Energy and its wholly owned subsidiaries, Detroit Edison and MichCon, entered
into amended and restated two-year $1 billion unsecured revolving credit agreements and new
three-year $800 million unsecured revolving credit agreements with a syndicate of 23 banks that may
be used for general corporate borrowings, but are intended to provide liquidity support for each of
the companies commercial paper programs. No one bank provides more than 8.25% of the commitment in
any facility. Borrowings under the facilities are available at prevailing short-term interest
rates. DTE Energy has approximately $1.7 billion of available liquidity at September 30, 2010.
We have approximately $900 million in long-term debt maturing in the next twelve months. DTE Energy
has $600 million of unsecured debt maturing in June 2011 which is expected to be funded through a
combination of internally generated funds and the issuance of debt and/or equity. Substantially all
of the remaining debt maturities relate to Securitization and other Detroit Edison issues. The
principal amount of the Securitization debt is funded through a surcharge payable by Detroit
Edisons electric customers.
In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) and the Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act (HCERA) were enacted into law (collectively, the Act). The Act is a
comprehensive health care reform bill. A provision of the PPACA repeals the current rule permitting
deduction of the portion of the drug coverage expense that is offset by the Medicare Part D
subsidy, effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012. We are currently assessing
other impacts the legislation may have on our active and retiree healthcare costs. We contributed
$200 million to our pension plans during the nine months ended September 30, 2010, including a DTE
Energy stock contribution of $100 million in March 2010. We expect to contribute $155 million to
our postretirement medical and life insurance benefit plans during 2010. We contributed $25 million
to our postretirement medical and life insurance benefit plans during the nine months ended
September 30, 2010. As a result of the continued downward
trend in long-term interest rates, we expect our 2011 pension and other postretirement benefit
costs to increase as compared to 2010. See Note 13 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
In July 2010, a federal financial reform act was signed into law. The legislation reshapes
financial regulation and is intended to address specific issues that contributed to the financial
crisis. Most major areas of the legislation will be dependent upon regulatory interpretation,
rulemaking and implementation. We are unable to predict the ultimate outcome of this legislation,
but do not expect any material effect on our operations and financial position.
Detroit Edison filed a rate case on October 29, 2010 that requests an increase in base rates that is required to recover
higher costs associated with environmental compliance, operation and maintenance of the Companys electric
distribution system and generation plants, inflation, the capital costs of plant additions, the reduction in territory
sales, the impact from the expiration of certain wholesale for resale contracts and the increased migration of
customers to the electric Customer Choice program. See Note 7 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
We believe we have sufficient operating flexibility, cash resources and funding sources to maintain
adequate amounts of liquidity and to meet our future operating cash and capital expenditure needs.
However, virtually all of our businesses are capital intensive, or require access to capital, and
the inability to access adequate capital could adversely impact earnings and cash flows.
56
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
Regulation
A significant portion of our business is subject to regulation. This results in differences in the
application of generally accepted accounting principles between regulated and non-regulated
businesses. Detroit Edison and MichCon are required to record regulatory assets and liabilities for
certain transactions that would have been treated as revenue or expense in non-regulated
businesses.
In March 2010, the PPACA and the HCERA were enacted into law (collectively, the Act). A provision
of the PPACA repeals the current rule permitting deduction of the portion of the drug coverage
expense that is offset by the Medicare Part D subsidy, effective for taxable years beginning after
December 31, 2012. This change in tax law required a remeasurement of the deferred tax asset
related to the Other Postretirement Benefit Obligation (OPEB) and the deferred tax liability
related to the OPEB Regulatory Asset. Income tax accounting rules require the impact of a change in
tax law be recognized in continuing operations in the Consolidated Statements of Operations in the
period that the tax law change is enacted. However, regulated businesses may defer changes in tax
law if allowed by regulators. The MPSCs historical practice has been to recognize both the expense
and working capital impacts for OPEB costs. In addition, the current and deferred tax effects
related to OPEB costs have been recognized consistently. The effects of the subsidy have been
reflected through lower tax expense included in rates. We believe we have reasonable assurance that
the impacts related to the enactment of the Act are recoverable through rates in future periods.
Therefore, the amounts related to Detroit Edison of $18 million and MichCon of $4 million have been
deferred as Regulatory Assets. See Note 13 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
FAIR VALUE
Derivatives are generally recorded at fair value and shown as Derivative Assets or Liabilities.
Contracts we typically classify as derivative instruments include power, gas, oil and certain coal
forwards, futures, options and swaps, and foreign currency exchange contracts. Items we do not
generally account for as derivatives include proprietary gas inventory, power transmission,
pipeline transportation and certain storage assets. See Notes 4 and 5 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements.
As a result of adherence to generally accepted accounting principles, the tables below do not
include the expected earnings impact of non-derivative gas storage, transportation and power
contracts. Consequently, gains and losses from these positions may not match with the related
physical and financial hedging instruments in some reporting periods, resulting in volatility in
DTE Energys reported period-by-period earnings; however, the financial impact of the timing
differences will reverse at the time of physical delivery and/or settlement.
The Company manages its mark-to-market (MTM) risk on a portfolio basis based upon the delivery
period of its contracts and the individual components of the risks within each contract.
Accordingly, it records and manages the energy purchase and sale obligations under its contracts in
separate components based on the commodity (e.g.
electricity or gas), the product (e.g. electricity for delivery during peak or off-peak hours), the
delivery location (e.g. by region), the risk profile (e.g. forward or option), and the delivery
period (e.g. by month and year).
The Company has established a fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs to valuation
techniques used to measure fair value in three broad levels. The fair value hierarchy gives the
highest priority to quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). For further
discussion of the fair value hierarchy, see Note 4 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements.
The following tables provide details on changes in our MTM net asset (or liability) position for
the nine months ended September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
Total |
|
MTM at December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
(93 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Reclassify to realized upon settlement |
|
|
47 |
|
Changes in fair value recorded to income |
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts recorded to unrealized income |
|
|
132 |
|
Changes in fair value recorded in regulatory liabilities |
|
|
3 |
|
Amounts recorded in other comprehensive income pre-tax |
|
|
1 |
|
Change in collateral held by (for) others |
|
|
(51 |
) |
Option premiums paid and other |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
|
|
MTM at September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
(36 |
) |
|
|
|
|
57
The table below shows the maturity of our MTM positions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And |
|
|
Total Fair |
|
Source of Fair Value |
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2012 |
|
|
Beyond |
|
|
Value |
|
Level 1 |
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
(22 |
) |
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
$ |
26 |
|
Level 2 |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(129 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(230 |
) |
Level 3 |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total MTM before netting adjustments |
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
(28 |
) |
|
$ |
(44 |
) |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
(71 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collateral adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total MTM at September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(36 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Market Price Risk
We have commodity price risk in both utility and non-utility businesses arising from market price
fluctuations.
Our Electric and Gas utility businesses have risks in conjunction with the anticipated purchases of
coal, natural gas, uranium, electricity, and base metals to meet their service obligations.
However, we do not bear significant exposure to earnings risk as commodity costs are included in
the PSCR and GCR mechanisms. In addition, changes in the price of natural gas can impact the
valuation of lost and stolen gas, storage sales revenue and uncollectible expenses at the Gas
Utility. Gas Utility manages its market price risk related to storage sales revenue primarily
through the sale of long-term storage contracts. We have tracking mechanisms to mitigate a portion
of losses related to uncollectible accounts receivable at MichCon and Detroit Edison. We are
exposed to short-term cash flow or liquidity risk as a result of the time differential between
actual cash settlements and regulatory rate recovery.
Our Gas Storage and Pipelines business segment has limited exposure to natural gas price
fluctuations and manages its exposure through the sale of long-term storage and transportation
contracts.
Our Unconventional Gas Production business segment has exposure to natural gas and crude oil price
fluctuations. These commodity price fluctuations can impact both current year earnings and reserve
valuations. To manage this exposure we may use forward energy and futures contracts.
Our Power and Industrial Projects business segment is subject to electricity, natural gas, coal and
coal-based product price risk and other risks associated with the weakened U.S. economy. To the
extent that commodity price risk has not been mitigated through the use of long-term contracts, we
manage this exposure using forward energy, capacity and futures contracts.
Our Energy Trading business segment has exposure to electricity, natural gas, crude oil, heating
oil, and foreign currency exchange price fluctuations. These risks are managed by our energy
marketing and trading operations through the use of forward energy, capacity, storage, options and
futures contracts, within pre-determined risk parameters.
Credit Risk
Bankruptcies
We purchase and sell electricity, gas, coal, coke and other energy products from and to numerous
companies operating in the steel, automotive, energy, retail, financial and other industries.
Certain of our customers have filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S.
Bankruptcy Code. We regularly review contingent matters relating to these customers and our
purchase and sale contracts and record provisions for amounts considered at risk of probable loss.
We believe our accrued amounts are adequate for probable loss. The final resolution of these
matters may have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.
Other
We engage in business with customers that are non-investment grade. We closely monitor the credit
ratings of these customers and, when deemed necessary, we request collateral or guarantees from
such customers to secure their obligations.
59
Trading Activities
We are exposed to credit risk through trading activities. Credit risk is the potential loss that
may result if our trading counterparties fail to meet their contractual obligations. We utilize
both external and internally generated credit assessments when determining the credit quality of
our trading counterparties. The following table displays the credit quality of our trading
counterparties as of September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Exposure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before Cash |
|
|
Cash |
|
|
Net Credit |
|
(in Millions) |
|
Collateral |
|
|
Collateral |
|
|
Exposure |
|
Investment Grade(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A- and Greater |
|
$ |
207 |
|
|
$ |
(14 |
) |
|
$ |
193 |
|
BBB+ and BBB |
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
271 |
|
BBB- |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Investment Grade |
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
512 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-investment grade(2) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Internally Rated investment grade(3) |
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
112 |
|
Internally Rated non-investment grade(4) |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
660 |
|
|
$ |
(24 |
) |
|
$ |
636 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
This category includes counterparties with minimum credit ratings of Baa3 assigned by Moodys
Investor Service (Moodys) and BBB- assigned by Standard & Poors Rating Group (Standard &
Poors). The five largest counterparty exposures combined for this category represented
approximately 39 percent of the total gross credit exposure. |
|
(2) |
|
This category includes counterparties with credit ratings that are below investment grade.
The five largest counterparty exposures combined for this category represented less than 1
percent of the total gross credit exposure. |
|
(3) |
|
This category includes counterparties that have not been rated by Moodys or Standard &
Poors, but are considered investment grade based on DTE Energys evaluation of the
counterpartys creditworthiness. The five largest counterparty exposures combined for this
category represented approximately 13 percent of the total gross credit exposure. |
|
(4) |
|
This category includes counterparties that have not been rated by Moodys or Standard &
Poors, and are considered non-investment grade based on DTE Energys evaluation of the
counterpartys creditworthiness. The five largest counterparty exposures combined for this
category represented approximately 1 percent of the total gross credit exposure. |
Interest Rate Risk
DTE Energy is subject to interest rate risk in connection with the issuance of debt and preferred
securities. In order to manage interest costs, we may use treasury locks and interest rate swap
agreements. Our exposure to interest rate risk arises primarily from changes in U.S. Treasury
rates, commercial paper rates and London Inter-Bank Offered Rates (LIBOR). As of September 30,
2010, we had a floating rate debt-to-total debt ratio of less than one percent (excluding
securitized debt).
60
Foreign Currency Exchange Risk
We have foreign currency exchange risk arising from market price fluctuations associated with fixed
priced contracts. These contracts are denominated in Canadian dollars and are primarily for the
purchase and sale of power as well as for long-term transportation capacity. To limit our exposure
to foreign currency exchange fluctuations, we have entered into a series of foreign currency
exchange forward contracts through January 2013. Additionally, we may enter into fair value foreign
currency exchange hedges to mitigate changes in the value of contracts or loans.
Summary of Sensitivity Analysis
We performed a sensitivity analysis on the fair values of our commodity contracts, long-term debt
obligations and foreign currency exchange forward contracts. The commodity contracts and foreign
currency exchange risk listed below principally relate to our energy marketing and trading
activities. The sensitivity analysis involved increasing and decreasing forward rates at September
30, 2010 and September 30, 2009 by a hypothetical 10% and calculating the resulting change in the
fair values.
The results of the sensitivity analysis calculations as of September 30, 2010 and September 30,
2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assuming a |
|
Assuming a |
|
|
|
|
10% Increase in Rates |
|
10% Decrease in Rates |
|
|
(in Millions) |
|
As of September 30, |
|
As of September 30, |
|
|
Activity |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
Change in the Fair Value of |
Coal Contracts |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
Commodity contracts |
Gas Contracts |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
Commodity contracts |
Oil Contracts |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
Commodity contracts |
Power Contracts |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
Commodity contracts |
Interest Rate Risk |
|
|
(294 |
) |
|
|
(295 |
) |
|
|
315 |
|
|
|
317 |
|
|
Long-term debt |
Foreign Currency Exchange Risk |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
Forward contracts |
Discount Rates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
Commodity contracts |
For further discussion of market risk, see Note 5 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements.
61
CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
(a) Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures
Management of the Company carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the
participation of DTE Energys Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the
effectiveness of the design and operation of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) as of September 30, 2010, which is the end
of the period covered by this report. Based on this evaluation, the Companys Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that such disclosure controls and procedures are
effective in providing reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by the
Company in reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act (i) is recorded, processed,
summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SECs rules and forms and (ii) is
accumulated and communicated to the Companys management, including its Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Due to the inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any disclosure controls and procedures,
management cannot provide absolute assurance that the objectives of its disclosure controls and
procedures will be attained.
(b) Changes in internal control over financial reporting
There have been no changes in the Companys internal control over financial reporting during the
quarter ended September 30, 2010 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
62
Part II Other Information
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
The Company is involved in certain legal, regulatory, administrative and environmental proceedings
before various courts, arbitration panels and governmental agencies concerning claims arising in
the ordinary course of business. These proceedings include certain contract disputes, additional
environmental reviews and investigations, audits, inquiries from various regulators, and pending
judicial matters. The Company cannot predict the final disposition of such proceedings. The Company
regularly reviews legal matters and records provisions for claims it can estimate and are
considered probable of loss. The resolution of these pending proceedings is not expected to have a
material effect on the Companys operations or financial statements in the periods they are
resolved.
In July 2009, DTE Energy received a Notice of Violation/Finding of Violation (NOV/FOV) from the EPA
alleging, among other things, that five of Detroit Edisons power plants violated New Source
Performance standards, Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements, and Title V operating
permit requirements under the Clean Air Act. In June 2010, the EPA issued a NOV/FOV making similar
allegations related to a recent project and outage at Unit 2 of the Monroe Power Plant.
On August 5, 2010, the United States Department of Justice, at the request of the EPA, brought a
civil suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan against DTE Energy and
Detroit Edison, related to the June 2010 NOV/FOV and the outage work performed at Unit 2 of the
Monroe Power Plant, but not relating to the July 2009 NOV/FOV. Among other relief, the EPA is
requesting the court to require Detroit Edison to install and operate the best available control
technology at Unit 2 of the Monroe Power Plant. Further, the EPA is requesting the court to issue
a preliminary injunction to require Detroit Edison to (i) begin the process of obtaining the
necessary permits for the Monroe Unit 2 modification and (ii) offset the pollution from Monroe Unit
2 through emissions reductions from Detroit Edisons fleet of coal-fired power plants until the new
control equipment is operating.
DTE Energy and Detroit Edison believe that the plants identified by the EPA, including Unit 2 of
the Monroe Power Plant, have complied with all applicable federal environmental regulations.
Depending upon the outcome of discussions with the EPA regarding the NOV/FOV and the result of the
civil action, Detroit Edison could also be required to install additional pollution control
equipment at some or all of the power plants in question, consider early retirement of facilities
where control equipment is not economical, engage in supplemental environmental programs, and/or
pay fines. DTE Energy and Detroit Edison cannot predict the financial impact or outcome of this
matter, or the timing of its resolution.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
There are various risks associated with the operations of DTE Energys utility and non-utility
businesses. To provide a framework to understand the operating environment of DTE Energy, we have
provided a brief explanation of the more significant risks associated with our businesses in Part
1, Item 1A. Risk Factors in the Companys 2009 Form 10-K. Although we have tried to identify and
discuss key risk factors, others could emerge in the future. In addition to the risk factors set
forth in our 10-K, the following updated risk could affect our performance.
A work interruption may adversely affect us. Unions represent approximately 5,000 of our employees.
A union choosing to strike would have an impact on our business. We are unable to predict the
effect a work stoppage would have on our costs of operation and financial performance.
63
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds; Purchases of Equity
Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers
The following table provides information about Company purchases of equity securities that are
registered by the Company pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
three months ended September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of |
|
Maximum Dollar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased |
|
Value that May Yet |
|
|
Total Number |
|
Average |
|
as Part of Publicly |
|
Be Purchased Under |
|
|
of Shares |
|
Price Paid |
|
Announced Plans |
|
the Plans or |
Period |
|
Purchased (1) |
|
Per Share |
|
or Programs |
|
Programs |
07/01/10 07/31/10 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
08/01/10 08/31/10 |
|
|
35,000 |
|
|
|
46.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
09/01/10 09/30/10 |
|
|
44,000 |
|
|
|
47.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
79,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents shares of common stock purchased on the open market to provide shares to
participants under various employee compensation and incentive programs. These purchases were
not made pursuant to a publicly announced plan or program. |
64
Item 6. Exhibits
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
Exhibits filed herewith: |
|
|
|
31-61
|
|
Chief Executive Officer Section 302 Form 10-Q Certification |
|
|
|
31-62
|
|
Chief Financial Officer Section 302 Form 10-Q Certification |
Exhibits incorporated herein by reference:
4-258 Form of Amended and Restated DTE Energy Two-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of April
29, 2009 and amended and restated as of August 20, 2010, by and among DTE Energy Company,
the lenders party thereto, Citibank, N.A., as Administrative Agent, and Barclays Capital,
Bank of America, N.A. and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Co-Syndication Agents (Exhibit
10.1 to Form 8-K filed on August 26, 2010).
4-259 Form of Amended and Restated MichCon Two-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of April
29, 2009 and amended and restated as of August 20, 2010, by and among Michigan
Consolidated Gas Company, the lenders party thereto, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
Administrative Agent, and Barclays Capital, Citibank N.A. and Bank of America N.A., as
Co-Syndication Agents (Exhibit 10.2 to Form 8-K filed on August 26, 2010).
4-260 Form of DTE Energy Three-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of August 20, 2010, by and
among DTE Energy Company, the lenders party thereto, Citibank, N.A., as Administrative
Agent, and Barclays Capital, Bank of America, N.A. and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
Co-Syndication Agents (Exhibit 10.3 to Form 8-K filed on August 26, 2010).
4-261 Form of MichCon Three-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of August 20, 2010, by and
among Michigan Consolidated Gas Company, the lenders party thereto, JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., as Administrative Agent, and Barclays Capital, Citibank N.A. and Bank of America
N.A., as Co-Syndication Agents (Exhibit 10.4 to Form 8-K filed on August 26, 2010).
4-262 Form of Amended and Restated Detroit Edison Two-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of
April 29, 2009 and amended and restated as of August 20, 2010, by and among The Detroit
Edison Company, the lenders party thereto, Barclays Bank plc, as Administrative Agent, and
Citibank N.A., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and the Royal Bank of Scotland plc, as
Co-Syndication Agents (Exhibit 10.1 to Detroit Edison Form 8-K filed on August 26, 2010).
4-263 Form of Detroit Edison Three-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of August 20, 2010, by
and among The Detroit Edison Company, the lenders party thereto, Barclays Bank plc, as
Administrative Agent, and Citibank N.A., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and the Royal Bank of
Scotland plc, as Co-Syndication Agents (Exhibit 10.2 to Detroit Edison Form 8-K filed on
August 26, 2010).
4-264 Supplemental Indenture, dated as of August 1, 2010, to the Mortgage and Deed of
Trust, dated as of October 1, 1924, by and between The Detroit Edison Company and The
Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. as successor trustee (Exhibit 4-269 to
Detroit Edisons Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010). (2010 Series B)
4-265 Thirty-First Supplemental Indenture, dated as of August 1, 2010 to the Collateral
Trust Indenture, dated as of June 1, 1993 by and between The Detroit Edison Company and
The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., as successor trustee (Exhibit 4-270 to
Detroit Edisons Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010). (2010 Series B
3.45% Senior Notes due 2020)
4-266 Supplemental Indenture, dated as of September 1, 2010, to the Mortgage and Deed of
Trust, dated as of October 1, 1924, by and between The Detroit Edison Company and The Bank
of New York Mellon Trust Company,
65
N.A. as successor trustee (Exhibit 4-271 to Detroit
Edisons Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010). (2010 Series A)
4-267 Thirty-Second Supplemental Indenture, dated as of September 1, 2010, by and between
The Detroit Edison Company and The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., as
successor trustee (Exhibit 4-272 to Detroit Edisons Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2010). (2010 Series A 4.89% Senior Notes due 2020)
Exhibits furnished herewith:
|
|
|
32-61
|
|
Chief Executive Officer Section 906 Form 10-Q Certification |
|
|
|
32-62
|
|
Chief Financial Officer Section 906 Form 10-Q Certification |
|
|
|
101.INS
|
|
XBRL Instance Document |
|
|
|
101.SCH
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema |
|
|
|
101.CAL
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase |
|
|
|
101.DEF
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Database |
|
|
|
101.LAB
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase |
|
|
|
101.PRE
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase |
66
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DTE ENERGY COMPANY
(Registrant) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: October 29, 2010
|
|
/S/ PETER B. OLEKSIAK |
|
|
|
|
Peter B. Oleksiak
|
|
|
|
|
Vice President and Controller and
Chief Accounting Officer |
|
|
67