Chuck Eldred
Analyst · Jefferies. Please go ahead
Thank you, Pat and good morning everyone. We continue to make progress towards achieving our goal. The Westmoreland coal contract that became effective February the 1st brings substantial savings to customers. We received approval on the BART and resolution of the future test year definitions under New Mexico Commission in December. We also ended 2015 with an improvement in earnings compared to our revised guidance range. So beginning on slide seven, let’s start by reviewing load of both PNM and TNMP. Both were within the guidance ranges that we had for the year. At PNM, 2015 was down 1.4% compared to 2014. I want to point out the residential loan was flat both for the fourth quarter and for the entire year. Customer growth came in higher than our expectations at 0.8% for fourth quarter and 0.7% for the year. The economy in New Mexico continues to have mixed indicators. The employment growth recently in Albuquerque Metro area has been strong and you can see that even on a 12-month rolling average its moving up with the strongest numbers we have seen in three years. The state overall is not faring as well though. That softness is driven primarily by the low oil and natural gas prices. While we do not serve the regions of the state that produce oil and gas, we do expect the impacts of layoffs and the decrease in state royalty revenues will somewhat soften the economies in our service territory, particularly in Albuquerque metro area in Santa Fe as the state deals with budget shortfalls. We continue to expect 2016 load to be flat to down 2% for the year. Moving to TNMP, load for 2015 was up 2.6% compared to 2014. Customer growth was higher than forecast at 1.5% for Q4 and for the year. The Texas economy continues to be strong but the Houston area in particular is feeling the impact of low oil and natural gas prices. While Houston property is suffering, we are not seeing the economy in our service territory softened. This is because of a couple of factors. We serve many refiners and petrochemical manufacturers who continued to have strong production. Additionally, we see some production movements into the smaller communities outside the Houston Metro area, population movements into the smaller communities outside the Houston area. TNMP serves some of those areas and therefore, we are actually seeing customer increases rather than decreases. For 2016, we continue to expect load to be up 2% to 3%, as refiners and petrochemical manufacturers continue strong production and our service territories near Dallas and Forth Worth continues to have a strong economy. On slide 8, as I said before, we ended the year exceeding the upper end of 2015 guidance range, with the $1.64 consolidated ongoing earnings. All of our segments performed well during the year. PNM came in $0.02 higher than guidance. TNMP at the upper end of the guidance range and Corporate and Other was also $0.01 better than guidance. Now moving to slide 9. Ongoing earnings came in at $0.23 for fourth quarter compared to $0.24 in the fourth quarter 2014. PNM was down $0.03 and TNMP was flat. Corporate and other came in $0.02 better than last year, driven by improvements in interest expense related to the repayment of the $119 million and a 0.0025% debt in May of 2015. On slide 10, let’s look at the drivers for PNM and TNMP. Beginning with PNM, AFUDC improved $0.03 compared to the fourth quarter of 2014. This was caused by higher capital spending and higher quid balances, including the SNCR and balanced draft equipment in San Juan, the construction of the 40 megawatt La Luz gas peaker and 40 megawatts of solar. As we’ve seen through 2015, the half price of the Palo Verde Unit 1 leases contributed $0.03. Weather was an improvement of $0.02 between the quarters, as weather reduced fourth quarter 2014 earnings by $0.01 and improved fourth quarter 2015 by $0.01. The heating degree days for fourth quarter 2015 were not the driver for weather, as they were only 8% higher than last year but 2% below normal. Instead it was our cooling season that extended into October, with temperatures that were warmer than normal and warmer than 2014. We have been migrating to the Palo Verde Unit 3 Nuclear Decommissioning Trust from a shareholder asset to a regulated asset. This involves rebalancing the portfolio to reduce the percentages held in equity investments to better match the regulated assets. As we do this, we have opportunistically captured gains. In addition to that, we change some of our managers which resulted in further rebalancing of the investment portfolios. Together these actions resulted in higher gains of $0.02 compared to fourth quarter 2014. Renewable also improved results by $0.01. We had higher O&M expenses of $0.03 in the quarter, which brings our year-to-date expenses in line with our guidance range. Outage costs were $0.02 higher. This was caused largely by the San Juan Unit 4 outages and saw SNCR and balanced draft equipment. We took $0.02 write-off in fourth quarter 2015 for items on our balance sheet related to the exploration of alternative fuel supply contracts for San Juan. With the completion of the Westmoreland contract, we determine that it was appropriate to write-off these assets. Interest expense was $0.02 higher related to the additional debt that PNM entered into August of 2015. Load was down a $0.01. Transition margins were down a $0.01, compared to fourth quarter 2014. We had two long-term point-to-point contracts expired during the year, which is the primary cause of this change. We also had higher depreciation and property tax expense of $0.01. Finally, we capitalized ANG load on capital projects as lower than it was last year. This is primarily relating to the timing of capital projects At TNMP, rate relief from TCOS filings was up one penny compared to fourth quarter 2014. Weather was down $0.01. Heating degree days were 28% lower than fourth quarter of 2014 and 27% lower than normal. Depreciation and property taxes were also higher by a $0.01. Now turning to slide 11. Before we review the 2016 forecast, I want to mention how the five-year bonus depreciation extension affects us. As you are aware, we have an NOL at PNM for income tax purposes that have been expected to be fully utilized in 2018. The extension of bonus depreciation will cost the NOL to last for a longer period of time, now carrying us into 2019. While the additional deferred tax from bonus depreciation decreases rate base, the NOL increases rate base. As a result, we do not expect to see significant change in our rate base. Looking at 2016, bonus depreciation does not impact our ongoing earnings guidance. We have included our rate base projection on this slide for the expected impact of bonus depreciation and the extension of the NOL. The impact of bonus depreciation does not change our 2016 rate case numbers except the TNMP, which does not have an NOL. However, regardless of rate base change, our EPS expectations for 2016 are ineffective. As a reminder, we expect to update guidance in middle of this year after we resolve the ongoing rate case at PNM. In the appendix to today’s presentation, you will find the 2017 to 2019 potential earnings power slide. This is also been updated for bonus depreciation. As for 2016, PNM does not have a significant change and TNMP’s rate base is reduced from our prior presentation by approximately $50 million in each period. Overall, the changes are not as significant earnings driver for the company. Since the NOL’s expected to be utilized in 2019, bonus depreciation will have an impact in our 2020 rate case. We are currently viewing the capital projections and identifying which projects should be funded. We will provide those updates later this year. Finally on slide 12, we are focused on achieving our strategic goals. We expect to continue delivering above industry average earnings and dividend growth, which is displayed to the potential earnings power of the business and supports our 7% to 9% growth rate. As I wrap up today, I want to express that 2015 ended with good results. We are optimistic about 2016 and we recognize the importance of PNM’s rate case on this year’s financial results and the need to bring it to a good resolution. We also expect to file our 2018 rate case in December of this year. That filing will include the major elements of the BART case. The abandonment of San Juan’s Unit 2 and 3, additional megawatts in San Juan Unit 4 and the inclusion of Palo Verde Unit 3 rates. The rate base valuations for each of these items have already been set for the BART process. Pat, I will turn the call back over to you.