Earnings Labs

Xcel Energy Inc. (XEL)

Q1 2014 Earnings Call· Thu, May 1, 2014

$79.27

-0.18%

Key Takeaways · AI generated
AI summary not yet generated for this transcript. Generation in progress for older transcripts; check back soon, or browse the full transcript below.

Same-Day

-2.29%

1 Week

-2.29%

1 Month

-3.88%

vs S&P

-6.26%

Transcript

Operator

Operator

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the First Quarter 2014 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to turn the conference over to Paul Johnson, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Paul A. Johnson

Analyst

Good morning and welcome to Xcel Energy's 2014 First Quarter Earnings Release Conference Call. Joining me today are Ben Fowke, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer; Teresa Madden, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Dave Sparby, Senior Vice President, Group President and President and CEO of NSP-Minnesota; Scott Wilensky, Senior Vice President and General Counsel; and George Tyson, Vice President and Treasurer. This morning, we'll review our 2014 first quarter results, update you on recent business and regulatory developments and reiterate our 2014 guidance. Slides that accompany today's call are available on our web page. In addition, we'll post a brief video of Teresa summarizing our financial results on our web page. As a reminder, some of the comments during today's conference call may contain forward-looking information. Significant factors that could cause results to differ from those anticipated are described in our earnings release and our filings with the SEC. I'll now turn the call over to Ben.

Benjamin G. S. Fowke

Analyst

Thank you, Paul, and good morning. Overall, it was another strong quarter for Xcel Energy. I'm pleased to report that ongoing earnings for the first quarter of 2014 were $0.52 per share, compared with $0.48 per share for the first quarter of 2013. Our solid financial results were driven by rate increases, favorable weather and higher than expected weather adjusted sales growth. This positions us well as we head into the important summer months. Let me elaborate a bit more. The harsh winter we experienced in the upper Midwest increased earnings by almost $0.05 compared to a normal winter. Additionally, as you also know, extreme cold or heat, while improving the financial outlook, can also bring its share of operational challenges and this winter was certainly no exception. In fact, on Saturday, January 25, a rupture occurred on one of our supplier's natural gas pipelines in Canada, when temperatures were more than 20 degrees below 0 in our northern service territories. This rupture also caused 2 other pipelines to be removed from service for safety reasons, which significantly restricted the flow of natural gas into the region. Our employees worked around the clock with our suppliers and our customers to ensure that we avoided a potentially devastating natural gas outage. The results of those proactive steps, along with the tremendous willingness of our customers to conserve, prevented what could have been a very dangerous situation. Instead, by Monday, we had resumed service back to normal. For me, it speaks volumes about our ability to respond to an operational challenge. It also reminds all of us at Xcel Energy of the need to continue to invest, plan and strive for operational excellence to provide our customers the safe and reliable energy they expect. And besides weather, we're also seeing some potential…

Teresa S. Madden

Analyst

Thank you, Ben, and good morning. As Ben indicated, we are pleased to report another solid quarter with earnings of $0.52 per share, compared with 2013 first quarter earnings of $0.48 per share. In summary, drivers of the favorable results included new and interim rates being implemented across several jurisdictions, positive weather and higher than expected weather adjusted sales. These positive factors were partially offset by higher O&M and property taxes. Let me start by providing an update on sales and the economies in our local service territories. Overall, sales growth was stronger than expected for the quarter. Weather-adjusted retail electric sales increased 2%, and firm natural gas sales increased 3.7%. While growth was favorable across the board, it varied by operating company. We have added a table to our earnings release that breaks down sales by utility to provide you with more detail. Beginning with SPS, weather-adjusted retail electric sales increased 4%, largely driven by growth in the C&I class, although we saw strong residential growth. The energy sector continues to provide a positive impact from oil and gas drilling activities in the Southeastern New Mexico Permian Basin area. Additional load growth in ethanol production and uranium enrichment also contributed to the higher sales. Weather-adjusted retail sales at NSP-Wisconsin increased 3.3%. C&I sales were strong, primarily due to increased load from one of our larger customers that was operating their pipeline at reduced capacity in the first quarter of 2013, but returned to full capacity in 2014. Residential customer growth, combined with slightly increasing use per customer, drove residential sales. Additionally, propane shortages in the region likely contributed to the strong growth. As a result, we don't think this represents a sustainable growth trend. Weather-adjusted retail electric sales at PSCo increased 1.4%, primarily driven by higher average use in…

Operator

Operator

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Michael Weinstein with UBS.

Michael Weinstein

Analyst

Could you talk a little bit more about Black Dog and the process for getting a PPA there? What's going wrong with it? I think what we heard on the Calpine call was that they are now saying that this process might go into late 2014, maybe early '15.

Benjamin G. S. Fowke

Analyst

First, let me just clarify. Black Dog is our self-build option, and Calpine, of course would be the PPA, power purchase agreement option that we referred to. And what the Commission instructed us to do is basically negotiate with all parties' top line and energy and continue to look at our own options and present them the alternatives. Timeframe is later in the year.

Teresa S. Madden

Analyst

Yes, we're required to respond by October. So then, it would be deliberated on after that. So that timeline is probably fairly consistent.

Operator

Operator

And our next question is from the line of Paul Ridzon with KeyBanc.

Paul T. Ridzon - KeyBanc Capital Markets Inc., Research Division

Analyst

A question unrelated to the quarter, but just given what's happened at the Supreme Court with CASPR, kind of how should we book-end the potential impact on your capital plans?

Benjamin G. S. Fowke

Analyst

That's a great question, Paul. We were pretty concerned about that ruling, particularly in Texas. But a lot's happened since 2011. We've -- within SPS, we've added 700 megawatts of renewables. We've put on a more efficient gas plant in Jonesboro, we've put some abatement equipment on. And then given MATS and low gas prices across the nation, we've seen more retirements of coal plants. So the allowance market has increased significantly. So the bottom line is we don't see it as very significant to our capital plans. As a matter of fact, I mean, more to come on this. And I think it's going to be interesting to see what EPA ultimately does with this decision. But the bottom line is we think any gaps that we may have in compliance right now, we can probably meet with the purchase of allowances, which would be pretty minimal and with flow-through fuel recovery mechanisms that we have.

Paul T. Ridzon - KeyBanc Capital Markets Inc., Research Division

Analyst

And then just any update on Boulder?

Benjamin G. S. Fowke

Analyst

Not too much. There's been some administrative things. In April the city went -- did the first vote on forming a power and light utility. It's, I think it's part of the process they need to go through to be able to issue bonds. It's kind of part of the formal process. So we also continue to work with officials to try to craft some kind of solution that might work for both parties to avoid the municipalization, but right now that's the path we're on, and it's a long path. As we've talked about before, it's going to take more than 3 years probably to see all this through.

Operator

Operator

And our next question is from the line of Glen Pruitt with Wells Fargo.

Glen F. Pruitt - Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division

Analyst

My question has to do with the solar programs you mentioned in your planned remarks. Over the last several years, a lot of companies have offered solar and renewable options to customers. Primarily, they were focused on just offering some percentage of your bill from solar or other renewables. I was wondering if you could give me some idea how your programs are different from those programs? Because they haven't been well received by customers in a lot of places.

Benjamin G. S. Fowke

Analyst

I can't speak to other places, but our Windsource program has been extremely popular. And so we're trying to augment that particular program, starting in Colorado with the Solar*Connect program. It gives people that perhaps don't want to put panels on their roof or can't afford to or aren't in the right position because of their angle to the sun to have another option to have more renewable energy in their energy mix. So I think the -- I think our programs in the past have been well received. I think this program, the initial response is, well, it's generally favorable.

Teresa S. Madden

Analyst

Maybe I would just add to that. The Solar*Connect program we think will be also more cost-effective than adding just solar to rooftop. It would potentially be about half the cost, in terms of having centralized solar as the resource.

Benjamin G. S. Fowke

Analyst

Yes, I mean, that's our whole intention. That's how we've -- look, we are a leader in renewables. I mean, 10-year running as the #1 wind provider in a the United States. Supportive of solar across all of our territories. But we're also very diligent at bringing on renewables at the right price point for all customers, and we want to continue to do that. It's extremely important that we never lose sight of what we're trying to accomplish with renewables, which in my mind is reducing carbon in an efficient manner. And we want to do that as efficiently as possible, as transparently as possible and as fairly as possible to all customers.

Glen F. Pruitt - Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division

Analyst

Okay, and one follow-up question, not related. Considering some of the issues that are -- other utilities are having related to coal ash storage. Do you foresee any potential issues at your fossil plants and any possible future investment due to this new focus?

Benjamin G. S. Fowke

Analyst

No. Not really. Our disposals are quite a lot different than the issues you saw back on the East Coast. Clearly, we're going to watch and see if the EPA does turn around and classify coal ash as a hazard, that could drive up some expense. But the Ponnes themselves were in very good shape. As a matter of fact, EPA has given us very, very high marks for our Sherco plant, which would be the -- it's not close but it'd be the closest thing related to the some of the Ponne-ash disposal -- or Ponne-ash facilities on the East Coast.

Operator

Operator

[Operator Instructions] Our next question is from the line of Lauren Duke with Deutsche Bank.

Lauren B. Duke - Deutsche Bank AG, Research Division

Analyst

I wanted to ask about Colorado. You mentioned considering your options as your multiyear plan expires. And clearly, you guys are very happy with how the plan has turned out. What about the other parties to the settlement? I mean, do you get the sense that they are similarly pleased with how that worked out? Meaning, you think you could come forward with another multiyear settlement? And in the absence of a settlement, do you still feel comfortable that the Commission would be willing to approve one given what happened on the gas side?

Benjamin G. S. Fowke

Analyst

I think, by and large, the parties are happy with the multiyear plan. We -- you always have to go back and kind of review what you entered into and how it actually worked. We had some pleasant upside surprises, sales and tax things. Cost-containment that we initiated that really helped to make, I think, the multiyear plan work for all parties. I think the Commission is supportive of a multiyear plan. I also think, as Teresa mentioned, the drivers of what we need over the next several years, are really pretty specific. And it's recovery of the investments we're making under the Clean Air-Clean Jobs program. And it's recovery of property taxes. So I mean, the ask isn't going to be as big as I think parties maybe had perceived, and I think the pathway to settlement and the pathway to getting either a multiyear or a rider-type program in place, are, I think the prospects are pretty good.

Operator

Operator

Thank you. And I'm showing no further questions. I'll turn the call back to Teresa Madden for closing comments.

Teresa S. Madden

Analyst

Well, thanks, everyone. If you have any follow-up questions, please contact Paul Johnson and the IR team. Thank you.