AVISTA CORP quarterly report, Q2 FY2015

Avista Corporation — Q2 2015 Form 10-Q

Reporting period: Quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015. Avista is primarily a regulated electric and natural gas utility in the Pacific Northwest, with Alaska utility operations acquired July 1, 2014. Interim statements are unaudited and were reviewed by Deloitte; the review was not an audit.

Financial performance and position

MetricQ2 2015Q2 2014Six months 2015Six months 2014
Operating revenues$337.3 million$312.6 million$783.8 million$759.2 million
Income from continuing operations$25.1 million$31.3 million$71.5 million$78.7 million
Diluted EPS, continuing operations$0.40$0.52$1.14$1.31
Net income attributable to Avista shareholders$25.2 million$100.9 million$71.7 million$149.4 million
Operating cash flowNot provided for quarterNot provided for quarter$232.1 million$224.0 million
  • Revenue increased 7.9% in Q2 and 3.2% for the half year. Continuing income fell 19.8% and 9.1%, respectively; diluted continuing-operations EPS declined accordingly.
  • Prior-year reported net income included Ecova sale gains: 2014 discontinued-operations income attributable to Avista was $69.6 million for Q2 and $70.6 million for the first half. Ecova was sold June 30, 2014; its results make headline net-income comparisons non-comparable.
  • Avista Utilities’ gross margin, a non-GAAP measure, rose to $182.8 million from $174.6 million in Q2 and to $400.2 million from $391.7 million for the half year. Higher utility operating costs, depreciation, taxes, and pension costs offset margin improvement.
  • Six-month utility capital expenditures were $177.8 million; operating cash flow less utility capital expenditures was approximately $54.4 million. Cash declined to $16.2 million from $22.1 million at year-end.
  • At June 30, total debt was approximately $1.64 billion and debt was 52.0% of total capitalization. Shareholders’ equity was $1.51 billion. Avista had $90.0 million drawn on its $400 million revolver and $34.4 million in letters of credit, leaving $275.6 million available; it reported compliance with debt covenants.

Material changes and management commentary

  • Weather was a significant earnings factor: unusually warm first-quarter conditions reduced heating demand, partly offset by stronger second-quarter cooling loads. Washington decoupling mechanisms partially mitigated usage effects.
  • Q2 utility gross margin benefited from Washington rate increases and warmer-weather electric loads, but was affected by lower hydro generation and timing of Washington power-cost recovery. First-half margin benefited from lower net power supply costs and rate increases.
  • AEL&P contributed $0.9 million of net income in Q2 and $3.6 million in the first half; the prior-year comparable periods did not include its results.
  • Cash dividends declared were $0.33 per share in Q2 and $0.66 per share for the first half. The company repurchased 89,400 shares for $2.9 million under a program that ended March 31.

Outlook, regulatory matters, and risks

  • Management expected 2015 long-term debt issuance of up to $125 million and stated operating cash flows and committed credit facilities should provide adequate funding for planned expenditures, dividends, and commitments.
  • Expected capital expenditures: Avista Utilities approximately $375 million in 2015 and $350 million annually in 2016–2017; AEL&P approximately $15 million annually in 2015–2017.
  • Washington rate cases were pending. A partial settlement proposed a 7.29% return on rate base and reduced the requested electric revenue increase to $17.0 million (3.4%) and natural gas increase to $11.3 million (6.6%). UTC staff recommended disallowing $12.7 million of Washington Project Compass costs; management considered disallowance less than probable and intended to defend recovery.
  • Idaho rate cases filed in June requested staged electric and natural-gas increases for 2016 and 2017. Oregon approved a 2015 natural-gas rate settlement; AEL&P did not expect to file a rate case in 2015.
  • The new EPA coal-combustion-residuals rule led Avista to record an $11.7 million increase in asset-retirement obligations tied to its 15% interest in Colstrip Units 3 and 4. Future compliance and infrastructure costs were uncertain and could be material; the company expected to seek recovery through rates.
  • Other notable exposures include the Sierra Club/MEIC Clean Air Act litigation concerning Colstrip, with a liability trial set for November 2015 and loss considered reasonably possible but not estimable; and Seattle’s request for rehearing in the Pacific Northwest refund proceeding after FERC denied its claims. Management did not expect the latter to materially affect results.
  • Commodity-price and interest-rate volatility can create collateral demands. At June 30, the company had posted $28.0 million cash and $20.0 million letters of credit for energy derivatives, plus $22.4 million cash and $7.2 million letters of credit for interest-rate swaps. A credit downgrade below investment grade could trigger additional collateral requirements.
  • Other risks include regulatory cost recovery, weather and hydro conditions, wholesale-market and counterparty exposure, environmental requirements, pension costs, and potential disruption or collection delays associated with the customer information and work-management systems placed in service in February 2015.

Important facts for investors to verify

  • Track continuing-operations earnings separately from prior-year Ecova sale gains and account for AEL&P’s inclusion only after its July 2014 acquisition.
  • Monitor outcomes of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon rate proceedings, including Project Compass cost recovery and the resulting approved returns and rates.
  • Assess the eventual Colstrip coal-ash compliance plan, retirement and operating costs, and regulatory recovery; the initial $11.7 million obligation is subject to revision.
  • Review capital-spending and financing needs against operating cash generation, available revolver capacity, debt maturities, and collateral requirements.
  • Follow the Colstrip litigation and Seattle rehearing, as well as system-transition effects on customer collections and financial controls.