10-Q
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 |
|
|
|
o |
|
Transition report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 |
|
|
|
For the quarterly period ended: June 30, 2005
|
|
Commission File Number: 001-15891 |
NRG Energy, Inc.
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
41-1724239 |
(State or other jurisdiction
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
of incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification No.) |
|
|
|
211 Carnegie Center |
|
|
Princeton, New Jersey
|
|
08540 |
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip Code) |
(609) 524-4500
(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 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 is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12
b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports required to
be filed by Section 12, 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the
distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court.
Yes þ No o
As of August 3, 2005, there were 87,047,034 shares of common stock outstanding.
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Index
2
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward Looking Information
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of
Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. The words believes,
projects, anticipates, plans, expects, intends, estimates and similar expressions are
intended to identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements involve known and
unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause our actual results, performance and
achievements, or industry results, to be materially different from any future results, performance
or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statement. These factors, risks and
uncertainties include the factors described under Risks Related to
NRG Energy, Inc. in Item 1 of
the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K and the following:
|
|
|
Hazards customary to the power production industry and power generation operations such
as fuel and electricity price volatility, unusual weather conditions, catastrophic
weather-related or other damage to facilities, unscheduled generation outages, maintenance
or repairs, unanticipated changes to fossil fuel supply costs or availability due to higher
demand, shortages, transportation problems or other developments, environmental incidents,
or electric transmission or gas pipeline system constraints and the possibility that we may
not have adequate insurance to cover losses as a result of such hazards; |
|
|
|
|
Our potential inability to enter into contracts to sell power and procure fuel on terms and prices acceptable to us; |
|
|
|
|
The liquidity and competitiveness of wholesale markets for energy commodities; |
|
|
|
|
Changes in government regulation, including possible changes of market rules, market
structures and design, rates, tariffs, environmental laws and regulations and regulatory
compliance requirements; |
|
|
|
|
Price mitigation strategies and other market structures or designs employed by
independent system operators, or ISOs, or regional transmission organizations, or RTOs, that
result in a failure to adequately compensate our generation units for all of their costs; |
|
|
|
|
Our ability to borrow additional funds and access capital markets, as well as our
substantial indebtedness and the possibility that we may incur additional indebtedness going
forward; |
|
|
|
|
Significant operating and financial restrictions placed on us contained in the indenture
governing our 8% second priority senior secured notes due 2013, our amended and restated
credit facility as well as in debt and other agreements of certain of our subsidiaries and
project affiliates generally; and |
|
|
|
|
Our ability to complete the preferred stock issuance and
share repurchase as described in this Form 10-Q.
|
Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they were made, and we undertake no
obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new
information, future events or otherwise. The foregoing review of factors that could cause our
actual results to differ materially from those contemplated in any forward-looking statements
included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q should not be construed as exhaustive.
3
NRG ENERGY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
Six Months |
|
|
Ended |
|
Ended |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
(In thousands, except for per share amounts) |
Operating Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from majority-owned operations |
|
$ |
584,567 |
|
|
$ |
573,623 |
|
|
$ |
1,185,709 |
|
|
$ |
1,173,888 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Costs and Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of majority-owned operations |
|
|
436,470 |
|
|
|
353,258 |
|
|
|
889,392 |
|
|
|
735,011 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
47,749 |
|
|
|
53,168 |
|
|
|
96,173 |
|
|
|
108,174 |
|
General, administrative and development |
|
|
53,164 |
|
|
|
45,746 |
|
|
|
103,058 |
|
|
|
82,138 |
|
Other charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate relocation charges |
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
5,645 |
|
|
|
3,911 |
|
|
|
6,761 |
|
Reorganization items |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,661 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,589 |
|
Impairment charges |
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
1,676 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
1,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
538,062 |
|
|
|
456,832 |
|
|
|
1,092,757 |
|
|
|
937,349 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income |
|
|
46,505 |
|
|
|
116,791 |
|
|
|
92,952 |
|
|
|
236,539 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income (Expense) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in earnings of consolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
(407 |
) |
|
|
(201 |
) |
|
|
(881 |
) |
|
|
(709 |
) |
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates |
|
|
16,460 |
|
|
|
46,101 |
|
|
|
53,424 |
|
|
|
63,814 |
|
Write downs and gains/(losses) on sales of equity method investments |
|
|
11,561 |
|
|
|
1,205 |
|
|
|
11,561 |
|
|
|
(533 |
) |
Other income, net |
|
|
7,654 |
|
|
|
8,051 |
|
|
|
33,156 |
|
|
|
11,708 |
|
Refinancing expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,024 |
) |
|
|
(30,417 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
(50,560 |
) |
|
|
(66,225 |
) |
|
|
(106,551 |
) |
|
|
(128,954 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other expense |
|
|
(15,292 |
) |
|
|
(11,069 |
) |
|
|
(34,315 |
) |
|
|
(85,091 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income From Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes |
|
|
31,213 |
|
|
|
105,722 |
|
|
|
58,637 |
|
|
|
151,448 |
|
Income Tax Expense |
|
|
8,081 |
|
|
|
36,322 |
|
|
|
12,883 |
|
|
|
50,602 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income From Continuing Operations |
|
|
23,132 |
|
|
|
69,400 |
|
|
|
45,754 |
|
|
|
100,846 |
|
Income from discontinued operations, net of income taxes |
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
13,624 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
12,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
|
23,866 |
|
|
|
83,024 |
|
|
|
46,484 |
|
|
|
113,259 |
|
Preference stock dividends |
|
|
4,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,072 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Available for Common Stockholders |
|
$ |
19,666 |
|
|
$ |
83,024 |
|
|
$ |
38,412 |
|
|
$ |
113,259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Number of Common Shares Outstanding Basic |
|
|
87,046 |
|
|
|
100,080 |
|
|
|
87,045 |
|
|
|
100,051 |
|
Income From Continuing Operations per Weighted Average Common Share
Basic |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
|
$ |
1.01 |
|
Income From Discontinued Operations per Weighted Average Common
Share Basic |
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.14 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income per Weighted Average Common Share Basic |
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
$ |
0.83 |
|
|
$ |
0.44 |
|
|
$ |
1.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Number of Common Shares Outstanding Diluted |
|
|
87,775 |
|
|
|
100,478 |
|
|
|
87,729 |
|
|
|
100,214 |
|
Income From Continuing Operations per Weighted Average Common Share
Diluted |
|
$ |
0.21 |
|
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
|
$ |
0.42 |
|
|
$ |
1.01 |
|
Income From Discontinued Operations per Weighted Average Common
Share Diluted |
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.14 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income per Weighted Average Common Share Diluted |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
$ |
0.83 |
|
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
|
$ |
1.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
4
NRG ENERGY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
(unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
ASSETS
|
Current Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
823,161 |
|
|
$ |
1,110,045 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
87,248 |
|
|
|
112,824 |
|
Accounts receivable, less allowance for doubtful accounts |
|
|
313,660 |
|
|
|
272,101 |
|
Current portion of notes receivable |
|
|
25,100 |
|
|
|
85,447 |
|
Income taxes receivable |
|
|
38,877 |
|
|
|
37,484 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
228,995 |
|
|
|
248,010 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
59,524 |
|
|
|
79,759 |
|
Prepayments and other current assets |
|
|
294,062 |
|
|
|
169,608 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
1,262 |
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
1,871,889 |
|
|
|
2,118,288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation of $301,371 and $207,536 |
|
|
3,308,650 |
|
|
|
3,374,551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity investments in affiliates |
|
|
637,881 |
|
|
|
734,950 |
|
Notes receivable, less current portion, less reserve for uncollectible notes of $3,794 and $8,196 |
|
|
723,461 |
|
|
|
804,522 |
|
Intangible assets, net |
|
|
275,854 |
|
|
|
294,350 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
13,415 |
|
|
|
41,787 |
|
Funded letter of credit |
|
|
350,000 |
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
Other non-current assets |
|
|
100,514 |
|
|
|
111,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other assets |
|
|
2,101,125 |
|
|
|
2,337,189 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
7,281,664 |
|
|
$ |
7,830,028 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt and capital leases |
|
$ |
90,745 |
|
|
$ |
512,252 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
150,688 |
|
|
|
171,722 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
129,623 |
|
|
|
16,772 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
334 |
|
Other bankruptcy settlement |
|
|
177,424 |
|
|
|
175,576 |
|
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities |
|
|
237,903 |
|
|
|
209,923 |
|
Current liabilities discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,362 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
786,383 |
|
|
|
1,087,941 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt and capital leases |
|
|
3,120,206 |
|
|
|
3,253,866 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
109,438 |
|
|
|
134,325 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
153,464 |
|
|
|
148,445 |
|
Out-of-market contracts |
|
|
309,129 |
|
|
|
318,664 |
|
Other non-current liabilities |
|
|
195,309 |
|
|
|
187,438 |
|
Non-current liabilities discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,081 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-current liabilities |
|
|
3,887,546 |
|
|
|
4,043,819 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities |
|
|
4,673,929 |
|
|
|
5,131,760 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority Interest |
|
|
7,084 |
|
|
|
6,104 |
|
Commitments and Contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4% Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock; $.01 par value; 10,000,000 shares authorized, 420,000
outstanding at June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004 (shown at liquidation value, net of issuance
costs) |
|
|
406,155 |
|
|
|
406,359 |
|
Common Stock; $.01 par value; 500,000,000 shares authorized; 87,045,104 and 87,041,935
outstanding at June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
2,423,636 |
|
|
|
2,417,021 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
235,054 |
|
|
|
196,642 |
|
Less treasury stock, at cost 13,000,000 shares |
|
|
(405,312 |
) |
|
|
(405,312 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income/(loss) |
|
|
(59,882 |
) |
|
|
76,454 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
2,600,651 |
|
|
|
2,692,164 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
$ |
7,281,664 |
|
|
$ |
7,830,028 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
5
NRG ENERGY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
For the Three and Six Months Ended June 30, 2005 and June 30, 2004
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Serial Preferred |
|
Common |
|
Paid-in |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Stockholders |
|
(In thousands) |
|
Stock |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Income/(loss) |
|
|
Equity |
|
Balances at March 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,406,771 |
|
|
$ |
41,260 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3,176 |
) |
|
$ |
2,445,855 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83,024 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83,024 |
|
Foreign currency
translation adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(33,520 |
) |
|
|
(33,520 |
) |
Deferred unrealized gain
on derivatives, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,739 |
|
|
|
36,739 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86,243 |
|
Equity based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
3,980 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,980 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at June 30, 2004 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
|
100,007 |
|
|
$ |
2,410,751 |
|
|
$ |
124,284 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
43 |
|
|
$ |
2,536,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at March 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
406,306 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
|
87,045 |
|
|
$ |
2,420,982 |
|
|
$ |
215,388 |
|
|
$ |
(405,312 |
) |
|
$ |
(28,274 |
) |
|
$ |
2,610,090 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,866 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,866 |
|
Foreign currency
translation adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26,923 |
) |
|
|
(26,923 |
) |
Deferred unrealized loss
on derivatives, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,685 |
) |
|
|
(4,685 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,742 |
) |
Issue costs |
|
|
(151 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(151 |
) |
4% preferred stock dividend |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,200 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,200 |
) |
Equity based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,654 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,654 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at June 30, 2005 |
|
$ |
406,155 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
|
87,045 |
|
|
$ |
2,423,636 |
|
|
$ |
235,054 |
|
|
$ |
(405,312 |
) |
|
$ |
(59,882 |
) |
|
$ |
2,600,651 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Serial Preferred |
|
|
Common |
|
|
Paid-in |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Stockholders |
|
(In thousands) |
|
Stock |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Income/(loss) |
|
|
Equity |
|
Balances at December 31,
2003 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,403,429 |
|
|
$ |
11,025 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
21,802 |
|
|
$ |
2,437,256 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
113,259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
113,259 |
|
Foreign currency
translation adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35,933 |
) |
|
|
(35,933 |
) |
Deferred unrealized gain
on derivatives, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,174 |
|
|
|
14,174 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91,500 |
|
Equity based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7,322 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,322 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at June 30, 2004 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
|
100,007 |
|
|
$ |
2,410,751 |
|
|
$ |
124,284 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
43 |
|
|
$ |
2,536,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at December 31,
2004 |
|
$ |
406,359 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
|
87,042 |
|
|
$ |
2,417,021 |
|
|
$ |
196,642 |
|
|
$ |
(405,312 |
) |
|
$ |
76,454 |
|
|
$ |
2,692,164 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,484 |
|
Foreign currency
translation adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,764 |
) |
|
|
(49,764 |
) |
Deferred unrealized loss
on derivatives, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(86,572 |
) |
|
|
(86,572 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(89,852 |
) |
Issue costs |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(204 |
) |
4% preferred stock dividend |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,072 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,072 |
) |
Equity based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
6,615 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,615 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances at June 30, 2005 |
|
$ |
406,155 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
|
87,045 |
|
|
$ |
2,423,636 |
|
|
$ |
235,054 |
|
|
$ |
(405,312 |
) |
|
$ |
(59,882 |
) |
|
$ |
2,600,651 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
6
NRG ENERGY, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
Cash Flows from Operating Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
46,484 |
|
|
$ |
113,259 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions in excess of equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates |
|
|
15,925 |
|
|
|
4,751 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
96,173 |
|
|
|
113,499 |
|
Reserve for note and interest receivable |
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Amortization of debt issuance costs and debt discount |
|
|
4,958 |
|
|
|
16,543 |
|
Write-off of deferred financing costs/(debt premium) |
|
|
(8,413 |
) |
|
|
15,312 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(3,625 |
) |
|
|
49,384 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
881 |
|
|
|
2,089 |
|
Unrealized (gains)/losses on derivatives |
|
|
81,710 |
|
|
|
(21,458 |
) |
Asset impairment |
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
1,676 |
|
Write downs and (gains)/losses on sales of equity method investments |
|
|
(11,561 |
) |
|
|
533 |
|
Gain on TermoRio settlement |
|
|
(13,532 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,012 |
) |
Amortization of power contracts and emission credits |
|
|
15,140 |
|
|
|
34,517 |
|
Amortization of unearned equity compensation |
|
|
4,718 |
|
|
|
7,322 |
|
Cash used by changes in working capital, net of disposition affects |
|
|
(137,464 |
) |
|
|
(7,058 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities |
|
|
91,519 |
|
|
|
317,357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Investing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds on sale of equity method investments |
|
|
64,575 |
|
|
|
29,693 |
|
Proceeds on sale of discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,190 |
|
Return of capital from (investments in) equity method investments and projects |
|
|
1,291 |
|
|
|
(566 |
) |
Decrease in notes receivable, net |
|
|
92,904 |
|
|
|
15,208 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
(36,537 |
) |
|
|
(64,676 |
) |
Increase/(decrease) in restricted cash and trust funds, net |
|
|
26,313 |
|
|
|
(37,291 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided by Investing Activities |
|
|
148,546 |
|
|
|
1,558 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Financing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net |
|
|
204,141 |
|
|
|
490,631 |
|
Payment of dividends to preferred stockholders |
|
|
(8,072 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Deferred debt issuance costs |
|
|
(1,582 |
) |
|
|
(8,497 |
) |
Issuance expense of preferred shares |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Principal payments on short and long-term debt |
|
|
(721,548 |
) |
|
|
(567,806 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Used by Financing Activities |
|
|
(527,265 |
) |
|
|
(85,672 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Cash from Discontinued Operations |
|
|
1,685 |
|
|
|
10,822 |
|
Effect of Exchange Rate Changes on Cash and Cash Equivalents |
|
|
(1,369 |
) |
|
|
25,588 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents |
|
|
(286,884 |
) |
|
|
269,653 |
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period |
|
|
1,110,045 |
|
|
|
551,223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period |
|
$ |
823,161 |
|
|
$ |
820,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
7
NRG ENERGY, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note 1 General
NRG Energy, Inc., or NRG Energy, the Company, we, our, or us, is a wholesale power
generation company, primarily engaged in the ownership and operation of power generation
facilities, the transacting in and trading of fuel and transportation services, and the marketing
and trading of energy, capacity and related products in the United States and internationally.
Note 2 Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commissions regulations for interim
financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q. Accordingly, they do not include all
of the information and notes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete
financial statements. The accounting policies we follow are set forth in Note 2, Summary of
Significant Accounting Policies, to the Companys financial statements in our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004. The following notes should be read in conjunction with
such policies and other disclosures in the Form 10-K. Interim results are not necessarily
indicative of results for a full year.
In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited interim condensed consolidated
financial statements contain all material adjustments (consisting of normal, recurring accruals)
necessary to fairly present our consolidated financial position as of June 30, 2005, the results of
our operations and stockholders equity for the six months and three months ended June 30, 2005 and
2004, and our cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004. Certain prior-year
amounts have been reclassified for comparative purposes.
Restricted Cash
Restricted cash consists primarily of funds held to satisfy the requirements of certain debt
agreements and funds held within our projects that are restricted in their use. These funds are
used to pay for current operating expenses and current debt service payments, per the restrictions
of the debt agreements.
Accounting Estimates
Management of the Company is required to make certain estimates and assumptions during the
preparation of the consolidated financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles. These estimates and assumptions impact the reported amount of assets and
liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the consolidated
financial statements. They also impact the reported amount of net earnings during any period.
Actual results could differ from those estimates.
New Accounting Pronouncements
During the period, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Interpretation No.
47 (FIN 47) to Financial Accounting Standard No. 143 (SFAS No. 143) governing the application of
Asset Retirement Obligations. FIN 47 clarifies the term conditional asset retirement obligation
as used in SFAS No. 143. SFAS No. 143 refers to a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement
activity in which the timing and/or method of settlement are conditional on a future event that may
or may not be within the control of the entity. The obligation to perform the asset retirement
activity is unconditional but there may remain some uncertainty as to the timing and/or method of
settlement. Accordingly, an entity is required to recognize a liability for the fair value of a
conditional asset retirement obligation if the fair value of the liability can be reasonably
estimated. The fair value of a liability for the conditional asset retirement obligation should be
recognized when incurred generally upon acquisition, construction, or development and/or through
the normal operation of the asset. SFAS No. 143 acknowledges that in some cases, sufficient
information may not be available to reasonably estimate the fair value of an asset retirement
obligation. FIN 47 clarifies when the company would have sufficient information to reasonably
estimate the fair value of an asset retirement obligation. FIN 47 is effective for fiscal years
ending after December 15, 2005 and we are currently evaluating the impact of this guidance.
8
Also during the period, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin 107 (SAB 107) which addresses
the application of SFAS No. 123(R). SAB 107 was issued to assist registrants by simplifying some of
the implementation challenges of SFAS No. 123(R) while enhancing the information that investors
receive. SAB 107 creates a framework that is premised on two overarching themes considerable
judgment will be required by preparers to successfully implement SFAS No. 123(R), specifically when
valuing employee stock options, and that reasonable individuals, acting in good faith, may conclude
differently on the fair value of employee stock options. Accordingly, situations in which there is
only one acceptable fair value estimate are expected to be rare. In addition, the SEC extended the
adoption date to registrants for the implementation of SFAS No. 123(R) and SAB 107 so that they may
implement this guidance for their fiscal year which begins after June 15, 2005.
On March 17, 2005, the Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) issued EITF Issue No. 04-6 (EITF
04-6). EITF 04-6 provides that stripping costs incurred during the production phase of a mine are
variable production costs that should be included in the costs of the inventory produced during the
period that the stripping costs are incurred. EITF 04-6 is effective for the first reporting
period in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. Our MIBRAG equity investment is a 50%
interest in a mining company, which will be negatively affected by this pronouncement. Currently,
MIBRAG has an asset totaling 153 million, approximately $185.4 million, representing the
stripping costs incurred during production as of June 30, 2005. We are currently evaluating
the implementation of this guidance.
Also during the period, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154 Accounting Changes and Error Correctionsa
replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3 (SFAS No. 154). This Statement
replaces APB Opinion No. 20, Accounting Changes, and FASB Statement No. 3, Reporting Accounting
Changes in Interim Financial Statements, and changes the requirements for the accounting for and
reporting of a change in accounting principle. This Statement applies to all voluntary changes in
accounting principle. It also applies to changes required by an accounting pronouncement in the
unusual instance that the pronouncement does not include specific transition provisions. When a
pronouncement includes specific transition provisions, those provisions should be followed. APB
Opinion No. 20 previously required that most voluntary changes in accounting principle be
recognized by including in net income of the period of the change the cumulative effect of changing
to the new accounting principle. This Statement requires retrospective application to prior
periods financial statements of changes in accounting principle for direct effects of the change,
unless it is impracticable to determine either the period-specific effects or the cumulative effect
of the change, and redefines restatement as the revising of previously issued financial statements
to reflect the correction of an error. This Statement shall be effective for accounting
changes and corrections of errors made in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005.
Also during the period, the FASB issued Staff Position 150-1 Issuers Accounting under
FASB Statement No. 150 for Freestanding and Other Similar Instruments on Shares That Are
Redeemable (FSP FAS 150-1). This Staff Position clarifies the application of paragraph 11 of SFAS
No. 150, Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of both Liabilities and
Equity (SFAS No. 150), and requires classification as a liability of warrants for an issuers
equity shares that are puttable under paragraph 11 of SFAS No. 150 because the warrants embody
obligations to repurchase the issuers shares and may require a transfer of assets. The guidance
in FSP FAS 150-1 applies to the first reporting period beginning after June 30, 2005. If the
guidance in this FSP results in changes to previously reported information, the cumulative effect
shall be reported according to the transition provisions of SFAS No. 150 in the first reporting
period beginning after June 30, 2005. Currently, this guidance does not materially affect our
consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
On July 12, 2005, the FASB issued Staff Position APB 18-1, Accounting by an Investor for Its
Proportionate Share of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income of an Investee Accounted for under
the Equity Method in Accordance with APB Opinion No. 18 upon a Loss of Significant Influence (FSP
APB 18-1). This guidance clarifies the application of paragraph 121 of SFAS No. 130, Reporting
Comprehensive Income (SFAS No. 130), and clarifies that the companys proportionate share of an
investees equity adjustments for OCI should be offset against the carrying value of the investment
at the time significant influence is lost. To the extent that the offset results in a carrying
value of the investment that is less than zero, an investor should (a) reduce the carrying value of
the investment to zero and (b) record the remaining balance in income. The guidance in FSP APB
18-1 is effective as of the first reporting period after July 12, 2005. Currently, this guidance
does not materially affect our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
Note 3 Discontinued Operations
We have classified certain business operations, and gains/(losses) recognized on sale, as
discontinued operations for projects that were sold or have met the required criteria for such
classification. The financial results for all of these businesses have been accounted
9
for as discontinued operations. Accordingly, current period operating results and prior
periods have been restated to report the operations as discontinued.
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, or SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment
or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets requires that discontinued operations be valued on an
asset-by-asset basis at the lower of carrying amount or fair value less costs to sell. In applying
those provisions, our management considered cash flow analyses and offers related to the assets and
businesses. This amount is included in income/(loss) from discontinued operations, net of income
taxes in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations. In accordance with SFAS
No. 144, assets held for sale will not be depreciated commencing with their classification as such.
The assets and liabilities reported in the balance sheet as of December 31, 2004 as
discontinued operations represent those of NRG McClain. The assets of NRG McClain were sold in July
2004 however certain assets and liabilities remained to effect its liquidation and on April 29,
2005, we settled all outstanding obligations of NRG McClain. All other projects were sold as of
December 31, 2004.
For the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, discontinued operations consisted of
activity related to NRG McClain as noted above. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2004,
discontinued operations included our NRG McClain LLC; Penobscot Energy Recovery Company, or PERC;
Compania Boliviana De Energia Electrica S.A. Bolivian Power Company Limited, or Cobee; Hsin Yu, LSP
Energy (Batesville) and four NEO Corporation projects (NEO Nashville LLC, NEO Hackensack LLC, NEO
Prima Deshecha and NEO Tajiguas LLC). McClain, PERC and LSP Energy (Batesville) are included in our
Wholesale Power Generation Other North America segment. Cobee and Hsin Yu are included in the All
Other Other International segment and the four NEO projects are included in the All Other -
Alternative Energy segment.
Summarized results of operations of discontinued operations were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Six Months |
|
|
Six Months |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Operating revenues |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
43,309 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
102,185 |
|
Pre-tax
income from operations of discontinued
operations |
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
1,732 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
1,502 |
|
Income on discontinued operations, net of income taxes |
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
13,624 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
12,413 |
|
Note 4 Write Downs and Gains/(Losses) on Sales of Equity Method Investments
Write downs and gains/(losses) on sales of equity method investments recorded in the condensed
consolidated statement of operations include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Six Months |
|
|
Six Months |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Enfield |
|
$ |
11,561 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
11,561 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Calpine Cogeneration |
|
|
|
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
735 |
|
Loy Yang |
|
|
|
|
|
|
705 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,268 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total write downs
and gains/(losses)
on sales of equity
method investments |
|
$ |
11,561 |
|
|
$ |
1,205 |
|
|
$ |
11,561 |
|
|
$ |
(533 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enfield On April 1, 2005, we completed the sale of our 25% interest in Enfield to
Infrastructure Alliance Limited. The sale resulted in net pre-tax proceeds of $64.6 million. A
pre-tax gain of approximately $11.6 million was recorded in the second quarter of 2005.
Calpine Cogeneration In January 2004, we executed an agreement to sell our 20% interest in
Calpine Cogeneration Corporation to Calpine Power Company. The transaction closed in March 2004 and
resulted in net cash proceeds of $2.5 million and a net gain of $0.2 million. During the second
quarter of 2004, we received additional consideration on the sale of $0.5 million, resulting in an
adjusted net gain of $0.7 million.
10
Loy Yang During the first quarter of 2004, we wrote down our investment in Loy Yang by $2.0
million due to recent estimates of the expected sales proceeds. In April 2004, we completed the
sale of our 25.4% interest in Loy Yang to Great Energy Alliance Corporation, which resulted in net
cash proceeds of $26.7 million and a gain of $0.7 million. This resulted in an adjusted loss of
$1.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004.
Note 5 Corporate Relocation Charges
On March 16, 2004, we announced plans to implement a new regional business strategy and
structure. The new plan called for a reorganized management structure and corporate headquarters
relocation to Princeton, New Jersey. The transition of our corporate headquarters was completed in
December 2004.
For the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, we recorded $3.9 million and $6.8 million,
respectively, for charges related to our corporate relocation activities, primarily for employee
severance and termination benefits, employee related transition costs and lease termination costs.
These charges are classified separately in our statement of operations, in accordance with SFAS No.
146, Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities. Relocation charges for the
year ended December 31, 2004 were $16.2 million. We expect to incur an additional $1.0 million in
the third and fourth quarters of 2005 of SFAS No. 146-classified expenses in connection with
corporate relocation charges for a total of $21.1 million.
A summary of the SFAS No. 146-classified expenses is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Yet to be |
|
|
Expected |
|
|
December 31, 2004 |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
Incurred |
|
|
Total Charges |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Employee related transition costs |
|
$ |
8,595 |
|
|
$ |
931 |
|
|
$ |
424 |
|
|
$ |
9,950 |
|
Severance and termination benefits |
|
|
6,505 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,677 |
|
Lease termination costs |
|
|
1,067 |
|
|
|
2,808 |
|
|
|
554 |
|
|
|
4,429 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total corporate relocation charges |
|
$ |
16,167 |
|
|
$ |
3,911 |
|
|
$ |
978 |
|
|
$ |
21,056 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A summary of the significant components of the restructuring liability is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at |
|
|
Restructuring |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
Related |
|
|
Cash Receipts/ |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Charges |
|
|
(Payments) |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Employee related transition costs |
|
$ |
(1,425 |
) |
|
$ |
931 |
|
|
$ |
452 |
|
|
$ |
(42 |
) |
Severance and termination benefits |
|
|
4,939 |
|
|
|
507 |
|
|
|
(4,895 |
) |
|
|
551 |
|
Lease termination costs |
|
|
796 |
|
|
|
2,808 |
|
|
|
(631 |
) |
|
|
2,973 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
4,310 |
|
|
$ |
4,246 |
|
|
$ |
(5,074 |
) |
|
$ |
3,482 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of June 30, 2005, the restructuring liability was $3.5 million the majority of which is
included in other current liabilities on the condensed consolidated balance sheet. The
restructuring liability excludes pension curtailment gains of $0.8 million and $0.3 million which
was credited to the corporate relocation charge for the 2004 fiscal year and six months ended June
30, 2005, respectively. All restructuring costs are recorded at our corporate level within our All
Other Other segment, in the corporate relocation charges line on the consolidated statement of
operations. Severance and termination benefits require that cash payments be made through the
fourth quarter of 2005. Lease termination costs require that cash payments be made through the
fourth quarter of 2006.
Note 6 Investments Accounted for by the Equity Method
We have a 50% interest in one company, West Coast Power, or WCP, which was considered
significant, as defined by applicable SEC regulations.
West Coast Power LLC Summarized Results of Operations
For the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, we recorded equity earnings of $4.4 million
and $8.5 million, respectively, for WCP after adjustments for the reversal of $3.1 million and $6.3
million, respectively, of project level depreciation expense. For the three and six months ended
June 30, 2004, we recorded equity earnings of $21.9 million and $27.9 million, respectively, after
11
adjustments for the reversal of $5.6 million and $7.6 million, respectively, of project level
depreciation expense, offset by a decrease in earnings related to $30.6 million and $61.6 million,
respectively, of amortization of the intangible asset for the California Department of Water
Resources, or CDWR contract. As discussed in Note 13, Investments Accounted for by the Equity
Method, in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, the amortization of
an intangible is a result of pushing down the impact of Fresh Start to the projects balance sheet,
as we established a contract-based intangible asset with a one-year remaining life, consisting of
the value of WCPs CDWR energy sales contract. The following table summarizes financial
information for West Coast Power, including interests owned by us and other parties for the periods
shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Six Months Ended |
(In millions) |
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
June 30, 2004 |
Operating revenues |
|
$ |
72 |
|
|
$ |
185 |
|
|
$ |
158 |
|
|
$ |
352 |
|
Operating income |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
Income before tax |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
Note 7 Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 133),
as amended, requires us to recognize all derivative instruments on the balance sheet as either
assets or liabilities and measure them at fair value each reporting period. If certain conditions
are met, we may be able to designate our derivatives as cash flow hedges and defer the effective
portion of the change in fair value of the derivatives in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income
(OCI) and subsequently recognize in earnings when the hedged items impact income. The ineffective
portion of a cash flow hedge is immediately recognized in income.
For derivatives designated as hedges of the fair value of assets or liabilities, the changes
in fair value of both the derivatives and the hedged items are recorded in current earnings. The
ineffective portion of a hedging derivative instruments change in fair value will be immediately
recognized in earnings.
For derivatives that are neither designated as cash flow hedges or do not qualify for hedge
accounting treatment, the changes in the fair value will be immediately recognized in earnings.
Under the guidelines established by SFAS No. 133, as amended, certain derivative instruments may
qualify for the normal purchase and sale exception and are therefore exempt from fair value
accounting treatment. SFAS No. 133 applies to our energy related commodity contracts, interest
rate swaps and foreign exchange contracts.
As the Company engages principally in the trading and marketing of its generation assets, most
of our commercial activities qualify for hedge accounting under the requirements of SFAS No.133.
In order to so qualify, the physical generation and sale of electricity must be highly probable at
inception of the trade and throughout the period it is held, as is the case with our base-load coal
plants. For this reason, trades in support of the companys peaking units will not generally
qualify for hedge accounting treatment and any changes in fair value are likely to be reflected on
a mark-to-market basis in the statement of operations. The majority of trades in support of our
base-load coal units will normally qualify for hedge accounting treatment and any fair value
movements will be reflected in the balance sheet as part of Other Comprehensive Income.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (OCI)
The following table summarizes the effects of SFAS No. 133 on our OCI balance attributable to
hedged derivatives for the three months ended June 30, 2005 before income taxes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Foreign |
|
|
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
Currency |
|
|
Total |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Accumulated OCI balance at March 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
(87,043 |
) |
|
$ |
12,625 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(74,418 |
) |
Unwound from OCI during the period: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due to unwinding of previously deferred amounts |
|
|
1,036 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,295 |
|
Mark-to-market of hedge contracts (net of tax) |
|
|
9,301 |
|
|
|
(15,281 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,980 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated OCI balance at June 30, 2005 |
|
$ |
(76,706 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,397 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(79,103 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains/(Losses) expect to unwind from OCI during the
next 12 months |
|
|
(59,480 |
) |
|
|
5,735 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(53,745 |
) |
12
The following table summarizes the effects of SFAS No. 133 on our OCI balance attributable to
hedged derivatives for the six months ended June 30, 2005 before income taxes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Foreign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
Currency |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
Accumulated OCI balance at December 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
5,482 |
|
|
$ |
1,987 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
7,469 |
|
Unwound from OCI during the period: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due to unwinding of previously deferred amounts |
|
|
(1,719 |
) |
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(856 |
) |
Mark-to-market of hedge contracts (net of tax) |
|
|
(80,469 |
) |
|
|
(5,247 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(85,716 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated OCI balance at June 30, 2005 |
|
$ |
(76,706 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,397 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(79,103 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains/(Losses) expect to unwind from OCI during the
next 12 months |
|
|
(59,480 |
) |
|
|
5,735 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(53,745 |
) |
The following table summarizes the effects of SFAS No. 133 on our OCI balance attributable to
hedged derivatives for the three months ended June 30, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Foreign |
|
|
|
|
(Gains/(Losses) In thousands) |
|
Commodities |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
Currency |
|
|
Total |
|
Accumulated OCI balance at March 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
(15,271 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,817 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(23,088 |
) |
Unwound from OCI during period: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due to unwinding of previously deferred amounts |
|
|
9,408 |
|
|
|
3,272 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,680 |
|
Mark-to-market of hedge contracts |
|
|
(3,079 |
) |
|
|
27,138 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,059 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated OCI balance at June 30, 2004 |
|
$ |
(8,942 |
) |
|
$ |
22,593 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
13,651 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes the effects of SFAS No. 133 on our OCI balance attributable to
hedged derivatives for the six months ended June 30, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Foreign |
|
|
|
|
(Gains/(Losses) In thousands) |
|
Commodities |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
Currency |
|
|
Total |
|
Accumulated OCI balance at December 31, 2003 |
|
$ |
(1,953 |
) |
|
$ |
1,600 |
|
|
$ |
(170 |
) |
|
$ |
(523 |
) |
Unwound from OCI during period: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due to unwinding of previously deferred amounts |
|
|
8,784 |
|
|
|
7,058 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
16,012 |
|
Mark-to-market of hedge contracts |
|
|
(15,773 |
) |
|
|
13,935 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,838 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated OCI balance at June 30, 2004 |
|
$ |
(8,942 |
) |
|
$ |
22,593 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
13,651 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses of $1.3 million and gains of $0.9 million were reclassified from OCI to current period
earnings during the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 due to the unwinding of previously
deferred amounts. These amounts are recorded on the same line in the statement of operations in
which the hedged items are recorded. Also during the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 we
recorded losses in OCI of approximately $6.0 million and losses of $85.7 million, respectively,
related to changes in the fair values of derivatives accounted for as hedges. The net balance in
OCI relating to SFAS No. 133 as of June 30, 2005 was an unrecognized loss of approximately $79.1
million. We expect $53.7 million of deferred net losses on derivative instruments accumulated in
OCI to be recognized in earnings during the next twelve months.
Statement of Operations
The following tables summarize the pre-tax effects of non-hedge derivatives on our statement
of operations for the three months ended June 30, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign |
|
|
|
|
(Gains/(Losses) In thousands) |
|
Commodities |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
Currency |
|
|
Total |
|
Revenue from majority-owned subsidiaries |
|
$ |
5,604 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5,604 |
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of operations |
|
|
3,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total statement of operations impact before tax |
|
$ |
2,560 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2,560 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13
The following tables summarize the pre-tax effects of non-hedge derivatives on our statement
of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign |
|
|
(Gains/(Losses) In thousands) |
|
Commodities |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
Currency |
|
|
Total |
Revenue from majority-owned subsidiaries |
|
$ |
(81,609 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(81,609 |
) |
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
11,868 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,868 |
|
Cost of operations |
|
|
(1,384 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,384 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total statement of operations impact before tax |
|
$ |
(68,357 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(68,357 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following tables summarize the pre-tax effects of non-hedge derivatives and derivatives
that no longer qualify as hedges on our statement of operations for the three months ended June 30,
2004: |
|
|
|
Energy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign |
|
|
(Gains/(Losses) In thousands) |
|
Commodities |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
Currency |
|
|
Total |
Revenue from majority-owned subsidiaries |
|
$ |
6,572 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,572 |
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
9,733 |
|
|
|
560 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,293 |
|
Cost of operations |
|
|
1,129 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,129 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total statement of operations impact before tax |
|
$ |
15,176 |
|
|
$ |
560 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
15,736 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following tables summarize the pre-tax effects of non-hedge derivatives and derivatives
that no longer qualify as hedges on our statement of operations for the six months ended June 30,
2004: |
|
|
|
Energy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign |
|
|
(Gains/(Losses) In thousands) |
|
Commodities |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
Currency |
|
|
Total |
Revenue from majority-owned subsidiaries |
|
$ |
7,468 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
7,468 |
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
8,506 |
|
|
|
629 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,135 |
|
Cost of operations |
|
|
1,632 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,632 |
|
Other income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
411 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
411 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total statement of operations impact before tax |
|
$ |
14,342 |
|
|
$ |
1,040 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
15,382 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy Related Commodities
As part of our risk management activities, we manage the commodity price risk associated with
our competitive supply activities and the price risk associated with power sales from our electric
generation facilities. In doing so, we may enter into a variety of derivative and non-derivative
instruments, including the following:
|
|
|
Forward contracts, which commit us to purchase or sell energy commodities in the future. |
|
|
|
|
Futures contracts, which are exchange-traded standardized commitments to purchase or sell
a commodity or financial instrument. |
|
|
|
|
Swap agreements, which require payments to or from counter-parties based upon the
differential between two prices for a predetermined contractual (notional) quantity. |
|
|
|
|
Option contracts, which convey the right to buy or sell a commodity, financial
instrument, or index at a predetermined price. |
The objectives for entering into such hedges include:
|
|
|
Fixing the price for a portion of anticipated future electricity sales at a level that
provides an acceptable return on our electric generation operations. |
|
|
|
|
Fixing the price of a portion of anticipated fuel purchases for the operation of our power plants. |
|
|
|
|
Fixing the price of a portion of anticipated energy purchases to supply our load-serving customers. |
Ineffectiveness
will result from a difference in the relative price movements between
a financial transaction and the underlying physical pricing point. If
this difference is large enough, it will cause an entity to
discontinue the use of hedge accounting. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 our pre-tax earnings were affected by an
unrealized loss of $1.7 million due to the ineffectiveness associated with financial forward
contracted electric sales.
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, our pre-tax earnings were affected by an
unrealized gain of $2.6 million and unrealized losses of $80.2 million, respectively, associated
with changes in the fair value of energy related derivative instruments not accounted for as hedges
in accordance with SFAS No. 133. These amounts exclude the affect of unrealized gains and losses
recorded by equity investees.
14
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, our pre-tax earnings were increased by an
unrealized gain of $5.4 million and $5.8 million, respectively, associated with changes in the fair
value of energy related derivative instruments not accounted for as hedges in accordance with SFAS
No. 133. These amounts exclude the affect of unrealized gains and losses recorded by equity
investees.
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, we reclassified losses of $1.0 million
and gains of $1.7 million, respectively, from OCI to current period earnings and expect to
reclassify approximately $59.5 million of deferred losses to earnings during the next twelve months
on energy related derivative instruments accounted for as hedges.
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, we reclassified losses of $9.4 million
and $8.8 million, respectively, from OCI to current period earnings.
At June 30, 2005, we had hedge and non-hedge energy related commodity contracts extending
through March 2025.
Interest Rates
To manage interest rate risk, we have entered into interest-rate swap agreements that fix the
interest payments or the fair value of selected debt issuances. The qualifying swap agreements are
accounted for as cash flow or fair value hedges. The effective portion of the cash flow hedges
cumulative gains/losses are reported as a component of OCI in stockholders equity. These
gains/losses are recognized in earnings as the hedged interest expense is incurred. The
reclassification from OCI is included on the same line of the statement of operations in which the
hedged item appears. The entire amount of the change in fair value hedges is recorded in the
statement of operations along with the change in value of the hedged item. Any ineffectiveness on
interest rate swaps during the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 was immaterial to
our financial results.
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, pre-tax earnings were increased by an
unrealized gain of $0 million and $0.4 million, respectively, related to the change in fair value
of one interest rate related derivative instrument. This instrument is a $400 million floating to
fixed interest rate swap, which was not designated as an effective hedge of the expected cash flows
at March 31, 2004. As of April 1, 2004, this instrument was designated as a cash flow hedge under
SFAS No. 133. As a result, subsequent changes to its fair value will be deferred and recorded as
part of other comprehensive income.
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, we reclassified losses of $0.3 million
and $0.9 million, respectively, from OCI to current period earnings and expect to reclassify
approximately $5.7 million of deferred gains to earnings during the next twelve months associated
with interest rate swaps accounted for as hedges.
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, we reclassified losses of $3.3 million
and $7.1 million, respectively, from OCI to current period earnings and expect to reclassify
immaterial amounts to earnings during the next twelve months associated with interest rate swaps
accounted for as hedges.
At June 30, 2005, we had interest rate derivative instruments extending through June 2019.
Foreign Currency Exchange Rates
To preserve the U.S. dollar value of projected foreign currency cash flows, we may hedge, or
protect those cash flows if appropriate foreign hedging instruments are available. As of June 30,
2005, the results of any outstanding foreign currency exchange contracts were immaterial to our
financial results.
Note 8 Long-Term Debt
NRG Energy Corporate Debt
In January 2005 and March 2005, we used existing cash to purchase, at market prices, $25
million and $15.8 million, respectively, in face value of our Second Priority Notes. We paid $3.4
million in fees and market premiums on the repurchased notes which were recorded to refinancing
expense, and an additional $0.7 million of accrued interest.
15
On February 4, 2005, we redeemed $375.0 million in Second Priority Notes and paid $30.0
million for the early redemption premium on the redeemed notes which was recorded to refinancing
expense. In addition, we paid $4.1 million in accrued but unpaid interest on the redeemed notes
and $0.4 million in accrued but unpaid liquidated damages on the redeemed notes.
On June 17, 2005, we announced the commencement of a registered exchange offer to exchange up
to $1.35 billion aggregate principal amount of the 8% Second Priority Notes, which have been
registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, for all outstanding 8% Second Priority
Notes that were issued and sold by NRG in December 2003 and January 2004 in private placement
offerings. The sole purpose of this exchange offer was to fulfill our obligations with respect to
the registration of the notes issued in the private placements. The exchange offer expired on July
25, 2005 and closed on July 28, 2005.
As of June 30, 2005 and August 3, 2005, our $150.0 million corporate revolving credit facility
remained undrawn.
Certain Events Related to Project-Level Debt
In February 2005, NRG Flinders amended its debt facility of AUD 279.4 million (approximately
US $218.5 million) in floating-rate debt. The amendment extended the maturity to February 2017,
reduced borrowing costs and reserve requirements, reduced debt service coverage ratios, removed
mandatory cash sharing arrangements, and made other minor modifications to terms and conditions.
The facility includes an AUD 20.0 million (US $15.6 million) working capital and performance bond
facility, under which AUD 14.0 million (US $10.6 million) in performance bonds and letters of
credit have been issued as of June 30, 2005. An interim arrangement to indemnify ANZ of up to AUD
15.5 million (US $11.8 million) was terminated on May 17, 2005. NRG Flinders is required to
maintain interest-rate hedging contracts on a rolling 5-year basis at a minimum level of 60% of
principal outstanding. Upon execution of the amendment, a voluntary principal prepayment of AUD 50
million (US $39.1 million) was made. On March 31, 2005 Flinders made voluntary prepayments of AUD
10.5 million (US $8.1 million) and on June 30, 2005, Flinders made scheduled repayments of AUD
13.1 million (US $10 million), respectively, reducing the outstanding amount to AUD 185.8 million
(US $141.5 million). NRG Flinders retains the right to redraw these amounts at any time.
Note 9 Earnings Per Share
Basic earnings per common share were computed by dividing net income less accumulated
preferred stock dividends by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding. Shares
issued during the year are weighted for the portion of the year that they were outstanding. Diluted
earnings per share are computed in a manner consistent with that of basic earnings per share while
giving effect to all potentially dilutive common shares that were outstanding during the period.
The dilutive effect of the potential exercise of outstanding options to purchase shares of common
stock is calculated using the treasury stock method. The nonvested restricted stock units are not
considered outstanding for purposes of computing basic earnings per share; however these units are
included in the denominator for purposes of computing diluted earnings per share under the treasury
stock method. The deferred stock units are not considered outstanding for purposes of computing
basic earnings per share; however these units are included in the denominator for purposes of
computing diluted earnings per share under the if-converted method. The reconciliation of basic
earnings per common share to diluted earnings per common share is shown in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) |
Basic earnings per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
23,132 |
|
|
$ |
69,400 |
|
|
$ |
45,754 |
|
|
$ |
100,846 |
|
Preferred stock dividends |
|
|
(4,200 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,400 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income available to common stockholders from
continuing operations |
|
|
18,932 |
|
|
|
69,400 |
|
|
|
37,354 |
|
|
|
100,846 |
|
Discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
13,624 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
12,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income available to common stockholders |
|
$ |
19,666 |
|
|
$ |
83,024 |
|
|
$ |
38,084 |
|
|
$ |
113,259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding |
|
|
87,046 |
|
|
|
100,080 |
|
|
|
87,045 |
|
|
|
100,051 |
|
Basic earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
|
$ |
1.01 |
|
Discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.14 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
$ |
0.83 |
|
|
$ |
0.44 |
|
|
$ |
1.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) |
Diluted earnings per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income available to common stockholders from
continuing operations |
|
$ |
18,932 |
|
|
$ |
69,400 |
|
|
$ |
37,354 |
|
|
$ |
100,846 |
|
Discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
13,624 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
12,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income available to common stockholders |
|
$ |
19,666 |
|
|
$ |
83,024 |
|
|
$ |
38,084 |
|
|
$ |
113,259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding |
|
|
87,046 |
|
|
|
100,080 |
|
|
|
87,045 |
|
|
|
100,051 |
|
Incremental shares attributable to the issuance of
nonvested restricted stock units (treasury stock
method) |
|
|
396 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
378 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
Incremental shares attributable to the assumed
conversion of deferred stock units (if-converted
method) |
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
|
|
Incremental shares attributable to the issuance of
nonvested nonqualifying stock options (treasury
stock method) |
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total dilutive shares |
|
|
87,775 |
|
|
|
100,478 |
|
|
|
87,729 |
|
|
|
100,214 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.21 |
|
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
|
$ |
0.42 |
|
|
$ |
1.01 |
|
Discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.14 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
$ |
0.83 |
|
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
|
$ |
1.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three and six months ended June 30, 2005, outstanding preferred shares which are
convertible into 10,500,000 shares of common stock were not included in the computation because the
effect would be anti-dilutive. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, options to
purchase 770,751 and 786,751 shares of common stock at an average price of $23.66 and $23.61,
respectively, were not included in the computation because the effect would be anti-dilutive.
Note 10 Segment Reporting
We conduct the majority of our business within five reportable operating segments. All of our
other operations are presented under the All Other category. Our reportable operating segments
consist of Wholesale Power Generation Northeast, Wholesale
Power Generation South Central,
Wholesale Power Generation Western, Wholesale Power Generation
Other North America and
Wholesale Power Generation Australia. These reportable segments are distinct components with
separate operating results and management structures in place. Included in the All Other category
are our Wholesale Power Generation Other International operations, our Alternative Energy
operations, our Non Generation operations and an Other component which includes primarily our
corporate charges (primarily interest expense) that have not been allocated to the reportable
segments and the remainder of our operations which are not significant. We have presented this
detail within the All Other category, as we believe that this information is important to a full
understanding of our business.
Beginning January 1, 2005 management decided to change the allocation criteria of corporate
general and administrative expenses to the segments. Prior to 2005, corporate general and
administrative expenses were allocated based on an analysis of man hours spent on work for each
segment. As of January 1, 2005, corporate general and administrative expenses are allocated based
on the forecasted revenue to be generated by each segment. In the following table, we have included
a reconciliation of the increase/(decrease) in net income by segment for the three month period and
six month period ended June 30, 2005, assuming the prior allocation criteria was still in effect.
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, 2005 |
|
|
Wholesale Power Generation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
South |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other North |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
Alternative |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northeast |
|
|
Central |
|
|
Western |
|
|
America |
|
|
Australia |
|
|
International |
|
|
Energy |
|
|
Generation |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating revenues |
|
$ |
315,676 |
|
|
$ |
108,929 |
|
|
$ |
(25 |
) |
|
$ |
9,661 |
|
|
$ |
57,137 |
|
|
$ |
39,132 |
|
|
$ |
20,397 |
|
|
$ |
35,080 |
|
|
$ |
(1,420 |
) |
|
$ |
584,567 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
18,582 |
|
|
|
15,085 |
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
2,010 |
|
|
|
6,118 |
|
|
|
858 |
|
|
|
1,318 |
|
|
|
2,740 |
|
|
|
841 |
|
|
|
47,749 |
|
Equity in earnings of
unconsolidated affiliates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,367 |
|
|
|
1,843 |
|
|
|
5,578 |
|
|
|
1,680 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,460 |
|
Income/(loss) from
continuing operations before
income taxes |
|
|
39,473 |
|
|
|
(6,817 |
) |
|
|
5,906 |
|
|
|
(5,574 |
) |
|
|
5,355 |
|
|
|
22,506 |
|
|
|
3,294 |
|
|
|
2,371 |
|
|
|
(35,301 |
) |
|
|
31,213 |
|
Net income/(loss) from
continuing operations |
|
|
39,473 |
|
|
|
(6,817 |
) |
|
|
5,909 |
|
|
|
(6,701 |
) |
|
|
4,213 |
|
|
|
18,438 |
|
|
|
3,120 |
|
|
|
1,834 |
|
|
|
(36,337 |
) |
|
|
23,132 |
|
Net income from discontinued
operations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
Net income/(loss) |
|
|
39,473 |
|
|
|
(6,817 |
) |
|
|
5,909 |
|
|
|
(5,967 |
) |
|
|
4,213 |
|
|
|
18,438 |
|
|
|
3,120 |
|
|
|
1,834 |
|
|
|
(36,337 |
) |
|
|
23,866 |
|
|
Total assets |
|
|
2,046,441 |
|
|
|
1,067,915 |
|
|
|
289,093 |
|
|
|
767,037 |
|
|
|
826,997 |
|
|
|
947,180 |
|
|
|
46,327 |
|
|
|
676,357 |
|
|
|
614,317 |
|
|
|
7,281,664 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the Company continued using the previous years allocation method for corporate general and
administrative expenses, the effect to the net income of each segment for the three months ended
June 30, 2005 would be as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income/(loss) as reported |
|
$ |
39,473 |
|
|
$ |
(6,817 |
) |
|
$ |
5,909 |
|
|
$ |
(5,967 |
) |
|
$ |
4,213 |
|
|
$ |
18,438 |
|
|
$ |
3,120 |
|
|
$ |
1,834 |
|
|
$ |
(36,337 |
) |
|
$ |
23,866 |
|
Increase/(decrease) in net income |
|
|
6,766 |
|
|
|
3,561 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
(412 |
) |
|
|
1,712 |
|
|
|
1,090 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
1,327 |
|
|
|
(14,441 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted net income/(loss) |
|
$ |
46,239 |
|
|
$ |
(3,256 |
) |
|
$ |
5,931 |
|
|
$ |
(6,379 |
) |
|
$ |
5,925 |
|
|
$ |
19,528 |
|
|
$ |
3,495 |
|
|
$ |
3,161 |
|
|
$ |
(50,778 |
) |
|
$ |
23,866 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, 2004 |
|
|
Wholesale Power Generation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
South |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other North |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
Alternative |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northeast |
|
|
Central |
|
|
Western |
|
|
America |
|
|
Australia |
|
|
International |
|
|
Energy |
|
|
Generation |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating revenues |
|
$ |
275,029 |
|
|
$ |
102,497 |
|
|
$ |
929 |
|
|
$ |
29,587 |
|
|
$ |
36,793 |
|
|
$ |
39,374 |
|
|
$ |
18,781 |
|
|
$ |
72,712 |
|
|
$ |
(2,079 |
) |
|
$ |
573,623 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
17,382 |
|
|
|
14,572 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
6,930 |
|
|
|
6,886 |
|
|
|
613 |
|
|
|
1,289 |
|
|
|
2,729 |
|
|
|
2,564 |
|
|
|
53,168 |
|
Equity in earnings/(losses)
of unconsolidated affiliates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,100 |
|
|
|
2,069 |
|
|
|
3,534 |
|
|
|
15,878 |
|
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
46,101 |
|
Income/(loss) from
continuing operations before
income taxes |
|
|
56,230 |
|
|
|
16,494 |
|
|
|
23,237 |
|
|
|
(568 |
) |
|
|
(8,278 |
) |
|
|
26,263 |
|
|
|
4,266 |
|
|
|
44,152 |
|
|
|
(56,074 |
) |
|
|
105,722 |
|
Net income/(loss) from
continuing operations |
|
|
56,230 |
|
|
|
16,494 |
|
|
|
23,052 |
|
|
|
(977 |
) |
|
|
(4,908 |
) |
|
|
20,957 |
|
|
|
4,262 |
|
|
|
43,703 |
|
|
|
(89,413 |
) |
|
|
69,400 |
|
Net income on discontinued
operations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,915 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,237 |
|
|
|
(531 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
13,624 |
|
Net income/(loss) |
|
$ |
56,230 |
|
|
$ |
16,494 |
|
|
$ |
23,052 |
|
|
$ |
938 |
|
|
$ |
(4,908 |
) |
|
$ |
33,194 |
|
|
$ |
3,731 |
|
|
$ |
43,703 |
|
|
$ |
(89,410 |
) |
|
$ |
83,024 |
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, 2005 |
|
|
Wholesale Power Generation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
South |
|
|
|
|
|
Other North |
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
Alternative |
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northeast |
|
Central |
|
Western |
|
America |
|
Australia |
|
International |
|
Energy |
|
Generation |
|
Other |
|
Total |
|
|
(in thousands) |
Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating revenues |
|
$ |
648,136 |
|
|
$ |
226,075 |
|
|
$ |
150 |
|
|
$ |
14,808 |
|
|
$ |
105,923 |
|
|
$ |
82,169 |
|
|
$ |
35,343 |
|
|
$ |
75,958 |
|
|
$ |
(2,853 |
) |
|
$ |
1,185,709 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
37,191 |
|
|
|
30,227 |
|
|
|
395 |
|
|
|
4,003 |
|
|
|
12,712 |
|
|
|
1,654 |
|
|
|
2,634 |
|
|
|
5,479 |
|
|
|
1,878 |
|
|
|
96,173 |
|
Equity in earnings of
unconsolidated affiliates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,092 |
|
|
|
3,649 |
|
|
|
11,715 |
|
|
|
25,957 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,424 |
|
Income/(loss) from
continuing operations before
income taxes |
|
|
72,333 |
|
|
|
2,489 |
|
|
|
9,193 |
|
|
|
(10,511 |
) |
|
|
16,169 |
|
|
|
68,843 |
|
|
|
4,074 |
|
|
|
7,495 |
|
|
|
(111,448 |
) |
|
|
58,637 |
|
Net income/(loss) from
continuing operations |
|
|
72,333 |
|
|
|
2,489 |
|
|
|
9,168 |
|
|
|
(11,859 |
) |
|
|
14,393 |
|
|
|
60,706 |
|
|
|
3,658 |
|
|
|
6,943 |
|
|
|
(112,077 |
) |
|
|
45,754 |
|
Net income from discontinued
operations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
Net income/(loss) |
|
|
72,333 |
|
|
|
2,489 |
|
|
|
9,168 |
|
|
|
(11,129 |
) |
|
|
14,393 |
|
|
|
60,706 |
|
|
|
3,658 |
|
|
|
6,943 |
|
|
|
(112,077 |
) |
|
|
46,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the Company continued using the previous years allocation method for corporate general and
administrative expenses, the effect to the net income of each segment for the six months ended June
30, 2004 would be as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income/(loss) as reported |
|
$ |
72,333 |
|
|
$ |
2,489 |
|
|
$ |
9,168 |
|
|
$ |
(11,129 |
) |
|
$ |
14,393 |
|
|
$ |
60,706 |
|
|
$ |
3,658 |
|
|
$ |
6,943 |
|
|
$ |
(112,077 |
) |
|
$ |
46,484 |
|
Increase/(decrease) in net income |
|
|
13,355 |
|
|
|
7,111 |
|
|
|
(274 |
) |
|
|
(737 |
) |
|
|
3,406 |
|
|
|
2,168 |
|
|
|
757 |
|
|
|
2,796 |
|
|
|
(28,582 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted net income/(loss) |
|
$ |
85,688 |
|
|
$ |
9,600 |
|
|
$ |
8,894 |
|
|
$ |
(11,866 |
) |
|
$ |
17,799 |
|
|
$ |
62,874 |
|
|
$ |
4,415 |
|
|
$ |
9,739 |
|
|
$ |
(140,659 |
) |
|
$ |
46,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, 2004 |
|
|
Wholesale Power Generation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
South |
|
|
|
|
|
Other North |
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
Alternative |
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northeast |
|
Central |
|
Western |
|
America |
|
Australia |
|
International |
|
Energy |
|
Generation |
|
Other |
|
Total |
|
|
(in thousands) |
Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating revenues |
|
$ |
605,569 |
|
|
$ |
197,762 |
|
|
$ |
(2,393 |
) |
|
$ |
50,422 |
|
|
$ |
99,022 |
|
|
$ |
79,440 |
|
|
$ |
32,380 |
|
|
$ |
115,438 |
|
|
$ |
(3,752 |
) |
|
$ |
1,173,888 |
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
35,911 |
|
|
|
31,534 |
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
14,540 |
|
|
|
12,011 |
|
|
|
1,337 |
|
|
|
2,678 |
|
|
|
5,853 |
|
|
|
3,905 |
|
|
|
108,174 |
|
Equity in earnings/(losses)
of unconsolidated affiliates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,697 |
|
|
|
2,301 |
|
|
|
6,706 |
|
|
|
23,360 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
63,814 |
|
Income/(loss) from
continuing operations before
income taxes |
|
|
143,658 |
|
|
|
27,871 |
|
|
|
24,600 |
|
|
|
(10,470 |
) |
|
|
8,122 |
|
|
|
40,617 |
|
|
|
5,160 |
|
|
|
53,063 |
|
|
|
(141,173 |
) |
|
|
151,448 |
|
Net income/(loss) from
continuing operations |
|
|
143,658 |
|
|
|
27,871 |
|
|
|
24,263 |
|
|
|
(11,214 |
) |
|
|
8,228 |
|
|
|
31,167 |
|
|
|
5,152 |
|
|
|
52,437 |
|
|
|
(180,716 |
) |
|
|
100,846 |
|
Net income on discontinued
operations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
933 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,357 |
|
|
|
(877 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,413 |
|
|
Net income/(loss) |
|
$ |
143,658 |
|
|
$ |
27,871 |
|
|
$ |
24,263 |
|
|
$ |
(10,281 |
) |
|
$ |
8,228 |
|
|
$ |
43,524 |
|
|
$ |
4,275 |
|
|
$ |
52,437 |
|
|
$ |
(180,716 |
) |
|
$ |
113,259 |
|
19
Note 11 Income Taxes
Income tax expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 was $8.1 million and $12.9
million, respectively, compared to a tax expense of $36.3 million and $50.6 million, respectively,
for the corresponding periods in 2004. The income tax expense for the six months ended June 30,
2005 includes domestic tax expense of $2.8 million and foreign tax expense of $10.1 million. The
tax expense for the six months ended June 30, 2004 includes domestic tax expense of $41.0 million
and foreign tax expense of $9.6 million.
A reconciliation of the U.S. statutory rate to our effective tax rate from continuing
operations for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
Income From Continuing Operations Before
Income Taxes |
|
$ |
58,637 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
151,448 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax |
|
|
20,523 |
|
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
|
53,007 |
|
|
|
35.0 |
% |
State taxes |
|
|
(1,482 |
) |
|
|
(2.5 |
)% |
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
Foreign operations |
|
|
(21,807 |
) |
|
|
(37.2 |
)% |
|
|
(7,490 |
) |
|
|
(4.9 |
)% |
Permanent differences including subpart F income |
|
|
12,079 |
|
|
|
20.5 |
% |
|
|
1,109 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
% |
Other |
|
|
3,570 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
% |
|
|
3,609 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Tax Expense |
|
$ |
12,883 |
|
|
|
21.9 |
% |
|
$ |
50,602 |
|
|
|
33.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
U.S. income tax purposes, the Company generated additional net deferred tax assets of $35
million for the six months ended June 30, 2005 of which a full valuation allowance was applied due
to the uncertainty of utilization in future periods.
The effective income tax rate for the six months ended June 30, 2005 differs from the U.S.
statutory rate of 35% due to the US income inclusion upon the sale of Enfield and due to earnings
in foreign jurisdictions taxed at rates lower than the U.S. statutory rate.
We believe that it is more likely than not that a benefit will not be realized on a
substantial portion of our deferred tax assets. This assessment included consideration of positive
and negative evidence, our current financial position and results of current operations, projected
future taxable income, projected operating and capital gains and our available tax planning
strategies. As of June 30, 2005, a consolidated valuation allowance of $725.3 million was recorded
against the net deferred tax assets, including net operating loss, or NOL, carryforwards.
Pending our evaluation of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, management intends to
reinvest indefinitely the earnings from our foreign operations. Currently, our management is
reviewing their reinvestment plan pursuant to the Act which provides for a low tax cost on earnings
repatriated in 2005 and reinvested in the companys U.S. operations. We are presently estimating a
maximum cash balance amount of $307 million which could be remitted from foreign operations to the
U.S. by year end and resulting in a federal tax cost of 5.25% under the Act to the extent the
Company has earnings and profits. Pending our conclusive evaluation of the Companys cumulative
earnings and profits position, we cannot assess the range of income tax cost at this time.
As of June 30, 2005, there is no tax effect resulting from this legislation since management
has not concluded upon a repatriation plan. The Company expects to conclude on this issue by the
fourth quarter of 2005.
Note 12 Benefit Plans and Other Postretirement Benefits
Substantially all employees hired prior to December 5, 2003 were eligible to participate in
our defined benefit pension plans. We have initiated an NRG Energy noncontributory, defined benefit
pension plan effective January 1, 2004, with credit for service from December 5, 2003. In addition,
we provide postretirement health and welfare benefits (health care and death benefits) for certain
groups of our employees. Generally, these are groups that were acquired in recent years and for
whom prior benefits are being continued (at least for a certain period of time or as required by
union contracts). Cost sharing provisions vary by acquisition group and terms of any applicable
collective bargaining agreements.
20
NRG Energy Pension and Postretirement Medical Plans
Components of Net Periodic Benefit Cost
The components of net pension and postretirement benefit costs are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension Benefits |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Service cost benefits earned |
|
$ |
3,007 |
|
|
$ |
2,950 |
|
|
$ |
6,063 |
|
|
$ |
5,900 |
|
Interest cost on benefit obligation |
|
|
933 |
|
|
|
738 |
|
|
|
1,871 |
|
|
|
1,476 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
(81 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(162 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Curtailment gain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(335 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost |
|
$ |
3,859 |
|
|
$ |
3,688 |
|
|
$ |
7,437 |
|
|
$ |
7,376 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Benefits |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Service cost benefits earned |
|
$ |
487 |
|
|
$ |
465 |
|
|
$ |
975 |
|
|
$ |
930 |
|
Interest cost on benefit obligation |
|
|
731 |
|
|
|
630 |
|
|
|
1,462 |
|
|
|
1,260 |
|
Amortization of net (gain)/loss |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost |
|
$ |
1,237 |
|
|
$ |
1,095 |
|
|
$ |
2,475 |
|
|
$ |
2,190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 13 Commitments and Contingencies
Legal Issues
Set forth below is a description of our material legal proceedings. Pursuant to the
requirements of SFAS No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies, and related guidance, we record
reserves for estimated losses from contingencies when information available indicates that a loss
is probable and the amount of the loss is reasonably estimable. Because litigation is subject to
inherent uncertainties and unfavorable rulings or developments could occur, there can be no
certainty that we may not ultimately incur charges in excess of presently recorded reserves. A
future adverse ruling or unfavorable development could result in future charges which could have a
material adverse effect on NRG Energys consolidated financial position, results of operations or
cash flows.
With respect to a number of the items listed below, management has determined that a loss is
not probable or the amount of the loss is not reasonably estimable, or both. In some cases,
management is not able to predict with any degree of substantial certainty the range of possible
loss that could be incurred. Notwithstanding these facts, management has assessed each of these
matters based on current information and made a judgment concerning its potential outcome,
considering the nature of the claim, the amount and nature of damages sought and the probability of
success. Managements judgment may, as a result of facts arising prior to resolution of these
matters or other factors prove inaccurate and investors should be aware that such judgment is made
subject to the known uncertainty of litigation.
In addition to the legal proceedings noted below, we are parties to other litigation or legal
proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. In managements opinion, the disposition of
these ordinary course matters will not materially adversely affect our consolidated financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.
The Company believes that it has valid defenses to the legal proceedings and investigations
described below and intends to defend them vigorously. However, litigation is inherently subject to
many uncertainties. There can be no assurance that additional litigation will not be filed against
the Company or its subsidiaries in the future asserting similar or different legal theories and
seeking similar or different types of damages and relief. Unless specified below, the Company is
unable to predict the outcome of these legal proceedings and investigations may have or reasonably
estimate the scope or amount of any associated costs and potential liabilities. An unfavorable
outcome in one or more of these proceedings could have a material impact on the Companys
consolidated financial
21
position, results of operations or cash flows. The Company also has indemnity rights for some
of these proceedings to reimburse the Company for certain legal expenses and to offset certain
amounts deemed to be owed in the event of an unfavorable litigation outcome.
The descriptions below update, and should be read in conjunction with, the complete
descriptions under Note 27, Commitments and Contingencies, in NRG Energys Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2004.
California Wholesale Electricity Litigation and Related Investigations
We, West Coast Power, LLC, or WCP, WCPs four operating subsidiaries, Dynegy, Inc. and
numerous other unrelated parties are the subject of numerous lawsuits arising based on events
occurring in the California power market. Through our subsidiary, NRG West Coast Power LLC, we are
a 50 percent beneficial owner with Dynegy of WCP, which owns, operates and markets the power of
four California plants. Dynegy and its affiliates and subsidiaries are responsible for gas
procurement and marketing and trading activities on behalf of WCP. The complaints primarily allege
that the defendants engaged in unfair business practices, price fixing, antitrust violations, and
other market gaming activities. Certain of these lawsuits, which seek unspecified treble damages
and injunctive relief, were consolidated and made a part of a Multi-District Litigation proceeding
before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. In December 2002, the
district court found that federal jurisdiction was absent and remanded the cases back to state
court. On December 8, 2004, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district
court in most respects. On March 3, 2005, the Ninth Circuit denied a motion for rehearing. On May
5, 2005, the case was remanded to California state court and, under a scheduling order, defendants
filed their objections to the pleadings based on the filed rate doctrine and federal preemption. A
hearing is scheduled for September 9, 2005, and a decision is expected shortly thereafter. On July
22, 2005, the court dismissed NRG Energy, Inc. without prejudice leaving only subsidiaries of WCP
remaining in the case.
In the Northern California cases, on February 25, 2005, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the
district courts decision to dismiss all of the defendants cases.
In the lawsuit brought by the California Attorney General, after removal to federal court, on
March 25, 2003, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed the case
based upon federal preemption and the filed rate doctrine. On July 6, 2004, the Ninth Circuit
affirmed that dismissal and later rejected rehearing. On April 18, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court
denied the Attorney Generals petition for writ of certiorari thereby ending the case.
Regarding the remaining case, defendants filed dispositive motions in the fall of 2002. In the
first quarter of 2003 the judge granted motions to dismiss in certain of these cases based on
federal preemption and the filed rate doctrine. On September 10, 2004, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Courts dismissal. On November 5, 2004, the plaintiffs
filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court which, on June 27, 2005, denied
that petition thereby ending the case.
In addition to the cases discussed above, numerous other cases, including putative class
actions, have been filed in state and federal court on behalf of business and residential
electricity consumers which name us and/or WCP and/or certain subsidiaries of WCP, in addition to
numerous other defendants. The complaints allege the defendants attempted to manipulate gas
indexes by reporting false and fraudulent trades, and violated Californias antitrust law and
unfair business practices law. The complaints seek restitution and disgorgement, civil fines,
compensatory and punitive damages, attorneys fees and declaratory and injunctive relief. Motion
practice is proceeding in these cases and dispositive motions have been filed in several. In
certain of the above referenced cases, Dynegy is defending WCP and/or its subsidiaries pursuant to
a limited indemnification agreement while in the others, Dynegys counsel is representing it and
WCP and/or its subsidiaries with each party responsible for half of the costs. Where NRG Energy is
named, we are defending the case and bear our own costs of defense.
FERC Proceedings
There are a number of proceedings in which WCP and WCP subsidiaries are parties, which are
either pending before FERC or on appeal from FERC to various U.S. Courts of Appeal. These cases
involve, among other things, allegations of physical withholding, a FERC-established price
mitigation plan determining maximum rates for wholesale power transactions in certain spot markets,
and the enforceability of, and obligations under, various contracts with, among others, the
California Independent System Operator, the California Department of Water Resources, or CDWR, and
the State of California. Among these is a demand by the State of California for FERC to abrogate
the CDWR contract between the State and subsidiaries of WCP. In 2003, FERC rejected this demand and
denied rehearing. The case was appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit where
oral argument was held December 8, 2004.
22
California Attorney General
The California Attorney General has undertaken an investigation entitled In the Matter of the
Investigation of Possibly Unlawful, Unfair, or Anti-Competitive Behavior Affecting Electricity
Prices in California. Dynegy, we and subsidiaries of WCP have responded to interrogatories,
document requests, and to requests for interviews.
NRG Bankruptcy Cap on California Claims
On November 21, 2003, in conjunction with confirmation of the NRG plan of reorganization, we
reached an agreement with the Attorney General and the State of California, generally, whereby for
purposes of distributions, if any, to be made to the State of California under the NRG plan of
reorganization, the liquidated amount of any and all allowed claims shall not exceed $1.35 billion
in the aggregate. The agreement neither affects our right to object to these claims on any and all
grounds nor admits any liability whatsoever. We further agreed to waive any objection to the
liquidation of these claims in a non-bankruptcy forum having proper jurisdiction.
New York Operating Reserve Markets
Consolidated Edison and others petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit for review of FERCs refusal to order a re-determination of prices in the New York
Independent System Operator, or NYISO, operating reserve markets for a two month period in 2000. On
November 7, 2003, the court found that NYISOs method of pricing spinning reserves violated the
NYISO tariff. On March 4, 2005, FERC issued an order stating that no refunds would be required for
the tariff violation associated with the pricing of spinning reserves. In the order, FERC also
stated that the exclusion of the Blenheim-Gilboa facility and western reserves from the
non-spinning market was not a market flaw and NYISO was correct not to use its TEP authority to
revise the prices in this market. A motion for rehearing of the Order was filed before the April 3,
2005 deadline, and on May 4, 2005, FERC issued an order staying the time period for deciding the
motion. If the March 4, 2005 order is reversed and refunds are required, NRG entities which may be
affected include NRG Power Marketing, Inc., or PMI, Astoria Gas Turbine Power LLC and Arthur Kill
Power LLC. Although non-NRG-related entities would share responsibility for payment of any such
refunds, under the petitioners theory the cumulative exposure to our above-listed entities could
exceed $23 million.
Connecticut Congestion Charges
On November 28, 2001, CL&P sought recovery of amounts it claimed was owed for congestion
charges. CL&P withheld approximately $30 million from amounts owed to PMI under an October 29,
1999, contract and PMI counterclaimed. CL&Ps motion for summary judgment, which PMI opposed,
remains pending. We cannot estimate at this time the overall exposure for congestion charges for
the term of the contract prior to the implementation of standard market design which occurred on
March 1, 2003, however, such amount has been fully reserved as a reduction to outstanding accounts
receivable.
New York Environmental Settlement
In January 2002, the New York Department of Environmental Conservation, or NYSDEC, sued
Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, or NiMo, and us in federal court in New York asserting that
projects undertaken at our Huntley and Dunkirk plants by NiMo, the former owner of the facilities,
violated federal and state laws. On January 11, 2005, we reached an agreement to settle this matter
whereby we will reduce levels of sulfur dioxide by over 86 percent and nitrogen oxide by over 80
percent in aggregate at the Huntley and Dunkirk plants. We are not subject to any penalty as a
result of the settlement. Through the end of the decade, we expect that our ongoing compliance with
the emissions limits set out in the settlement will be achieved through capital expenditures
already planned. This includes our conversion to low sulfur western coal at the Huntley and Dunkirk
plants that will be completed by spring 2006. On April 6, 2005, NYSDEC filed a motion with the
court to enter the Consent Decree and on April 19, 2005, we filed a supporting motion. On June 3,
2005, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York entered the Consent Decree
permitting the settlement and ending the case.
Station Service Disputes
On October 2, 2000, NiMo commenced an action against us in New York state court seeking
damages related to our alleged failure to pay retail tariff amounts for utility services at the
Dunkirk Plant between June 1999 and September 2000. The parties agreed to consolidate this action
with two other actions against the Huntley and Oswego Plants. On October 8, 2002, by Stipulation
and Order,
23
this action was stayed pending submission to FERC of some or all of the disputes in the
action. The potential loss inclusive of amounts paid to NiMo and accrued is approximately $24.4
million. In a companion action at FERC, NiMo asserted the same claims and legal theories and on
November 19, 2004, FERC denied NiMos petition and ruled that the NRG facilities could net their
service station obligations over a 30 calendar day period from the day NRG acquired the facilities.
In addition, FERC ruled that neither NiMo nor the New York Public Service Commission could impose a
retail delivery charge on the NRG facilities, because they are interconnected to transmission and
not to distribution. On April 22, 2005, FERC denied NiMos motion for rehearing. NiMo appealed to
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit which, on May 12, 2005, consolidated the appeal with
several pending station service disputes involving NiMo.
On December 14, 1999, NRG Energy acquired certain generating facilities from CL&P. A dispute
arose over station service power and delivery services provided to the facilities. On December 20,
2002, as a result of a petition filed at FERC by Northeast Utilities Services Company on behalf of
itself and CL&P, FERC issued an Order finding that at times when NRG Energy is not able to
self-supply its station power needs, there is a sale of station power from a third-party and retail
charges apply. In August 2003, the parties agreed to submit the dispute to binding arbitration,
however, the parties have yet to agree on a description of the dispute and on the appointment of a
neutral arbitrator. The potential loss inclusive of amounts paid to CL&P and accrued could exceed
$6 million.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
On January 27, 2004, our subsidiaries, Louisiana Generating, LLC and Big Cajun II, received an
initial and, thereafter, subsequent requests under Section 114 of the federal Clean Air Act from
EPA Region 6 seeking information primarily relating to physical changes made at Big Cajun II.
Louisiana Generating, LLC and Big Cajun II submitted several responses to the USEPA. On February
15, 2005, Louisiana Generating, LLC received a Notice of Violation alleging violations of the New
Source Review provisions of the Clean Air Act at Big Cajun II Units 1 and 2 from 1998 through the
Notice of Violation date. On April 7, 2005, a meeting was held with USEPA and the Department of
Justice and additional information was provided to the agency.
TermoRio Litigation
TermoRio was a greenfield cogeneration project located in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Based on the projects failure to meet certain key milestones, we exercised our rights under the
project agreements to sell our debt and equity interests in the project to our partner Petroleo
Brasileiro S.A.Petrobras, or Petrobras. Arbitration ensued, and on March 8, 2003, the arbitral
tribunal decided most, but not all, of the issues in our favor and awarded us approximately US $80
million. On June 4, 2004, NRG Energy commenced a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York seeking to enforce the arbitration award. On February 16, 2005, a
conditional settlement agreement was signed with Petrobras, whereby Petrobras agreed to pay us
$70.8 million. Such payment was received by us at a closing held on February 25, 2005. As of
December 31, 2004, we had a note receivable from Petrobras of $57.3 million related to the arbitral
award. The amounts paid in excess of the $57.3 million were recognized in earnings within other
income in the first quarter of 2005 as the settlement was accounted for as a gain contingency. In
addition to the settlement figure, we have the right to continue to seek recovery of $12.3 million
that is currently being held by Petrobras pending a ruling in a related dispute with a third-party.
This related dispute is also being accounted for as a gain contingency.
Itiquira Energetica, S.A.
Our Brazilian project company, Itiquira Energetica S.A., the owner of a 156 MW hydro project
in Brazil, is in arbitration with the former EPC contractor for the project, Inepar Industria e
Construcoes, or Inepar. The dispute was commenced by Itiquira in September of 2002 and pertains to
certain matters arising under the EPC contract. Itiquira seeks $R 140 million (approximately US
$33 million) and asserts that Inepar breached the contract. Inepar seeks $R 39 million
(approximately US $9 million) and alleges that Itiquira breached the contract. Final written
arguments were submitted on January 28, 2005, to the court of arbitration. On June 24, 2005 the
court of arbitration postponed its decision and instead set forth additional questions to be
answered by appointed experts with associated submittals by both parties. A decision is now
expected by the end of 2005.
CFTC Trading Litigation
On July 1, 2004, the CFTC filed a civil complaint against us in Minnesota federal district
court, alleging false reporting of natural gas trades from August 2001 to May 2002, and seeking an
injunction against future violations of the Commodity Exchange Act. On November 17, 2004, a
Bankruptcy Court hearing was held on the CFTCs motion to reinstate its expunged bankruptcy claim,
and on our motion to enforce the provisions of the NRG plan of reorganization thereby precluding
the CFTC from continuing its federal court action. The bankruptcy court has not yet ruled on those
motions. On December 6, 2004, a federal magistrate judge issued a report and
24
recommendation that our motion to dismiss be granted. That motion to dismiss was granted by
the federal district court in Minnesota on March 16, 2005. On May 16, 2005 the CFTC filed a notice
of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals of the Eighth Circuit. Briefing on the appeal is set to
close by the end of the third quarter of 2005. The Bankruptcy Court has yet to schedule a hearing
or rule on the CFTCs pending motion to reinstate its expunged claim.
Disputed Claims Reserve
As part of the NRG plan of reorganization confirmed on November 24, 2003, we have funded a
disputed claims reserve for the satisfaction of certain general unsecured claims that were disputed
claims as of the effective date of the plan. Under the terms of the plan, to the extent such claims
are resolved now that we have emerged from bankruptcy, the claimants will be paid from the reserve
on the same basis as if they had been paid out in the bankruptcy. That means that their allowed
claims will be reduced to the same recovery percentage as other creditors would have received and
will be paid in pro rata distributions of cash and common stock. We believe we have funded the
disputed claims reserve at a sufficient level to settle the remaining unresolved proofs of claim we
received during the bankruptcy proceedings. However, to the extent the aggregate amount of these
payouts of disputed claims ultimately exceeds the amount of the funded claims reserve, we are
obligated to provide additional cash, notes and common stock to the claimants. We will continue to
monitor our obligation as the disputed claims are settled. If excess funds remain in the disputed
claims reserve after payment of all obligations, such amounts will be reallocated to the creditor
pool. We have contributed common stock and cash to an escrow agent to complete the distribution and
settlement process. Since we have surrendered control over the common stock and cash provided to
the disputed claims reserve, we recognized the issuance of the common stock as of December 6, 2003
and removed the cash amounts from our balance sheet. Similarly, we removed the obligations
relevant to the claims from our balance sheet when the common stock was issued and cash
contributed.
Environmental Matters
We are subject to a broad range of foreign, federal, state and local environmental and safety
laws and regulations in the development, ownership, construction and operation of our domestic and
international projects. These laws and regulations impose requirements on discharges of substances
to the air, water and land, the handling, storage and disposal of, and exposure to, hazardous
substances and wastes and the cleanup of properties affected by pollutants. These laws and
regulations generally require that we obtain governmental permits and approvals before construction
or operation of a power plant commences, and after completion, that our facilities operate in
compliance with those permits and applicable legal requirements. We could also be held responsible
under these laws for the cleanup of pollutants released at our facilities or at off-site locations
where we may have sent wastes, even if the release or off-site disposal was conducted in compliance
with the law.
Northeast Region
Significant amounts of ash are contained in landfills at on and off-site locations. At
Dunkirk, Huntley, Somerset and Indian River, ash is disposed at landfills owned and operated by the
Company. The Company maintains financial assurance to cover costs associated with closure,
post-closure care and monitoring activities. The Company has funded a trust in the amount of
approximately $6.0 million to provide such financial assurance in New York and $6.8 million in
Delaware. The Company must also maintain financial assurance for closing interim status RCRA
facilities at the Devon, Middletown, Montville and Norwalk Harbor Generating Stations and has
funded a trust in the amount of $1.5 million accordingly.
The Company inherited historical clean-up liabilities when it acquired the Somerset, Devon,
Middletown, Montville, Norwalk Harbor, Arthur Kill and Astoria Generating Stations. During
installation of a sound wall at Somerset Station in 2003, oil contaminated soil was encountered.
The Company has delineated the general extent of contamination, determined it to be minimal, and
has placed an activity use limitation on that section of the property. Site contamination
liabilities arising under the Connecticut Transfer Act at the Devon, Middletown, Montville and
Norwalk Harbor Stations have been identified. The Company has proposed a remedial action plan to
be implemented over the next two to eight years (depending on the station) to address historical
ash contamination at the facilities. The total estimated cost is not expected to exceed $1.5
million. Remedial obligations at the Arthur Kill generating station have been established in
discussions between the Company and the NYSDEC and are estimated to cost approximately $1 million.
Remedial investigations continue at the Astoria generating station with long-term clean-up
liability expected to be approximately $2.9 million. While installing groundwater-monitoring wells
at Astoria to track our remediation of a historical fuel oil spill, the drilling contractor
encountered deposits of coal tar in two borings. The Company reported the coal tar discovery to the
NYSDEC in 2003 and delineated the extent of this contamination. The Company may also be required
to remediate the coal tar contamination and/or record a deed restriction on the property if
significant contamination is to remain in place.
25
At the end of 2004, we estimated environmental capital expenditures of approximately $200
million for our 2005 through 2010 plan, at the facilities in New York, Connecticut, Delaware and
Massachusetts. These expenditures are primarily related to installation of particulate
SO2 and
NOX controls, as well as installation of Best Technology Available,
or BTA, under the Phase II 316(b) Rule.
Huntley Power LLC, Dunkirk Power LLC and Oswego Power LLC were issued Notices of Violation for
opacity exceedances and entered into a Consent Order with NYSDEC, effective March 31, 2004. The
Consent Order required the respondents to pay a civil penalty of $1.0 million which was paid in
April 2004. The Order also establishes stipulated penalties (payable quarterly) for future
violations of opacity requirements and a compliance schedule. The Company is currently in dispute
with NYSDEC over the method of calculation for stipulated penalties. The Company has reserved $1.4
million as of June 30, 2005, and does not believe that the final resolution will involve a material
larger amount.
South Central Region
Liabilities associated with closure, post-closure care and monitoring of the ash ponds owned
and operated on site at the Big Cajun II Generating Station are addressed through the use of a
trust fund maintained by the Company in the amount of approximately $5.9 million. Annual payments
are made to the fund in the amount of approximately $116,000.
At the end of 2004, we estimated environmental capital expenditures of approximately $200
million for our 2005 through 2010 plan, at our South Central facilities. These expenditures are
primarily related to installation of particulate
SO2 and
NOX controls, as
well as installation of BTA, under the Phase II 316(b) Rule.
Western Region
The Asset Purchase Agreements for the Long Beach, El Segundo, Encina, and San Diego gas
turbine generating facilities provide that SCE and SDG&E retain liability, and indemnify the
Company, for existing soil and groundwater contamination that exceeds remedial thresholds in place
at the time of closing. The Company and its business partner conducted Phase I and Phase II
Environmental Site Assessments at each of these sites for purposes of identifying such existing
contamination and provided the results to the sellers. SCE and SDG&E have agreed to address
contamination identified by these studies and are undertaking corrective action at the Encina and
San Diego gas turbine generating sites. Spills and releases of various substances have occurred at
these sites since the Company established the historical baseline, all of which have been, or will
be, completely remediated. An oil leak in 2002 from underground piping at the El Segundo
Generating Station contaminated soils adjacent to and underneath the Unit 1 and 2 powerhouse. The
Company excavated and disposed of contaminated soils that could be removed in accordance with
existing laws. Following the Companys formal request, the LARWQCB will allow contaminated soils
to remain underneath the building foundation until the building is demolished.
Regulatory Matters
NYISO Claims
In November 2002, NYISO notified us of claims related to New York City mitigation adjustments,
general NYISO billing adjustments and other miscellaneous charges related to sales between November
2000 and October 2002. New York City mitigation adjustments totaled $11.4 million. The issue
related to NYISOs concern that NRG would not have sufficient revenue to cover subsequent revisions
to its energy market settlements. As of June 30, 2005, NYISO held $3.9 million in escrow for such
future settlement revisions.
Commitments
We have a number of commercial commitments as disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2004. During the current period we have increased our commitments as
described below.
In August 2004, we entered into a contract to purchase 1,540 aluminum railcars from Freight
Car America, formerly Johnstown America Corporation, to be used for the transportation of low
sulfur coal from Wyoming to NRGs coal burning generating plants, including our New York and South
Central facilities. On February 18, 2005, we entered into a ten-year operating lease agreement
with GE Railcar Services Corporation, or GE, for the lease of 1,500 railcars. Delivery of the
railcars from Freight Car America commenced in February 2005 and is expected to be completed by
August 2005. We have assigned certain of our rights and obligations for 1,500 railcars under the
purchase agreement with Freight Car America to GE. Accordingly, the railcars which we lease
from GE under the arrangement described above will be purchased by GE from Freight Car America
in lieu of our purchase of those railcars.
26
In December 2004, we entered into a long-term coal transport agreement with the Burlington
Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company and affiliates of American Commercial Lines LLC to deliver
low sulfur coal to our Big Cajun II facility in New Roads, Louisiana beginning April 1, 2005. In
March 2005, we entered into an agreement to purchase coal over a period of four years and nine
months from Buckskin Mining Company, or Buckskin. The coal will be sourced from Buckskins mine in
the Powder River Basin, Wyoming, and will be used primarily in NRGs coal-burning generation plants
in the South Central region of the United States. Including this contract and other contracts,
total coal purchase obligations increased by $174.4 million, which are expected to be paid over the
course of the next two years.
In April 2005, we amended our contract for a five-year coal rail transportation agreement with
CSX Transportation, Inc. and Union Pacific Railroad Company, to deliver low sulfur coal to our
Dunkirk and Huntley facilities in Buffalo, New York, beginning April 1, 2005. Although the
amendment does not change our minimum financial commitments, we are now obligated to transport at
least 95% of our coal supplies for our Dunkirk and Huntley facilities with CSX Transportation, Inc.
and Union Pacific Railroad Company.
Note 14 Guarantees
In November 2002, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 45, Guarantors Accounting and
Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others.
In connection with the adoption of Fresh Start, all outstanding guarantees were considered new;
accordingly, we applied the provisions of FIN 45 to all of the guarantees.
The descriptions below update, and should be read in conjunction with, the complete
descriptions under Note 29, Guarantees and Other Contingent Liabilities, in NRG Energys Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2004.
We and our subsidiaries enter into various contracts that include indemnification and
guarantee provisions as a routine part of our business activities. Examples of these contracts
include asset purchase and sale agreements, commodity sale and purchase agreements, joint venture
agreements, operations and maintenance agreements, service agreements, settlement agreements, and
other types of contractual agreements with vendors and other third parties. These contracts
generally indemnify the counter-party for tax, environmental liability, litigation and other
matters, as well as breaches of representations, warranties and covenants set forth in these
agreements. In many cases, our maximum potential liability cannot be estimated, since some of the
underlying agreements contain no limits on potential liability.
On February 28, 2005, concurrent with the amendment of its debt facility, our Flinders
subsidiary issued, under its amended AUD 20.0 million (US $15.6 million) working capital and
performance bond facility sponsored by National Australia Bank Limited, an AUD 15.5 million (US
$11.8 million) indemnity to the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ), the previous
sponsor of the facility. This indemnified ANZ against potential claims for performance bonds or
letters of credit issued under the facility prior to February 28, 2005. The indemnity was canceled
on May 17, 2005. As of June 30, 2005 Flinders had AUD
14.0 million (US $10.6 million) in
performance bonds and letters of credit under the new facility.
On February 18, 2005, we issued a guarantee to the benefit of General Electric Railcar Service
Corporation. We guarantee the performance and payment obligations of PMI under a railcar lease
from GE as described in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies. Payment obligations include future
rental and termination payments, which are estimated to total $58.6 million over the first five
years of the lease, and $49.9 million over the last five years of the lease, should we elect not to
exercise our termination rights. However, our obligations under this guarantee include additional
requirements that would be difficult to quantify until such time as a claim was made. As a result,
our maximum potential obligation under this guarantee is indeterminate. At this time, we do not
anticipate that we will be required to perform under this guarantee.
Also during the six months ended June 30, 2005, we issued guarantees of the performance of PMI
under various agreements with counter-parties for the purchase and sale of fuel, emission credits
and power generation products. These new guarantees total $32.8 million. At this time, we do not
believe we will be obligated to perform under these guarantees.
At June 30, 2005, we were contingently obligated for approximately $178.5 million under our
funded standby letters of credit facility, and we had $16.1 million issued under an unfunded
standby letter of credit facility. Obligations of the unfunded letter of credit facility were
reserved through our bankruptcy restructuring. Most of these standby letters of credit are issued
in support of our
27
obligations to perform under commodity agreements, financing or other arrangements. These
letters of credit expire within one year of issuance, and it is typical for us to renew many of
them on similar terms.
On April 1, 2005, in conjunction with the sale of our interest in the Enfield Energy Center
Ltd, a minority-owned, indirectly held affiliate of ours, we issued a guarantee of the obligations
of an affiliate of ours under the sale and purchase agreement, to the buyers of our interest. Our
maximum liability for this guarantee is $55.6 million. We do not anticipate that we will be
required to perform under this guarantee.
Because many of the guarantees and indemnities we issue to third parties do not limit the
amount or duration of our obligations to perform under them, there exists a risk that we may have
obligations in excess of the amounts described above. For those guarantees and indemnities that do
not limit our liability exposure, we may not be able to estimate what our liability would be, until
a claim was made for payment or performance, due to the contingent nature of these contracts.
Note 15 Subsequent Events
NRG
has committed to repurchase, on August 11, 2005,
$250 million of NRGs outstanding
common stock from an affiliate of Credit Suisse First Boston LLC, or
CSFB. NRG will fund the
planned repurchase with existing cash balances. To enable this share
repurchase under NRGs
high yield debt indenture, NRG will issue simultaneously in a private transaction, $250
million of perpetual preferred stock. On August 5, 2005, NRG obtained
an amendment to its corporate credit agreement which allowed NRG to
use cash proceeds from the preferred issuance to
repurchase approximately $229 million of our 8% high yield notes at 108% of par.
Note 16 Condensed Consolidating Financial Information
As of June 30, 2005, we have $1.35 billion of 8% Second Priority Senior Secured Notes
outstanding. These notes are guaranteed by each of our current and future wholly-owned domestic
subsidiaries, or Guarantor Subsidiaries. Each of the following Guarantor Subsidiaries fully and
unconditionally guarantee the Notes.
|
|
|
Arthur Kill Power LLC
|
|
NRG Cadillac Operations Inc. |
Astoria Gas Turbine Power LLC
|
|
NRG California Peaker Operations LLC |
Berrians I Gas Turbine Power LLC
|
|
NRG Connecticut Affiliate Services Inc. |
Big Cajun II Unit 4 LLC
|
|
NRG Devon Operations Inc. |
Capistrano Cogeneration Company
|
|
NRG Dunkirk Operations Inc. |
Chickahominy River Energy Corp.
|
|
NRG El Segundo Operations Inc. |
Commonwealth Atlantic Power LLC
|
|
NRG Huntley Operations Inc. |
Conemaugh Power LLC
|
|
NRG International LLC |
Connecticut Jet Power LLC
|
|
NRG Kaufman LLC |
Devon Power LLC
|
|
NRG Mesquite LLC |
Dunkirk Power LLC
|
|
NRG MidAtlantic Affiliate Services Inc. |
Eastern Sierra Energy Company
|
|
NRG MidAtlantic Generating LLC |
El Segundo Power II LLC
|
|
NRG Middletown Operations Inc. |
Hanover Energy Company
|
|
NRG Montville Operations Inc. |
Huntley Power LLC
|
|
NRG New Jersey Energy Sales LLC |
Indian River Operations Inc.
|
|
NRG New Roads Holdings LLC |
Indian River Power LLC
|
|
NRG North Central Operations Inc. |
James River Power LLC
|
|
NRG Northeast Affiliate Services Inc. |
Kaufman Cogen LP
|
|
NRG Northeast Generating LLC |
Keystone Power LLC
|
|
NRG Norwalk Harbor Operations Inc. |
Louisiana Generating LLC
|
|
NRG Operating Services, Inc. |
Middletown Power LLC
|
|
NRG Oswego Harbor Power Operations Inc. |
Montville Power LLC
|
|
NRG Power Marketing Inc. |
NEO California Power LLC
|
|
NRG Rocky Road LLC |
NEO Chester-Gen LLC
|
|
NRG Saguaro Operations Inc. |
NEO Corporation
|
|
NRG South Central Affiliate Services Inc. |
NEO Freehold-Gen LLC
|
|
NRG South Central Generating LLC |
NEO Landfill Gas Holdings Inc.
|
|
NRG South Central Operations Inc. |
NEO Power Services Inc.
|
|
NRG West Coast LLC |
28
|
|
|
Norwalk Power LLC
|
|
NRG Western Affiliate Services Inc. |
NRG Affiliate Services Inc.
|
|
Oswego Harbor Power LLC |
NRG Arthur Kill Operations Inc.
|
|
Saguaro Power LLC |
NRG Asia-Pacific, Ltd.
|
|
Somerset Operations Inc. |
NRG Astoria Gas Turbine Operations, Inc.
|
|
Somerset Power LLC |
NRG Bayou Cove LLC
|
|
Vienna Operations Inc. |
NRG Cabrillo Power Operations Inc.
|
|
Vienna Power LLC |
The non-guarantor subsidiaries, or Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries, include all of our foreign
subsidiaries and certain domestic subsidiaries. We conduct much of our business through and derive
much of our income from our subsidiaries. Therefore, our ability to make required payments with
respect to our indebtedness and other obligations depends on the financial results and condition of
our subsidiaries and our ability to receive funds from our subsidiaries. Except for NRG Bayou
Cove, LLC, which is subject to certain restrictions under our Peaker financing agreements, there
are no restrictions on the ability of any of the Guarantor Subsidiaries to transfer funds to us. In
addition, there may be restrictions for certain Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries.
The following condensed consolidating financial information presents the financial information
of NRG Energy, the Guarantor Subsidiaries and the Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries in accordance with
Rule 3-10 under the Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation S-X. The financial information
may not necessarily be indicative of results of operations or financial position had the Guarantor
Subsidiaries or Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries operated as independent entities.
In this presentation, NRG Energy consists of parent company operations. Guarantor Subsidiaries
and Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries of NRG Energy are reported on an equity basis. For companies
acquired, the fair values of the assets and liabilities acquired have been presented on a
push-down accounting basis.
29
NRG Energy, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Operations
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2005
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
NRG Energy, Inc. |
|
|
Eliminations (1) |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Operating Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from majority-owned operations |
|
$ |
428,562 |
|
|
$ |
142,122 |
|
|
$ |
15,302 |
|
|
$ |
(1,419 |
) |
|
$ |
584,567 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Costs and Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of majority-owned operations |
|
|
323,927 |
|
|
|
104,945 |
|
|
|
9,017 |
|
|
|
(1,419 |
) |
|
|
436,470 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
33,192 |
|
|
|
12,443 |
|
|
|
2,114 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47,749 |
|
General, administrative and development |
|
|
12,113 |
|
|
|
6,233 |
|
|
|
34,818 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,164 |
|
Corporate relocation charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
456 |
|
Impairment charges |
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
369,455 |
|
|
|
123,621 |
|
|
|
46,405 |
|
|
|
(1,419 |
) |
|
|
538,062 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income/(Loss) |
|
|
59,107 |
|
|
|
18,501 |
|
|
|
(31,103 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,505 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income (Expense) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in earnings of consolidated
subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(407 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(407 |
) |
Equity in earnings of consolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
23,022 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,061 |
|
|
|
(97,083 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates |
|
|
9,060 |
|
|
|
7,408 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,460 |
|
Write downs and gains/(losses) on sales of
equity method investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,561 |
|
Other income, net |
|
|
2,343 |
|
|
|
13,347 |
|
|
|
2,109 |
|
|
|
(10,145 |
) |
|
|
7,654 |
|
Refinancing Expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(110 |
) |
|
|
(24,014 |
) |
|
|
(36,581 |
) |
|
|
10,145 |
|
|
|
(50,560 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income/(expense) |
|
|
34,315 |
|
|
|
7,895 |
|
|
|
39,581 |
|
|
|
(97,083 |
) |
|
|
(15,292 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income From Continuing Operations Before Income
Taxes |
|
|
93,422 |
|
|
|
26,396 |
|
|
|
8,478 |
|
|
|
(97,083 |
) |
|
|
31,213 |
|
Income Tax Expense/(Benefit) |
|
|
24,183 |
|
|
|
(714 |
) |
|
|
(15,388 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,081 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income From Continuing Operations |
|
|
69,239 |
|
|
|
27,110 |
|
|
|
23,866 |
|
|
|
(97,083 |
) |
|
|
23,132 |
|
Income on Discontinued Operations, net of
Income Taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
$ |
69,239 |
|
|
$ |
27,844 |
|
|
$ |
23,866 |
|
|
$ |
(97,083 |
) |
|
$ |
23,866 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. |
30
NRG Energy, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Operations
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2005
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
NRG Energy, Inc. |
|
|
Eliminations (1) |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Operating Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from majority-owned operations |
|
$ |
880,155 |
|
|
$ |
280,298 |
|
|
$ |
28,109 |
|
|
$ |
(2,853 |
) |
|
$ |
1,185,709 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Costs and Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of majority-owned operations |
|
|
662,375 |
|
|
|
211,910 |
|
|
|
17,960 |
|
|
|
(2,853 |
) |
|
|
889,392 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
66,468 |
|
|
|
25,282 |
|
|
|
4,423 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
96,173 |
|
General, administrative and development |
|
|
22,678 |
|
|
|
14,900 |
|
|
|
65,480 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
103,058 |
|
Corporate relocation charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,911 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,911 |
|
Impairment charges |
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
751,744 |
|
|
|
252,092 |
|
|
|
91,774 |
|
|
|
(2,853 |
) |
|
|
1,092,757 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income/(Loss) |
|
|
128,411 |
|
|
|
28,206 |
|
|
|
(63,665 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
92,952 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income (Expense) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in earnings of consolidated
subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(881 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(881 |
) |
Equity in earnings of consolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
68,219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
153,261 |
|
|
|
(221,480 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates |
|
|
16,041 |
|
|
|
37,372 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,424 |
|
Write downs and gains/(losses) on sales of
equity method investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,561 |
|
Other income, net |
|
|
2,928 |
|
|
|
35,519 |
|
|
|
4,915 |
|
|
|
(10,206 |
) |
|
|
33,156 |
|
Refinancing expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,783 |
|
|
|
(34,807 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,024 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
(231 |
) |
|
|
(40,266 |
) |
|
|
(76,260 |
) |
|
|
10,206 |
|
|
|
(106,551 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense) |
|
|
86,957 |
|
|
|
53,088 |
|
|
|
47,120 |
|
|
|
(221,480 |
) |
|
|
(34,315 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income From Continuing Operations Before Income
Taxes |
|
|
215,368 |
|
|
|
81,294 |
|
|
|
(16,545 |
) |
|
|
(221,480 |
) |
|
|
58,637 |
|
Income Tax Expense/(Benefit) |
|
|
69,691 |
|
|
|
6,221 |
|
|
|
(63,029 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,883 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income From Continuing Operations |
|
|
145,677 |
|
|
|
75,073 |
|
|
|
46,484 |
|
|
|
(221,480 |
) |
|
|
45,754 |
|
Income on Discontinued Operations, net of
Income Taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
$ |
145,677 |
|
|
$ |
75,803 |
|
|
$ |
46,484 |
|
|
$ |
(221,480 |
) |
|
$ |
46,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. |
31
NRG Energy, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidating Balance Sheet
June 30, 2005
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
NRG Energy |
|
|
Eliminations(1) |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
(In thousands) |
ASSETS
|
Current Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
293,944 |
|
|
$ |
381,033 |
|
|
$ |
148,184 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
823,161 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
3,742 |
|
|
|
83,506 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87,248 |
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
157,205 |
|
|
|
251,188 |
|
|
|
(94,765 |
) |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
313,660 |
|
Current portion of notes receivable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,800 |
|
|
|
108,870 |
|
|
|
(108,570 |
) |
|
|
25,100 |
|
Income taxes receivable |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
38,924 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,877 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
198,650 |
|
|
|
28,845 |
|
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
228,995 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
34,448 |
|
|
|
19,878 |
|
|
|
5,198 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,524 |
|
Prepayments and other current assets |
|
|
236,048 |
|
|
|
19,349 |
|
|
|
38,847 |
|
|
|
(182 |
) |
|
|
294,062 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
19,463 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
(19,465 |
) |
|
|
1,256 |
|
|
|
1,262 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
943,451 |
|
|
|
808,609 |
|
|
|
227,293 |
|
|
|
(107,464 |
) |
|
|
1,871,889 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net property, plant and equipment |
|
|
2,207,153 |
|
|
|
1,073,874 |
|
|
|
27,428 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
3,308,650 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in subsidiaries |
|
|
789,137 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,053,000 |
|
|
|
(4,842,137 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Equity investments in affiliates |
|
|
289,364 |
|
|
|
348,095 |
|
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
637,881 |
|
Notes receivable, less current portion |
|
|
405,049 |
|
|
|
720,950 |
|
|
|
977 |
|
|
|
(403,515 |
) |
|
|
723,461 |
|
Intangible assets, net |
|
|
249,828 |
|
|
|
26,026 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
275,854 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
3,327 |
|
|
|
10,088 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,415 |
|
Funded letter of credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
Other non-current assets |
|
|
36,777 |
|
|
|
20,282 |
|
|
|
43,455 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,514 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other assets |
|
|
1,773,482 |
|
|
|
1,125,441 |
|
|
|
4,447,854 |
|
|
|
(5,245,652 |
) |
|
|
2,101,125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
4,924,086 |
|
|
$ |
3,007,924 |
|
|
$ |
4,702,575 |
|
|
$ |
(5,352,921 |
) |
|
$ |
7,281,664 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt |
|
$ |
100,317 |
|
|
$ |
84,989 |
|
|
$ |
14,009 |
|
|
$ |
(108,570 |
) |
|
$ |
90,745 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
214,134 |
|
|
|
80,558 |
|
|
|
(144,004 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,688 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
113,544 |
|
|
|
16,079 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
129,623 |
|
Other bankruptcy settlement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
177,424 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
177,424 |
|
Accrued expenses and other current
liabilities |
|
|
139,584 |
|
|
|
59,803 |
|
|
|
38,698 |
|
|
|
(182 |
) |
|
|
237,903 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
567,579 |
|
|
|
418,853 |
|
|
|
(91,297 |
) |
|
|
(108,752 |
) |
|
|
786,383 |
|
Other Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt and capital leases |
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
1,409,655 |
|
|
|
2,113,873 |
|
|
|
(403,515 |
) |
|
|
3,120,206 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(56,307 |
) |
|
|
108,633 |
|
|
|
55,856 |
|
|
|
1,256 |
|
|
|
109,438 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
32,848 |
|
|
|
113,550 |
|
|
|
7,066 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
153,464 |
|
Out-of-market contracts |
|
|
309,129 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
309,129 |
|
Other non-current liabilities |
|
|
128,941 |
|
|
|
49,942 |
|
|
|
16,426 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
195,309 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-current liabilities |
|
|
414,804 |
|
|
|
1,681,780 |
|
|
|
2,193,221 |
|
|
|
(402,259 |
) |
|
|
3,887,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
982,383 |
|
|
|
2,100,633 |
|
|
|
2,101,924 |
|
|
|
(511,011 |
) |
|
|
4,673,929 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,084 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,084 |
|
Stockholders Equity |
|
|
3,941,703 |
|
|
|
900,207 |
|
|
|
2,600,651 |
|
|
|
(4,841,910 |
) |
|
|
2,600,651 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
$ |
4,924,086 |
|
|
$ |
3,007,924 |
|
|
$ |
4,702,575 |
|
|
$ |
(5,352,921 |
) |
|
$ |
7,281,664 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. |
32
NRG Energy, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Cash Flows
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2005
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
NRG Energy, Inc. |
|
|
Eliminations (1) |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Cash Flows from Operating Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
145,677 |
|
|
$ |
75,803 |
|
|
$ |
46,484 |
|
|
$ |
(221,480 |
) |
|
$ |
46,484 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net
income to net cash provided (used) by
operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions in excess of (less than)
equity in earnings of unconsolidated
affiliates and consolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
(30,158 |
) |
|
|
(22,185 |
) |
|
|
12,588 |
|
|
|
55,680 |
|
|
|
15,925 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
66,468 |
|
|
|
25,282 |
|
|
|
4,423 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
96,173 |
|
Reserve for note and interest receivable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(98 |
) |
Amortization of financing costs and debt
premium |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,052 |
|
|
|
1,906 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,958 |
|
Write-off of deferred financing costs and
debt premium |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,783 |
) |
|
|
1,370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,413 |
) |
Write downs and gains/losses on sale of
equity method investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,561 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,561 |
) |
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(43,651 |
) |
|
|
(2,112 |
) |
|
|
42,138 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,625 |
) |
Unrealized (gains)/losses on derivatives |
|
|
70,503 |
|
|
|
11,444 |
|
|
|
(86,376 |
) |
|
|
86,139 |
|
|
|
81,710 |
|
Asset impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
223 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
881 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
881 |
|
Amortization of power contracts and emission
credits |
|
|
10,277 |
|
|
|
4,863 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,140 |
|
Amortization of unearned equity compensation |
|
|
1,065 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
3,470 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,718 |
|
Gain on TermoRio settlement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,532 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,532 |
) |
Cash used by changes in working capital, net
of disposition affects |
|
|
(5,888 |
) |
|
|
13,099 |
|
|
|
(58,536 |
) |
|
|
(86,139 |
) |
|
|
(137,464 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided/(used) by Operating
Activities |
|
|
214,293 |
|
|
|
75,559 |
|
|
|
(32,533 |
) |
|
|
(165,800 |
) |
|
|
91,519 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Investing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds on sale of equity method investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
64,575 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
64,575 |
|
Decrease/(increase) in restricted cash and
trust funds |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
26,335 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,313 |
|
Decrease/(increase) in notes receivable |
|
|
3,649 |
|
|
|
79,486 |
|
|
|
(103,088 |
) |
|
|
112,857 |
|
|
|
92,904 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
(30,063 |
) |
|
|
(5,403 |
) |
|
|
(1,071 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(36,537 |
) |
Return of capital from equity investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,291 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,291 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided/(used) by Investing
Activities |
|
|
(26,436 |
) |
|
|
166,284 |
|
|
|
(104,159 |
) |
|
|
112,857 |
|
|
|
148,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Financing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net |
|
|
100,300 |
|
|
|
216,679 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(112,857 |
) |
|
|
204,141 |
|
Payments for dividends |
|
|
(150,000 |
) |
|
|
(15,800 |
) |
|
|
(8,072 |
) |
|
|
165,800 |
|
|
|
(8,072 |
) |
Deferred debt issuance costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,076 |
) |
|
|
(506 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,582 |
) |
Payment for preferred share issuance costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(204 |
) |
Principal payments on short and long-term debt |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(303,452 |
) |
|
|
(418,088 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(721,548 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Used by Financing Activities |
|
|
(49,708 |
) |
|
|
(103,649 |
) |
|
|
(426,851 |
) |
|
|
52,943 |
|
|
|
(527,265 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of Exchange Rate Changes on Cash and
Cash Equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,369 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,369 |
) |
Change in Cash from Discontinued Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,685 |
|
Change in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
138,149 |
|
|
|
138,510 |
|
|
|
(563,543 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(286,884 |
) |
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of
Period |
|
|
155,795 |
|
|
|
242,523 |
|
|
|
711,727 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,110,045 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period |
|
$ |
293,944 |
|
|
$ |
381,033 |
|
|
$ |
148,184 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
823,161 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. |
33
NRG Energy, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidating Balance Sheet
December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
NRG Energy, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
(Note Issuer) |
|
|
Eliminations(1) |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
(In thousands) |
ASSETS
|
Current Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
155,795 |
|
|
$ |
242,523 |
|
|
$ |
711,727 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,110,045 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
3,720 |
|
|
|
109,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
112,824 |
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
182,340 |
|
|
|
82,757 |
|
|
|
7,004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
272,101 |
|
Current portion of notes receivable and other
investments affiliates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,986 |
) |
|
|
5,482 |
|
|
|
(2,496 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Current portion of notes receivable and other
investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,147 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,447 |
|
Taxes receivable |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(5,498 |
) |
|
|
42,981 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,484 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
216,932 |
|
|
|
29,617 |
|
|
|
1,461 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
248,010 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
79,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79,759 |
|
Prepayments and other current assets |
|
|
103,891 |
|
|
|
25,740 |
|
|
|
42,893 |
|
|
|
(2,916 |
) |
|
|
169,608 |
|
Current assets discontinued operations |
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
3,098 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
742,350 |
|
|
|
569,502 |
|
|
|
811,848 |
|
|
|
(5,412 |
) |
|
|
2,118,288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net property, plant and equipment |
|
|
2,243,558 |
|
|
|
1,100,017 |
|
|
|
30,780 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
3,374,551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in subsidiaries |
|
|
776,922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,916,352 |
|
|
|
(4,693,274 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Equity investments in affiliates |
|
|
327,425 |
|
|
|
407,054 |
|
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
734,950 |
|
Notes receivable, less current portion |
|
|
408,698 |
|
|
|
1,037,428 |
|
|
|
977 |
|
|
|
(642,581 |
) |
|
|
804,522 |
|
Intangible assets, net |
|
|
256,392 |
|
|
|
37,958 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
294,350 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
1,468 |
|
|
|
34,926 |
|
|
|
5,393 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,787 |
|
Funded letter of credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
Other non-current assets |
|
|
36,406 |
|
|
|
21,843 |
|
|
|
53,331 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
111,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other assets |
|
|
1,807,311 |
|
|
|
1,539,209 |
|
|
|
4,326,524 |
|
|
|
(5,335,855 |
) |
|
|
2,337,189 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
4,793,219 |
|
|
$ |
3,208,728 |
|
|
$ |
5,169,152 |
|
|
$ |
(5,341,071 |
) |
|
$ |
7,830,028 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt |
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
98,877 |
|
|
$ |
415,855 |
|
|
$ |
(2,496 |
) |
|
$ |
512,252 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
403,433 |
|
|
|
(37,922 |
) |
|
|
(194,706 |
) |
|
|
917 |
|
|
|
171,722 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
16,772 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,772 |
|
Current deferred income taxes |
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
334 |
|
Other bankruptcy settlement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
175,576 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
175,576 |
|
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities |
|
|
124,862 |
|
|
|
37,926 |
|
|
|
50,051 |
|
|
|
(2,916 |
) |
|
|
209,923 |
|
Current liabilities discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,362 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,362 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
545,343 |
|
|
|
275,911 |
|
|
|
271,182 |
|
|
|
(4,495 |
) |
|
|
1,087,941 |
|
Other Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
1,768,068 |
|
|
|
2,128,177 |
|
|
|
(642,581 |
) |
|
|
3,253,866 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(32,379 |
) |
|
|
130,972 |
|
|
|
35,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
134,325 |
|
Derivative instruments valuation |
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
132,209 |
|
|
|
16,064 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148,445 |
|
Out-of-market contracts |
|
|
318,664 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
318,664 |
|
Other non-current liabilities |
|
|
121,735 |
|
|
|
39,870 |
|
|
|
25,833 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
187,438 |
|
Non-current liabilities discontinued
operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,081 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,081 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-current liabilities |
|
|
408,394 |
|
|
|
2,072,200 |
|
|
|
2,205,806 |
|
|
|
(642,581 |
) |
|
|
4,043,819 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
953,737 |
|
|
|
2,348,111 |
|
|
|
2,476,988 |
|
|
|
(647,076 |
) |
|
|
5,131,760 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,104 |
|
Stockholders Equity |
|
|
3,839,482 |
|
|
|
854,513 |
|
|
|
2,692,164 |
|
|
|
(4,693,995 |
) |
|
|
2,692,164 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
$ |
4,793,219 |
|
|
$ |
3,208,728 |
|
|
$ |
5,169,152 |
|
|
$ |
(5,341,071 |
) |
|
$ |
7,830,028 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. |
34
NRG Energy, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Operations
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2004
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NRG Energy, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
(Note Issuer) |
|
|
Eliminations (1) |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Operating Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from majority-owned operations |
|
$ |
421,736 |
|
|
$ |
139,946 |
|
|
$ |
14,019 |
|
|
$ |
(2,078 |
) |
|
$ |
573,623 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Costs and Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of majority-owned operations |
|
|
247,968 |
|
|
|
99,746 |
|
|
|
7,622 |
|
|
|
(2,078 |
) |
|
|
353,258 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
31,494 |
|
|
|
17,865 |
|
|
|
3,809 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,168 |
|
General, administrative and development |
|
|
23,863 |
|
|
|
11,816 |
|
|
|
10,076 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
45,746 |
|
Corporate relocation charges |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,644 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,645 |
|
Reorganization charges |
|
|
(570 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(2,092 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,661 |
) |
Impairment charges |
|
|
1,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
304,432 |
|
|
|
129,428 |
|
|
|
25,059 |
|
|
|
(2,087 |
) |
|
|
456,832 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income/(Loss) |
|
|
117,304 |
|
|
|
10,518 |
|
|
|
(11,040 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
116,791 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income (Expense) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in earnings of consolidated
subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(201 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(201 |
) |
Equity in earnings of consolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
25,350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
99,392 |
|
|
|
(124,742 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates |
|
|
26,143 |
|
|
|
19,942 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,101 |
|
Write downs and losses on sales of equity
method investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
702 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,205 |
|
Other income, net |
|
|
2,956 |
|
|
|
4,594 |
|
|
|
2,246 |
|
|
|
(1,745 |
) |
|
|
8,051 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(127 |
) |
|
|
(22,812 |
) |
|
|
(45,022 |
) |
|
|
1,736 |
|
|
|
(66,225 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense) |
|
|
54,322 |
|
|
|
2,225 |
|
|
|
57,135 |
|
|
|
(124,751 |
) |
|
|
(11,069 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss From Continuing Operations Before Income
Taxes |
|
|
171,626 |
|
|
|
12,743 |
|
|
|
46,095 |
|
|
|
(124,742 |
) |
|
|
105,722 |
|
Income Tax Expense/(Benefit) |
|
|
68,514 |
|
|
|
5,037 |
|
|
|
(37,229 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,322 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain From Continuing Operations |
|
|
103,112 |
|
|
|
7,706 |
|
|
|
83,324 |
|
|
|
(124,742 |
) |
|
|
69,400 |
|
Income/(Loss) on Discontinued Operations, net
of Income Taxes |
|
|
(132 |
) |
|
|
14,056 |
|
|
|
(300 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,624 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
$ |
102,980 |
|
|
$ |
21,762 |
|
|
$ |
83,024 |
|
|
$ |
(124,742 |
) |
|
$ |
83,024 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. |
35
NRG Energy, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Operations
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2004
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NRG Energy, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
(Note Issuer) |
|
|
Eliminations (1) |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Operating Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from majority-owned operations |
|
$ |
848,232 |
|
|
$ |
303,380 |
|
|
$ |
26,026 |
|
|
$ |
(3,750 |
) |
|
$ |
1,173,888 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Costs and Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of majority-owned operations |
|
|
519,955 |
|
|
|
203,520 |
|
|
|
15,286 |
|
|
|
(3,750 |
) |
|
|
735,011 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
66,389 |
|
|
|
35,284 |
|
|
|
6,501 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108,174 |
|
General, administrative and development |
|
|
43,685 |
|
|
|
14,785 |
|
|
|
23,663 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
82,138 |
|
Corporate relocation charges |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,760 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,761 |
|
Reorganization charges |
|
|
1,163 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
2,275 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,589 |
|
Impairment charges |
|
|
1,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
632,869 |
|
|
|
253,740 |
|
|
|
54,485 |
|
|
|
(3,745 |
) |
|
|
937,349 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income/(Loss) |
|
|
215,363 |
|
|
|
49,640 |
|
|
|
(28,459 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
236,539 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income (Expense) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in earnings of consolidated
subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(709 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(709 |
) |
Equity in earnings of consolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
46,936 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
157,221 |
|
|
|
(204,157 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings/(losses) of unconsolidated
affiliates |
|
|
33,871 |
|
|
|
30,752 |
|
|
|
(809 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
63,814 |
|
Write downs and gains/(losses) on sales of
equity method investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,271 |
) |
|
|
738 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(533 |
) |
Other income, net |
|
|
3,658 |
|
|
|
12,043 |
|
|
|
3,024 |
|
|
|
(7,017 |
) |
|
|
11,708 |
|
Refinancing expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,417 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,417 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
(48,252 |
) |
|
|
(88,311 |
) |
|
|
7,022 |
|
|
|
(128,954 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense) |
|
|
85,052 |
|
|
|
(7,437 |
) |
|
|
41,446 |
|
|
|
(204,152 |
) |
|
|
(85,091 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain From Continuing Operations Before Income
Taxes |
|
|
300,415 |
|
|
|
42,203 |
|
|
|
12,987 |
|
|
|
(204,157 |
) |
|
|
151,448 |
|
Income Tax Expense/(Benefit) |
|
|
139,481 |
|
|
|
11,693 |
|
|
|
(100,572 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,602 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain From Continuing Operations |
|
|
160,934 |
|
|
|
30,510 |
|
|
|
113,559 |
|
|
|
(204,157 |
) |
|
|
100,846 |
|
Income/(Loss) on Discontinued Operations, net
of Income Taxes |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
12,917 |
|
|
|
(300 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
$ |
160,730 |
|
|
$ |
43,427 |
|
|
$ |
113,259 |
|
|
$ |
(204,157 |
) |
|
$ |
113,259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. |
36
NRG Energy, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Cash Flows
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2004
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NRG Energy, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non-Guarantor |
|
|
Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
(Note Issuer) |
|
|
Eliminations (1) |
|
|
Balance |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Cash Flows from Operating Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
160,730 |
|
|
|
43,427 |
|
|
|
113,259 |
|
|
|
(204,157 |
) |
|
|
113,259 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net
cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions in excess of (less than)
equity in earnings of unconsolidated
affiliates and consolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
(16,246 |
) |
|
|
(26,863 |
) |
|
|
(81,597 |
) |
|
|
129,457 |
|
|
|
4,751 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
66,389 |
|
|
|
40,609 |
|
|
|
6,501 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
113,499 |
|
Amortization of debt issuance costs and
debt discount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,932 |
|
|
|
3,611 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,543 |
|
Write off of deferred finance cost due to
refinancing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,312 |
|
Write downs and (gain)/loss on sales of
equity method investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,268 |
|
|
|
(735 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
533 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(78,372 |
) |
|
|
5,653 |
|
|
|
200,943 |
|
|
|
(78,840 |
) |
|
|
49,384 |
|
Unrealized (gains)/losses on derivatives |
|
|
(7,018 |
) |
|
|
(30,791 |
) |
|
|
18,950 |
|
|
|
(2,599 |
) |
|
|
(21,458 |
) |
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,089 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,089 |
|
Amortization of power contracts and
emission credits |
|
|
11,705 |
|
|
|
22,812 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,517 |
|
Asset impairment |
|
|
1,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,676 |
|
Gain on sale of discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,012 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,012 |
) |
Amortization of unearned equity compensation |
|
|
910 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
6,275 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,322 |
|
Cash provided (used) by changes in working
capital items, net of disposition affects |
|
|
(87,032 |
) |
|
|
860 |
|
|
|
81,675 |
|
|
|
(2,561 |
) |
|
|
(7,058 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities |
|
|
52,742 |
|
|
|
59,121 |
|
|
|
364,194 |
|
|
|
(158,700 |
) |
|
|
317,357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Investing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds on sale of discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,190 |
|
Proceeds on sale of equity method investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,693 |
|
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,693 |
|
Increase in restricted cash and trust funds |
|
|
(11,375 |
) |
|
|
(25,916 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(37,291 |
) |
Decrease in note receivable, net |
|
|
(34,312 |
) |
|
|
16,521 |
|
|
|
22,296 |
|
|
|
10,703 |
|
|
|
15,208 |
|
Investments in equity method investments and
projects |
|
|
(566 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(566 |
) |
Capital expenditures |
|
|
(43,886 |
) |
|
|
(19,836 |
) |
|
|
(954 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(64,676 |
) |
Investment in subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(92,000 |
) |
|
|
92,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided/(Used) by Investing Activities |
|
|
(90,139 |
) |
|
|
56,652 |
|
|
|
(67,658 |
) |
|
|
102,703 |
|
|
|
1,558 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Financing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,631 |
|
|
|
475,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
490,631 |
|
Deferred debt issuance costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
(8,550 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,497 |
) |
Principal payments on long-term debt |
|
|
(28,007 |
) |
|
|
(106,114 |
) |
|
|
(506,982 |
) |
|
|
73,297 |
|
|
|
(567,806 |
) |
Dividends to parent |
|
|
(54,700 |
) |
|
|
(20,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
Capital contributions from parent |
|
|
92,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(92,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Used/(Provided) by Financing Activities |
|
|
9,293 |
|
|
|
(110,430 |
) |
|
|
(40,532 |
) |
|
|
55,997 |
|
|
|
(85,672 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Cash from Discontinued Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,822 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,822 |
|
Effect of Exchange Rate Changes on cash and
cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,588 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,588 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(28,104 |
) |
|
|
41,753 |
|
|
|
256,004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
269,653 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at Beginning of Period |
|
|
295,509 |
|
|
|
160,434 |
|
|
|
95,280 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
551,223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at End of Period |
|
$ |
267,405 |
|
|
$ |
202,187 |
|
|
$ |
351,284 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
820,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. |
37
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Overview
NRG Energy, Inc., or NRG Energy, the Company, we, our, or us, is a wholesale power
generation company, primarily engaged in the ownership and operation of power generation
facilities, the transacting in and trading of fuel and transportation services and the marketing
and trading of energy, capacity and related products in the United States and internationally. We
have a diverse portfolio of electric generation facilities in terms of geography, fuel type and
dispatch levels. Our principal domestic generation assets consist of a diversified mix of natural
gas-, coal- and oil-fired facilities, representing approximately 40%, 31% and 29% of our total
domestic generation capacity, respectively. In addition, 23% of our domestic generating facilities
have dual- or multiple-fuel capacity, which render the ability for plants to dispatch with the
lowest cost fuel option.
Our two principal operating objectives are to optimize performance of our entire portfolio,
and to protect and enhance the market value of our physical and contractual assets through the
execution of asset-based risk management, marketing and trading strategies within well-defined risk
and liquidity guidelines. We manage the assets in our core regions on a portfolio basis as
integrated businesses in order to maximize profits and minimize risk. Our business involves the
reinvestment of capital in our existing assets for reasons of repowering, expansion, environmental
remediation, operating efficiency, reliability programs, greater fuel optionality, greater merit
order diversity, enhanced portfolio effect, among other reasons. Our business also may involve
acquisitions intended to complement the asset portfolios in our core regions, and from time to time
we may also consider and undertake other merger and acquisition transactions that are consistent
with our strategy.
We seek to maximize operating income through the generation of energy, marketing and trading
of energy, trading of emissions credits, capacity and ancillary services into spot, intermediate and
long-term markets and the effective transacting in and trading of fuel supplies and
transportation-related services. We perform our own power marketing (except with respect to our
West Coast Power and Rocky Road affiliates), which is focused on maximizing the value of our North
American and Australian assets through the pursuit of asset-focused power and fuel marketing and,
trading activities in the spot, intermediate and long-term markets. We also seek to manage and
mitigate commodity market risk, reduce cash flow volatility over time, realize the full market
value of the asset base, and add incremental value by using market knowledge to effectively trade
positions associated with our asset portfolio. Additionally, we work with independent system
operators, regional transmission organizations, regulators and market participants to promote
market designs that provide adequate long-term compensation for existing generation assets and to
attract the investment required to meet future generation and reliability needs.
As
of June 30, 2005, we owned interests in 50 power projects in four countries having an
aggregate net generation capacity of approximately 15,057 MW. Approximately 7,900 MW of our
capacity consists of power plants in the Northeast region of the United States. Certain of these
assets are located in transmission constrained areas, including approximately 1,400 MW of in-city
New York City generation capacity and approximately 750 MW of southwest Connecticut generation
capacity. We own approximately 2,500 MW of generating capacity in the South Central region of the
United States, with approximately 2,150 MW of that capacity supported by long-term power purchase
agreements.
As of June 30, 2005, our assets in the Western region of the United States consisted of
approximately 1,050 MW of capacity with the majority of such capacity owned via our 50% interest in
West Coast Power LLC, or West Coast Power. One-year term reliability must-run, or RMR, agreements
with the California Independent System Operator for all of the West Coast Power capacity have been
negotiated and filed and are effective January 1, 2005. In January 2005, the West Coast Power El
Segundo generating facility entered into a tolling agreement for its entire gross generating
capacity of 670 MW commencing May 1, 2005 and extending through December 31, 2005. During the term
of this agreement, the purchaser will be entitled to primary energy dispatch rights for the
facilitys generating capacity. The agreement is subject to the amendment of the El Segundo RMR
agreement to switch to RMR Condition I and to otherwise allow the purchaser to exercise its primary
dispatch rights under this agreement while preserving Cal ISOs ability to call on the El Segundo
facility as a reliability resource under the RMR agreement, if necessary. Approximately 265 MW of
capacity at the Long Beach generating facility was retired January 1, 2005.
We own approximately 1,591 MW of net generating capacity in other regions of the U.S. We also
own interests in plants having a net generation capacity of approximately 2,063 MW in various
international markets, including Australia, Germany and Brazil. We operate substantially all of our
generating assets, including the West Coast Power plants.
38
We were incorporated as a Delaware corporation on May 29, 1992. Our common stock is listed on
the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol NRG. Our headquarters and principal executive
offices are located at 211 Carnegie Center, Princeton, New Jersey 08540. Our telephone number is
(609) 524-4500. The address of our website is www.nrgenergy.com. Our recent annual reports,
quarterly reports, current reports and other periodic filings are available free of charge through
our website.
From May 14 to December 23, 2003, we and a number of our subsidiaries undertook a
comprehensive reorganization and restructuring under chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy
Code. All NRG entities have emerged from chapter 11.
Environmental Developments
We are subject to a broad range of foreign, federal, state and local environmental and safety
laws and regulations in the development, ownership, construction and operation of our domestic and
international projects. These laws and regulations generally require that we obtain governmental
permits and approvals before construction or during operation of our power plants. Environmental
laws have become increasingly stringent over time, particularly the regulation of air emissions
from power generators. Such laws generally require regular capital expenditures for power plant
upgrades, modifications and the installation of certain pollution control equipment. It is not
possible at this time to determine when or to what extent additional facilities or modifications to
existing or planned facilities will be required due to potential changes to environmental and
safety laws and regulations, regulatory interpretations or enforcement policies. In general,
future laws and regulations are expected to require the addition of emissions control equipment or
the imposition of certain restrictions on our operations. We expect that future liability under,
or compliance with, environmental requirements could have a material effect on our operations or
competitive position.
On March 15, 2005, the US Environmental Protection Authority, or USEPA, issued the Clean Air
Mercury Rule, or CAMR, to permanently cap and reduce mercury emissions from coal-fired power
plants, and this rule was published in the Federal Register on May 18, 2005. CAMR imposes limits
on mercury emissions from new and existing coal-fired plants and creates a market-based
cap-and-trade program that will reduce nationwide utility emissions of mercury in two phases (2010
and 2018). Consistent with the significant debate on whether USEPA has authority to regulate
mercury emissions through a cap-and-trade mechanism (as opposed to a command-and-control
requirement to install maximum achievable control technology, or MACT, on a unit basis), twelve
states, together with certain environmental organizations, have sued the federal government over
CAMR. The states (including California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Wisconsin) allege that the
rule violates the Clean Air Act (CAA) because it fails to treat mercury as a hazardous air
pollutant. On August 4, 2005, the D.C. Circuit denied the
environmental petitioners request for a stay of CAMR. In addition, on June 29, 2005, Senators Leahy and Collins, together with 28 other
senators, introduced a resolution in Congress to undo the delisting rule as it relates to mercury.
Each of our coal-fired electric power plants will be subject to mercury regulation. However, since
the final rule has yet to be implemented by individual states, it is not possible to identify in
detail how the final mercury rules will affect our operations located in those states.
Nevertheless, we continue to actively review emerging mercury monitoring and mitigation
technologies to identify the most cost-effective options for the Company in implementing the
required mercury emission controls on the stipulated schedule.
The USEPA had also proposed MACT standards for nickel from oil-fired units that would
essentially require the installation of electrostatic precipitators on certain oil-fired units.
These proposed requirements were originally included in drafts of CAMR. However, reflecting further
dialog with generation industry participants and additional scientific review, the nickel MACT
provisions were omitted on the basis of the USEPAs reconsideration of the requirement for new
controls on nickel emissions from oil-fired generators. In fact, the USEPA issued a delisting rule
on March 29, 2005 effectively removing the requirements that MACT standards for nickel (i.e.,
specific control technologies to be installed at each affected plant) apply to oil-fired power
plants. A number of environmental groups have lodged legal challenges to the USEPAs delisting
rule and this matter is still pending before the courts. As the delisting challenge relates to
both nickel from oil-fired power plants and mercury from coal-fired plants, it is not possible to
predict the outcome of the pending legal action.
On March 10, 2005, the USEPA announced the Clean Air Interstate Rule, or CAIR. This rule
applies to 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia and caps SO2 and NOx emissions
from power plants in two phases (2010 and 2015 for SO2 and 2009 and 2015 for NOx). CAIR
will apply to certain of the Companys power plants in New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut,
Delaware and Louisiana. States must achieve the required emission reductions through: (a) requiring
power plants to participate in a USEPA-administered interstate cap-and-trade system; or (b)
measures to be selected by individual states. While the Companys current business plans include
initiatives to address emissions (for example, the conversion of Huntley and Dunkirk to burn low
sulfur coal), until the final rule as issued by USEPA is actually implemented by specific state
legislation, it is not possible to identify with greater specificity the effect of CAIR on the Company,
39
although it is possible that investments in
additional backend control technologies will be required and the Company continues to evaluate
these issues.
In 2004, USEPA re-proposed the Regional Haze Rule, designed to improve air quality in national
parks and wilderness areas. This rule requires regional haze controls (by targeting SO2
and NOx emissions from sources including power plants) through the installation of Best Available
Retrofit Technology, or BART, in certain cases. The Clean Visibility Rule (or so-called BART rule)
was signed by the USEPA on June 15, 2005 and published in the Federal Register on July 6, 2005,
containing BART requirements and guidelines and providing states with several options for
determining whether sources located within their borders should be subject to BART. States must
develop their implementation plans by December 2007. The BART rule will affect many of the
Companys facilities, although consistent with USEPA analysis released as part of issuing the Clean
Visibility Rule, states which adopt the CAIR cap-and-trade program for SO2 and NOx are
allowed to apply CAIR controls to also satisfy BART, since emissions reductions required under CAIR
are actually more stringent than those mandated under BART. Most of the Companys facilities
expected to be affected by BART are also subject to CAIR, so no material additional expenditures
are anticipated for compliance with the Clean Visibility Rule, beyond those separately needed for
CAIR compliance.
Federal legislation has been proposed that would impose annual caps on U.S. power plant
emissions of NOx, SO2, mercury, and, in some instances, CO2. While the Clear
Skies bill stalled in Senate Committee on March 9, 2005, the Bush Administration continues to
support, and work with Congress to achieve, passage of Clear Skies in 2005. Clear Skies overlaps
significantly with the USEPA CAIR and CAMR, and would likely modify or supersede those rules if
enacted as federal legislation.
Twelve states and various environmental groups have filed suit against USEPA asking the Court
to address whether USEPA has an existing obligation to regulate greenhouse gases, or GHGs, under
the Clean Air Act (CAA). On July 15, 2005, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit issued an opinion in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. EPA supporting USEPAs refusal to
regulate GHGs emitted from any sources, although avoiding the issue of whether USEPA has
authority, or an obligation, to regulate GHGs under the CAA. Further, eight states and the City
of New York filed suit in 2004 against American Electric Power Company, Southern Company, Tennessee
Valley Authority, Xcel Energy, Inc. and Cinergy Corporation, alleged to be the nations five
largest emitters of GHGs and all of which are owners of electric generation. In the latter case, an
injunction is sought against each defendant to force it to abate its contribution to the global
warming nuisance by requiring it to cap its CO2 emissions and then reduce them by a
specified percentage each year for at least a decade. The outcome of GHG-related litigation and
proposed legislation cannot be predicted. The Companys compliance costs with any mandated GHG
reductions in the future could be material.
Nine northeastern states have created a regional initiative to establish a cap-and-trade GHG
program for electric generators, referred to as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or RGGI.
The model RGGI rule is to be announced in fall 2005, with an estimate of two to three years for
participating states to finalize implementing regulations. The current proposal is for a RGGI cap
to be based on region-wide average CO2 emissions for the period 2000 to 2003. That cap,
referred to as stabilization, will remain the same through 2015. Before 2015, the RGGI states
will periodically review the cap, the reductions achieved in the region and the success of the
program and decide if ratcheting down the cap is needed. If RGGI is implemented, our plants in New
York, Delaware, Massachusetts, and Connecticut may be materially affected.
The Massachusetts carbon regulation 310 CMR 7.29 Emissions Standards for Power Plants
requires coal-fired generation located within the state to comply with CO2 emissions
restrictions. A carbon emissions cap will apply from 2006, while a rate requirement will apply in
2008. This regulation impacts the Companys Somerset facility. This means that if CO2
emissions at Somerset exceed the annual cap from 2006, then the excess must be offset with
CO2 credits. However, since there are currently no approved CO2 credits for
use in Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, or MADEP, has
proposed that generators annually report overages and at the time that there is a an established
CO2 market operating in the state, the Company would be required to purchase or generate
sufficient CO2 credits to offset the balance. At this point, the state has indicated
its view that 2010 is likely to be the earliest year when such a carbon credit market exists, tying
it to RGGI. Given the regulatory uncertainty surrounding implementation of Massachusettss carbon
market and the corresponding costs of CO2 credits when that market exist, Somerset could
be materially affected.
The Companys facilities in Germany are likely to be impacted by evolving emissions
limitations imposed as a result of the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, which entered into
effect in February 2005. CO2 emissions trading started in Germany in March 2005. While
allocations of allowances have now been made by the government, they are being challenged by most
recipients. Irrespective of the final allocation amounts, the Company does not expect the
CO2 trading program to be a material constraint on its business in Germany.
40
The Ozone Transport Commission, or OTC, was established by Congress and governs ozone and the
NOx budget program in certain eastern states, including Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York and
Delaware. In January 2005, the OTC stepped up its efforts to develop a multi-pollutant regime
(SO2, NOx, mercury and CO2) that is expected to be completed by mid-2006
(with individual state implementation to follow). On June 8, 2005 the OTC members unanimously
resolved to implement CAIR-Plus emissions regulations, based on concerns that the USEPAs CAIR
fails to achieve attainment of 8-hour ozone and fine particulate matter. As a result, the OTC
proposes to implement a regional plan containing emissions reduction targets from power plants that
exceed those under CAIR. The OTC targets and timelines are as follows: (a) through June 2006:
write model rule, with participating states signing a Memorandum of Understanding; (b) by December
2006 states file their implementation plans or reduction regulations; (c) 2008 Phase I reductions
of NOx (to 1.87 million tons) and SO2 (to 3.0 million tons) apply; (d) 2012 Phase II
reductions of NOx (to 1.28 million tons) and SO2 (to 2.0 million tons) apply; and (e)
2015 90% mercury removal required. OTCs proposed CAIR-Plus involves emissions reductions which
are both sooner and more aggressive than CAIR (e.g., aggregate NOx reductions would be 25% greater
than CAIR, while SO2 reductions would be 33% greater than CAIR). The Company continues
to be engaged in the OTC stakeholder process. While it is not possible to predict the outcome of
this regional legislative effort, to the extent that the OTC is successful in implementing
emissions requirements that are more stringent than existing regimes (including the recently
reached New York settlement), the Company could be materially impacted.
Pursuant to New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, or NYSDEC, rules (the
Acid Deposition Reduction Program, ADRP) fossil-fuel-fired combustion units in New York must reduce
SO2 emissions to 25% below the levels allowed in the federal Acid Rain Program starting
January 2005 (and 50% below the levels allowed by the federal Acid Rain Program starting in January
2008). In addition, under ADRP generators now also have to meet the ozone season NOx emissions
limit year-round.
On January 11, 2005, the Company reached an agreement with the State of New York and the
NYSDEC in connection with voluntary emissions reductions at the Huntley and Dunkirk facilities, as
discussed in Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies, to the Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements. The Consent Decree was entered by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
New York on June 3, 2005. The Company does not anticipate that any material capital expenditures,
beyond those already planned, will be required for our Huntley and Dunkirk plants to meet the
current compliance standards under the Consent Decree through the end
of the decade, although,
this does not reflect any additional capital expenditures that may be required to satisfy other
federal and state laws.
In the 1990s, the USEPA commenced an industry-wide investigation of coal-fired electric
generators to determine compliance with environmental requirements under the CAA associated with
repairs, maintenance, modifications and operational changes made to facilities over the years. As
a result, USEPA and several states filed suits against a number of coal-fired power plants in
mid-western and southern states alleging violations of the CAA New Source Review (NSR)
requirements. One of the more prominent suits of this type, involving Ohio Edison, announced an
agreement on March 18, 2005 which settles NSR issues with respect to all coal-fired plant located
in Ohio and obligates First Energy to spend $1.1 billion to install pollution control equipment
through 2010. In another similar suit, the USEPA appeal in the Duke Energy case was finally heard
and on June 15, 2005 the US Court of Appeal held in favor of Dukes position as to what type of
modification triggers NSR and Prevention of Significant Deterioration provisions (although on
August 1, 2005 the Department of Justice and some environmental groups filed petitions for
rehearing of this case). In addition, on June 3, 2005 the US District Court reached conclusions
favorable to Alabama Power through the courts interpretation of NSR rules relating to routine
maintenance, repair and replacement, or RMRR, and the correct test for determining a significant
net emissions increase. In the meantime, the USEPAs proposed NSR rule from October 2003 underwent
further review and on May 31, 2005, USEPA confirmed that it was maintaining the material provisions
of the October 2003 proposal, particularly as they relate to a 20% per year capital spending limit
for RMRR. Litigation challenging USEPAs NSR rule revisions has been on hold pending the outcome
of USEPAs reconsideration. Plaintiffs have until the end of August to make further filings, with
court hearings not expected on the NSR amended rule lawsuit until mid-2006.
On January 27, 2004, Louisiana Generating, LLC and Big Cajun II received a request for
information under Section 114 of the CAA from USEPA seeking information primarily related to
physical changes made at Big Cajun II and subsequently received a Notice of Violation based on
alleged NSR violations. The current status of this matter is described in Note 13, Commitments and
Contingencies, to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Regulatory Developments
As participants in the wholesale electric energy market, the NRG companies are subject to
regulatory oversight by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC. This regulatory
oversight includes permitting the NRG companies to sell electricity and related products and
services at market-based rates, and the authority to revise market rules to insure that the rates
charged are just and reasonable. The
41
United States Congress has passed significant federal energy legislation,
which is awaiting execution by the President. We are currently evaluating this legislation for its
potential impact.
Northeast Region
New England
ISO-NE and NEPOOL operate a centralized energy market with Day-Ahead and Real-time energy
markets. On August 23, 2004, ISO-NE filed its proposal for locational installed capacity, or LICAP,
with FERC, which is deciding the issue in a litigated proceeding before an administrative law
judge. Under the proposal, separate capacity markets would be created for distinct areas of New
England, including southwest Connecticut and the rest of the state of Connecticut. While we view
this proposal as a positive development, as it is currently proposed it would not permit us to
recover all of our fixed costs. In response, we have submitted testimony, which includes an
alternative proposal. On June 15, 2005, the FERC administrative law judge issued her recommended
decision, which recommended FERC approve ISO-NEs proposed LICAP design with few exceptions. On
July 15, 2005, NRG and the parties to the case filed briefs on exceptions to the decision with
FERC. FERCs stated goal is to issue a decision on the precise terms of the NEPOOL LICAP market in the
fall of 2005, so that the LICAP market can be implemented on January 1, 2006.
New York
In April 2003, NYISO implemented a demand curve in its capacity market and scarcity pricing
improvements in its energy market. The New York demand curve eliminated the previous market
structures tendency to price capacity at either its cap (deficiency rate) or near zero. FERC had
previously approved the demand curve, but on December 19, 2003, the Electricity Consumers Resource
Council (ELCON) appealed the FERC decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit. On December 3, 2004, NRG Energy and other suppliers filed a brief in opposition.
On May 13, 2005, the court denied the appeal thereby ending the case.
On January 7, 2005, NYISO filed proposed LICAP demand curves for the following capacity years:
2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08. Under the NYISO proposal, the LICAP price for New York City
generation would be $126 per KW-year for the capacity year 2006-07. On January 28, 2005, we filed a
protest at FERC asserting the LICAP price for this period should be at least $140 per KW-year. On
April 21, 2005 FERC accepted the proposed demand curves with certain revisions. The FERCs
modifications should also increase the capacity prices in New York City but the existing In-City
mitigation measures will prevent us from obtaining these higher prices.
Our New York City generation is presently subject to price mitigation in the installed
capacity market. When the capacity market is tight, the price we receive is capped by the
mitigation price. However when the New York City capacity market is not tight, such as during the
winter season, the proposed demand curve price levels should increase our revenues from capacity
sales.
South Central Region
On April 1, 2004 Entergy filed revisions to its Open Access Transmission Tariff, or OATT,
proposing: (1) to contract with an independent entity, (an
Independent Coordinator of Transmission, or ICT), to provide oversight over the
operations of the Entergy transmission system; (2) a new process for assigning cost
responsibilities for transmission upgrades; and (3) a new Weekly Procurement Process (WPP). The
FERC convened a series of technical conferences to discuss issues raised by Entergys proposal.
On January 3, 2005, Entergy submitted a petition for declaratory order requesting guidance on
issues associated with its proposal to establish an ICT.
Entergy requested the Commissions guidance on whether the functions to be performed by the ICT
will cause it to become a public utility under the Federal Power Act or the Transmission Provider
under Entergys OATT and whether Entergys transmission pricing proposal satisfies the Commissions
transmission pricing policy.
On March 22, 2005, FERC granted Entergys Petition for Declaratory Order. FERC stated that
the order benefits customers because implementation of the ICT proposal on an experimental basis
goes beyond the transmission service offered under Entergys existing pro forma transmission tariff
and will permit a transmission decision-making process that is independent of control by any market
participant or class of participants. The Commission believes the ICT may be just and reasonable
with certain modifications. The Commission is prepared to grant Entergys proposed transmission
pricing proposal on a two-year experimental basis, subject to certain enhancements and monitoring
and reporting conditions. Before any approval of Entergys transmission pricing proposal can be
given, Entergy must make a section 205 filing in a new docket detailing the enhanced functions that
the ICT will perform. On May 27, 2005, Entergy submitted its Section 205 filing identifying the
proposed revision to its OATT. On June 30, 2005, FERC conducted
a technical conference to discuss issues raised by
Entergys filing.
42
On August 5, 2005, NRG and a group of
generators filed comments with FERC, stating that; (1) the ICT
entity should be given more authority; (2) the weekly
procurement process should be open to all participants; and
(3) the price of congestion should be calculated on a real-time
basis.
On December 17, 2004, FERC ordered that an investigation and evidentiary hearing be held to
determine whether Entergy is providing access to its transmission system on a short-term basis and
in a just and reasonable manner. On March 22, 2005, FERC suspended the hearing until Entergy
indicates whether it will accept the FERC conditional approval of its ICT proposal. On April 21,
2005, NRG and other generators and municipalities filed a motion for rehearing, claiming that the
suspension of the hearing was unjust and unreasonable. On May 22, 2005, FERC issued an order
stating that the this proceeding will be addressed in a future order.
Western Region
The Cal ISO and the California Energy Commission, or CEC, project a southern California peak
load shortage this summer against a 15% reserve margin of up to of nearly 2,000 MW assuming normal
weather conditions. The warnings from the Cal ISO and CEC are being heeded by the various
regulatory agencies and they are moving to design a market that will provide the incentives to
invest in new generation. The California Public Utility Commission, or CPUC, now requires that
load-serving entities meet a 15-17% reserve margin by June 2006. This has prompted RFOs from
load-serving entities, with the stated goal of engaging in bilateral contract negotiations with the
merchant generators to secure their long-term capacity needs. They must demonstrate that they have
secured at least 90% of their capacity needs by June 2005. This order will present significant
opportunities to enter into new bilateral agreements. The Red Bluff and Chowchilla facilities have
received capacity contracts for the period April 1, 2006 through December 31, 2007. In September
2004, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed AB2006, commonly referred to as the re-regulation initiative
with a promise to the California people that he wants to create a competitive energy market in
California that will attract the investment capital required to meet growing load obligations.
At the Cal ISO, a market re-design, known as Market Redesign and Technology Update, is
currently underway and has made significant progress in the past year. In addition to that
activity, the CPUC is engaged in another critical portion of the market design that involves
long-term resource adequacy and we expect an order to be issued by the California Public Utility
Commission by year end 2005, thus creating greater opportunities for merchant generators in
California.
Australian Region
The Australian based generation assets of NRG operate within the National Electricity Market,
or NEM, a physical wholesale market encompassing the interconnected states of southern and eastern
Australia.
In 2003, the governments spanning the NEM embarked upon a series of reforms to address
perceived deficiencies in the governance and institutional structure of the market. During the
quarter, draft legislation was finalized to give effect to these reforms, including the creation of
new regulatory bodies and streamlined market rule change processes. These reforms are not intended
to alter the fundamental design or operation of the market, but are designed to improve the
regulatory framework in which it operates, and are scheduled to take effect mid-year.
On March 14, 2005, a blackout occurred in the South Australian region of the NEM, initiated by
a transmission fault which triggered a sequence of events, including the operation of the Overspeed
Protection Controllers on both Northern Power Station Units at
Flinders. The National Electricity Code
Administrator, or NECA, the regulatory body responsible for the enforcement of market rules at the
time of the event, is conducting an investigation into the event. We are also conducting an
investigation.
43
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following tables provide selected financial information by segment for the three months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three months ended June 30, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
South |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other North |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northeast |
|
|
Central |
|
|
Western |
|
|
America |
|
|
Australia |
|
|
All Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Energy revenue |
|
$ |
236,701 |
|
|
$ |
59,964 |
|
|
$ |
(27 |
) |
|
$ |
9,262 |
|
|
$ |
36,272 |
|
|
$ |
18,778 |
|
|
$ |
360,950 |
|
Capacity revenue |
|
|
72,845 |
|
|
|
45,559 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,662 |
|
|
|
140,926 |
|
Alternative revenue |
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,153 |
|
|
|
45,848 |
|
O & M fees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,475 |
|
|
|
4,475 |
|
Other revenues |
|
|
5,801 |
|
|
|
3,406 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1,827 |
) |
|
|
20,865 |
|
|
|
4,121 |
|
|
|
32,368 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating revenues |
|
|
315,676 |
|
|
|
108,929 |
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
9,661 |
|
|
|
57,137 |
|
|
|
93,189 |
|
|
|
584,567 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of energy |
|
|
157,568 |
|
|
|
71,539 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
5,041 |
|
|
|
24,352 |
|
|
|
40,118 |
|
|
|
298,638 |
|
Other operating expenses * |
|
|
99,905 |
|
|
|
27,092 |
|
|
|
1,585 |
|
|
|
4,474 |
|
|
|
24,998 |
|
|
|
32,942 |
|
|
|
190,996 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
18,582 |
|
|
|
15,085 |
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
2,010 |
|
|
|
6,118 |
|
|
|
5,757 |
|
|
|
47,749 |
|
Operating income/(loss) |
|
|
39,613 |
|
|
|
(4,790 |
) |
|
|
(1,826 |
) |
|
|
(1,866 |
) |
|
|
1,669 |
|
|
|
13,705 |
|
|
|
46,505 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the three months ended June 30, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
South |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other North |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northeast |
|
|
Central |
|
|
Western |
|
|
America |
|
|
Australia |
|
|
All Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
Energy revenue |
|
$ |
184,615 |
|
|
$ |
53,401 |
|
|
$ |
1,746 |
|
|
$ |
7,827 |
|
|
$ |
28,271 |
|
|
$ |
57,122 |
|
|
$ |
332,982 |
|
Capacity revenue |
|
|
71,924 |
|
|
|
44,512 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,766 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,324 |
|
|
|
160,526 |
|
Alternative revenue |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,291 |
|
|
|
42,660 |
|
O & M fees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,027 |
|
|
|
4,937 |
|
Other revenues |
|
|
18,484 |
|
|
|
4,584 |
|
|
|
(817 |
) |
|
|
(2,279 |
) |
|
|
8,522 |
|
|
|
4,024 |
|
|
|
32,518 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating revenues |
|
|
275,029 |
|
|
|
102,497 |
|
|
|
929 |
|
|
|
29,587 |
|
|
|
36,793 |
|
|
|
128,788 |
|
|
|
573,623 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of energy |
|
|
113,198 |
|
|
|
50,402 |
|
|
|
803 |
|
|
|
2,949 |
|
|
|
18,445 |
|
|
|
39,321 |
|
|
|
225,118 |
|
Other operating expenses * |
|
|
89,150 |
|
|
|
18,143 |
|
|
|
1,146 |
|
|
|
10,695 |
|
|
|
22,414 |
|
|
|
32,338 |
|
|
|
173,886 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
17,382 |
|
|
|
14,572 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
6,930 |
|
|
|
6,886 |
|
|
|
7,195 |
|
|
|
53,168 |
|
Operating income/(loss) |
|
|
55,268 |
|
|
|
17,772 |
|
|
|
(1,224 |
) |
|
|
9,013 |
|
|
|
(10,954 |
) |
|
|
46,916 |
|
|
|
116,791 |
|
The following tables provide selected financial information by segment for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the six months ended June 30, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
South |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other North |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northeast |
|
|
Central |
|
|
Western |
|
|
America |
|
|
Australia |
|
|
All Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
Energy revenue |
|
$ |
513,249 |
|
|
$ |
128,847 |
|
|
$ |
136 |
|
|
$ |
14,222 |
|
|
$ |
68,101 |
|
|
$ |
38,570 |
|
|
$ |
763,125 |
|
Capacity revenue |
|
|
137,678 |
|
|
|
90,835 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,264 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,123 |
|
|
|
274,900 |
|
Alternative revenue |
|
|
345 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,309 |
|
|
|
94,748 |
|
O & M fees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,139 |
|
|
|
9,139 |
|
Other revenues |
|
|
(3,136 |
) |
|
|
6,393 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
(4,772 |
) |
|
|
37,822 |
|
|
|
7,476 |
|
|
|
43,797 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating revenues |
|
|
648,136 |
|
|
|
226,075 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
14,808 |
|
|
|
105,923 |
|
|
|
190,617 |
|
|
|
1,185,709 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of energy |
|
|
342,721 |
|
|
|
137,999 |
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
6,525 |
|
|
|
46,982 |
|
|
|
89,256 |
|
|
|
623,863 |
|
Other operating expenses * |
|
|
194,867 |
|
|
|
51,007 |
|
|
|
2,661 |
|
|
|
12,141 |
|
|
|
47,136 |
|
|
|
60,775 |
|
|
|
368,587 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
37,191 |
|
|
|
30,227 |
|
|
|
395 |
|
|
|
4,003 |
|
|
|
12,712 |
|
|
|
11,645 |
|
|
|
96,173 |
|
Operating income/(loss) |
|
|
73,345 |
|
|
|
6,839 |
|
|
|
(3,285 |
) |
|
|
(7,863 |
) |
|
|
(907 |
) |
|
|
24,823 |
|
|
|
92,952 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the six months ended June 30, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
South |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other North |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northeast |
|
|
Central |
|
|
Western |
|
|
America |
|
|
Australia |
|
|
All Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
Energy revenue |
|
$ |
442,251 |
|
|
$ |
99,788 |
|
|
$ |
2,950 |
|
|
$ |
13,116 |
|
|
$ |
82,333 |
|
|
$ |
75,451 |
|
|
$ |
715,889 |
|
Capacity revenue |
|
|
130,694 |
|
|
|
89,839 |
|
|
|
(3,709 |
) |
|
|
40,878 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,455 |
|
|
|
299,157 |
|
Alternative revenue |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87,759 |
|
|
|
88,788 |
|
O & M fees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,400 |
|
|
|
10,522 |
|
Other revenues |
|
|
32,613 |
|
|
|
8,135 |
|
|
|
(1,632 |
) |
|
|
(4,714 |
) |
|
|
16,689 |
|
|
|
8,441 |
|
|
|
59,532 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating revenues |
|
|
605,569 |
|
|
|
197,762 |
|
|
|
(2,393 |
) |
|
|
50,422 |
|
|
|
99,022 |
|
|
|
223,506 |
|
|
|
1,173,888 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of energy |
|
|
259,233 |
|
|
|
98,492 |
|
|
|
921 |
|
|
|
4,725 |
|
|
|
41,907 |
|
|
|
85,520 |
|
|
|
490,798 |
|
Other operating expenses * |
|
|
168,216 |
|
|
|
33,991 |
|
|
|
2,738 |
|
|
|
19,869 |
|
|
|
39,488 |
|
|
|
62,049 |
|
|
|
326,351 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
35,911 |
|
|
|
31,534 |
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
14,540 |
|
|
|
12,011 |
|
|
|
13,773 |
|
|
|
108,174 |
|
Operating income/(loss) |
|
|
141,858 |
|
|
|
31,414 |
|
|
|
(6,458 |
) |
|
|
11,138 |
|
|
|
5,615 |
|
|
|
52,972 |
|
|
|
236,539 |
|
____________
* Other operating expenses include Cost of majority-owned operations and General,
administrative and development expenses, excluding
Cost of energy
44
For the three months ended June 30, 2005 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2004
Consolidated Results
Net Income
For the three months ended June 30, 2005, net income was $23.9 million, or $0.22 per diluted
weighted average share of common stock compared to $83.0 million or $0.83 per diluted weighted
average share of common stock for the three months ended June 30, 2004. The quarter began with
mild temperatures in April and May, where in the Northeast region temperatures ranged from -6ºF to
+4.5ºF from the average, whereas in June, the Northeast region had significant heat, up to 9ºF
above average1. With gas prices 14% higher this quarter2 versus second
quarter 2004 increasing our spark spreads and dark
spreads. Our New York City assets benefited from the increased spark spreads with generation 90%
higher than second quarter 2004 due to competitor outages and the June heat. We also benefited
from an 8% increase in generation in our Australia operation over second quarter 2004, partially
due to the addition of the Playford station. However, compressed oil margins from our oil-fired
facilities and reduced generation of 0.54 million MWh from our total domestic operations this
quarter versus 2004 partially offset these higher spark and dark spreads. Generation decreased
over second quarter 2004 primarily due to unplanned outages at our Huntley and Louisiana Generating
facilities and the extension of a planned outage at our Indian River facility. The total decrease
in generation due to these outages was 0.44 million MWh.
Net income results were favorably impacted by $5.1 million of net unrealized gains associated
with forward sales of electricity supporting our Northeast assets, as well as lower interest
expense as a result of the December 2004 refinancing which lowered interest expense by $8.8
million, as well as decreased tax expense. Additionally, we recorded an $11.6 million gain
associated with the sale of our Enfield investment. These favorable results were offset by higher
operating expenses and a reduction of $29.6 million in equity earnings in comparison to the second
quarter of 2004. The decline in equity earnings is attributable to the $10.3 million
mark-to-market gain in 2004 from the Enfield investment which was sold on April 1, 2005, and
reduced equity earnings of $17.5 million from WCP related to the CDWR contract, which expired on
December 31, 2004. Our net income during the second quarter of 2004 was also positively impacted
by a one time payment of $38.5 million from the Connecticut Light and Power settlement.
Revenues from Majority-Owned Operations
Revenues from majority-owned operations were $584.6 million for the three months ended June
30, 2005 compared to $573.6 million for the three months ended June 30, 2004. Revenues for the
three months ended June 30, 2005 included $361.0 million of energy revenues compared to $333.0
million of energy revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2004. Of the $361.0 million, 83%
were non-contracted and non-capacity generation revenues; or merchant revenues. In the second
quarter of 2004, 66% of our energy revenues were merchant. The increase in energy revenues in 2005
versus 2004 was due to increased generation from our New York City assets which increased revenue
by $27 million, and to a lesser extent, our NEPOOL and Oswego assets which increased revenue by
$31.7 million, Competitor outages and the June heat drove the higher generation in New York City
and NEPOOL assets. This favorable variance versus prior year was partially offset by the 2004
collection of $38.5 million from the Connecticut Light and Power settlement, recorded as energy
revenues, which is reflected in our All Other region.
Capacity revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2005 were $140.9 million compared to
$160.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2004. Capacity revenues were unfavorable for
the second quarter of 2005 compared to 2004 due to the loss of capacity revenues from the Kendall
facility, which was sold in the fourth quarter of 2004. Alternative revenues and Operations and
maintenance, or O&M, fees for the three months ended June 30, 2005 were $45.8 million and $4.5
million, respectively. This compares to $42.7 million of alternative energy revenues and $4.9
million of O&M fees in the second quarter of 2004. Higher capacity prices from our Thermal
operations positively impacted the alternative revenues results by $2.6 million, due to an annual
increase in contract rates. Other revenues include derivative and financial revenues, natural gas
sales, Fresh Start-related contract amortization, and expense recovery revenues. For the three
months ended June 30, 2005, other revenues totaled $32.4 million compared to $32.5 million for the
three months ended June 30, 2004. Other revenues were positively impacted by higher gas sales of
$3 million and less contract amortization in 2005 versus 2004 of $7.3 million, as contracts have
rolled off over the course of 2004. These favorable items were offset by $11.5 million of lower
expense recovery revenues. Expense recovery revenues relate to our Connecticut RMR agreements.
|
|
|
1 |
|
Information available from the National
Climatic Data Center of the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, or
NOAA |
|
2 |
|
Per the Henry Hub gas price index published
by Platts Gas Daily |
45
Cost of Majority-Owned Operations
Cost of majority-owned operations for the three months ended June 30, 2005 was $436.5 million
or 75% of revenues from majority-owned operations. Cost of majority-owned operations for the three
months ended June 30, 2004 was $353.3 million or 62% of revenues from majority-owned operations.
Cost of majority-owned operations consists of the cost of energy (primarily fuel costs), operating
labor, operating and maintenance costs and non-income based taxes. Cost of energy for the second
quarter of 2005 was $298.6 versus $225.1 million for the second quarter of 2004. Higher gas and
oil fuel cost in our domestic operations were the primary drivers of the increased fuel costs, with
gas prices 14% higher and oil prices 37.4% higher than second quarter last year. Our gas fuel cost
increased by $30.3 million, 89% of which was due to higher generation from our New York City
assets. Oil fuel cost increased by $28.6 million, 52% of which was due to higher generation from
our oil-fired assets and 48% was due to an increase in price. Additionally, purchased energy
increased by $17.5 million, as our South Central operation purchased energy to meet its contract
load during its unplanned outages.
O&M costs for the second quarter 2005 totaled $132.6 million versus $121.4 million in the
second quarter of 2004. This increase is driven by a $10.5 million increase in major maintenance
projects related to the low-sulfur coal conversions and turbine overhauls in our Western New York
plants and Indian River plant, which were underway during the second quarter of 2005.
Depreciation and Amortization
Our depreciation and amortization expense for the three months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004
was $47.7 million and $53.2 million, respectively. The decrease in depreciation and amortization
from 2005 to 2004 is primarily due to the 2004 sale of our Kendall plant, which contributed $4.9
million in depreciation and amortization expense in the second quarter of 2004.
General, Administrative and Development
Our general, administrative and development, or G&A, costs for the three months ended June 30,
2005 were $53.2 million compared to $45.7 million for the three months ended June 30, 2004. These
amounts include corporate costs of $26.9 million, or 4.6% of operating revenues, for the second
quarter of 2005, as compared to $23.3 million, or 4.1% of operating revenues, for the second
quarter of 2004. G&A costs are primarily comprised of corporate and regional office labor,
corporate and plant insurance and external professional support, such as legal, accounting and
audit fees. G&A costs have been adversely impacted by $5.5 million of increased insurance expenses
as compared to the second quarter 2004.
Corporate Relocation Charges
During the three months ended June 30, 2005, charges related to our corporate relocation
activities were $0.5 million as compared to $5.6 million for the same period in 2004. This
decrease in expense reflects the fact that the relocation of our corporate headquarters is nearly
complete. The relocation plan will be completed by the end of 2005, and we expect to incur an
additional $1 million.
Impairment charges
During the three months ended June 30, 2005 we recorded $0.2 million of impairment charges as
compared to $1.7 million in the second quarter of 2004. On an annual basis we evaluate the
possible impairment of our assets, unless certain events occur which trigger an impairment
analysis.
Equity in Earnings of Unconsolidated Affiliates
During the three months ended June 30, 2005, we recorded $16.5 million of equity earnings from
our investments in unconsolidated affiliates as compared to $46.1 million for the three months
ended June 30, 2004. Our equity earnings from WCP comprised $4.4 million for the second quarter of
2005 as compared to $21.9 million for the second quarter of 2004, a net decrease of $17.5 million.
This decrease in earnings is because the CDWR contract expired in December 2004. Additionally,
equity earnings in 2004 included a $10.3 million mark-to-market unrealized gain at Enfield
associated with changes in the fair value of energy-related derivative instruments not accounted
for as hedges in accordance with SFAS No. 133. We sold our Enfield investment on April 1, 2005.
Other equity investments included in the 2005 results are MIBRAG and Gladstone, comprising
$0.5 million and $5.6 million, respectively. During the three months ended June 30, 2004, we
recorded earnings of $4.5 million for MIBRAG and $3.5 million for
46
Gladstone. MIBRAGs equity earnings for 2005 were negatively impacted by planned outages by
two of its primary customers, reducing the amount of coal they purchased from MIBRAG by 8
million (approximately $10.3 million). Our equity earnings were negatively impacted by 50% of this
amount.
Write Downs and Gains/(Losses) on Sales of Equity Method Investments
During the second quarter of 2005, we sold our 25% interest in Enfield. The sale resulted in
net pre-tax proceeds of $64.6 million and a pre-tax gain of $11.6 million, including the
post-closing working capital adjustments. For the three months ended June 30, 2004, we collected
$1.2 million of post-sale payments for Loy Yang and Calpine Cogeneration, which were recorded as a
gain.
Other income, net
During the three months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, we recorded $7.7 million and $8.1
million, respectively, of other income, net. Other income includes interest income, gain or loss
on foreign exchange, and other miscellaneous items. Interest income for the second quarter of 2005
increased over the second quarter of 2004 by $4.1 million, from $5.5 million to $9.6 million, due to
more efficient management of unrestricted cash and maximizing interest income. This increase was
partially offset in the second quarter of 2004 from recognizing an insurance gain from a previous
loss incurred, in the amount of $2.5 million.
Interest expense
Interest expense for the three months ended June 30, 2005 was $50.6 million as compared to
$66.2 million, for the three months ended June 30, 2004. Interest expense declined, in part, due
to the sale of Kendall in the fourth quarter of 2004. Kendall incurred $6.5 million of interest
expense in the second quarter of 2004. Additionally, in December 2004 we refinanced our Senior
Credit Facility and lowered our interest rate by 212.5 basis points. During the first quarter of
2005 we redeemed and repurchased $415.8 million of our Second Priority Notes. Together, these
transactions reduced interest expense by approximately $11.8 million. In connection with our
refinancing of our debt in Australia, we paid down $57.2 million during the first six months of
2005. As such, interest expense paid by our Australian operation decreased by $2.9 million quarter
over quarter.
Income Tax Expense
Income tax expense was $8.1 million and $36.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2005
and 2004, respectively. The effective tax rate was 25.9% and 34.4% for the three months ended June
30, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The effective income tax rate for the three months ended June 30,
2005 differs from the U.S. statutory rate of 35% due to lower tax rates for income derived in
foreign jurisdictions. This was partially offset by the Subpart F taxation for the sale of
Enfield, which increased our domestic tax expense by $11.4 million in the second quarter of 2005.
The effective tax rate may vary from period to period depending on, among other factors, the
geographic and business mix of earnings and losses and the creation of valuation allowances in
accordance with SFAS No. 109. These factors and others, including our history of pre-tax earnings
and losses, are taken into account in assessing the ability to realize deferred tax assets.
Income from Discontinued Operations, net of Income Taxes
We classified as discontinued operations the operations and gains/losses recognized on the
sale of projects that were sold or were deemed to have met the required criteria for such
classification pending final disposition. During the three months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, we
recorded income from discontinued operations of $0.7 million and $13.6 million, respectively.
Discontinued operations for the three months ended June 30, 2005 consist of various expenses
related to NRG McClain to effect its liquidation. During the period ended June 30, 2004,
discontinued operations consisted of the results of our NRG McClain LLC, Penobscot Energy Recovery
Company, or PERC, Compania Boliviana De Energia Electrica S.A. Bolivian Power Company Limited, or
Cobee, Hsin Yu, LSP Energy (Batesville) and four NEO Corporation projects (NEO Nashville LLC, NEO
Hackensack LLC, NEO Prima Deshecha and NEO Tajiguas LLC). All discontinued operations were sold
prior to December 31, 2004.
Regional Discussion
Northeast Region Results
Operating Income
47
For the three months ended June 30, 2005, operating income for the Northeast region was $39.6
million, as compared to $55.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2004. The quarter began
with mild temperatures in April and May, where temperatures ranged from -6ºF to +4.5ºF from the
average, whereas in June, the Northeast region had significant heat, up to 9ºF above
average1. With gas prices 14%2 higher this quarter versus second quarter
2004 increasing our spark spreads and dark spreads. However,
oil margins were compressed by 55% at our oil-fired generation and an overall 2.7% lower generation
from the Northeast assets this quarter versus 2004 partially offset these increased spark and dark
spreads. Generation decreased this quarter versus last quarter primarily due to planned and
unplanned outages at our Huntley facility and the extension of a planned outage at our Indian River
facility. The unplanned outages reduced generation by 0.12 million MWh. Higher major maintenance
costs of $8.6 million were due to these more extensive outages, which were partially offset by
lower property tax expense of $3.2 million, as compared to the same quarter last year. Also,
during the second quarter of 2005, we recorded $5.1 million of net unrealized gains associated with
forward sales of electricity supporting our Northeast assets.
Revenues
Revenues from our Northeast region totaled $315.7 million for the three months ended June 30,
2005 compared to $275.0 million for the three months ended June 30, 2004. Revenues for the three
months ended June 30, 2005 included $236.7 million in energy revenues compared to $184.6 million
for the three months ended June 30, 2004. This favorable increase versus 2004 is due to the
increased generation from our New York City facilities of 0.23 million MWh and NEPOOL assets of
0.16 million MWh, or 48.3% more than in the second quarter of 2004. Outages of local competitors
in the early part of the quarter and excessive heat in June provided the opportunity for the New
York City and NEPOOL assets to sell more merchant energy. Capacity revenues for the three months
ended June 30, 2005 were stable at $72.8 million compared to $71.9 million for the three months
ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Other revenues include derivative and financial
revenues, natural gas sales, Fresh Start-related contract amortization, and expense recovery
revenues. For the three months ended June 30, 2005, other revenues totaled a $5.8 million compared
to $18.5 million of other revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2004. Other revenues were
lower in 2005 by $11.5 million from our Connecticut RMR agreements. As of the first quarter of
2005, we recorded the maximum reimbursement under those agreements.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses, consisting of cost of energy, other operating expense, and depreciation
and amortization, for our Northeast operations for the three months ended June 30, 2005 were $276.1
million or 87% of the Northeasts revenues, as compared to $219.7 million or 80% of revenues for
the three months ended June 30, 2004. The increase in operating expenses is primarily driven by
the increase in the cost of energy, as generation and fuel prices increased from the second quarter
2005 compared to the second quarter 2004.
Cost of energy in the Northeast was $157.6 million as compared to $113.2 million in 2004, a
growth of $44.4 million. Oil costs in our Northeast region increased by $29.2 million, with $16.6
million of the increase due to increased generation from our NEPOOL assets. Gas costs increased by
$26.6 million over the second quarter of 2004. Of this total, $27.7 million was due to increased
generation at our New York City assets. Coal costs at our Northeast region decreased by $2.7
million, as lower generation from our Northeast coal-fired plants more than offset higher coal
prices. Because of planned and unplanned outages at our Northeast coal-fired plants, generation
from these assets decreased by 23%, which lowered expense by $14.1 million compared to second
quarter 2004. However, higher prices offset the impact of lower generation and accounted for an
$11.4 million increase in coal costs versus second quarter 2004. The increase in coal prices
impacted our Indian River facility in particular. Indian River burns eastern coal which has
experienced high price volatility versus western coal. As such, this plant was more adversely
affected by the overall increase in coal prices this quarter versus second quarter 2004.
Other operating expenses includes O&M expenses, non-income based taxes, and G&A costs. O&M
for our Northeast region was $76.7 million for the second quarter 2005 as compared to $68.2 million
in the second quarter 2004. O&M costs include operating labor, normal and major maintenance and
plant utilities. The $8.5 million increase in O&M expense this quarter versus second quarter 2004
is due to increased major maintenance projects including the low-sulfur conversion projects and the
turbine overhauls at our Western New York plants and Indian River. Other non-income based taxes
and G&A expenses for the Northeast region include sales and property taxes, administrative regional
office costs, insurance and corporate allocations. For the second quarter 2005, non-income
|
|
|
1 |
|
Information available from the National
Climatic Data Center of the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, or
NOAA |
|
2 |
|
Per the Henry Hub gas price index published
by Platts Gas Daily |
48
based taxes and G&A expenses totaled $23.5 million for the second quarter of 2005 as compared
to $20.7 million in 2004. This increase is due to the increase in the corporate allocations per
our new allocation methodology as discussed in Note 10, Segment Reporting, to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements. Additionally, the Northeasts regional office costs were largely
recorded as corporate costs in 2004. This increase was offset by lower property taxes of $3
million.
South Central Region Results
Operating Income
For the period ending June 30, 2005, the South Central region incurred an operating loss of
$4.8 million, as compared to $17.8 million in operating income for the period ended June 30, 2004,
a decrease of $22.6 million. This quarter, our Big Cajun II facility experienced several forced
outages, which required the purchase of additional higher priced energy to meet its contract
load-following obligation. Due to both forced and unforced outages, total generation from the
South Central assets decreased by 17.5% over second quarter last year. Big Cajun II also had a
planned outage in the second quarter and as such, South Centrals major maintenance expense increased this
quarter compared to the second quarter 2004.
Revenues
Revenues from our South Central region were $108.9 million for the three months ended June 30,
2005 compared to $102.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2004. Revenues for the three
months ended June 30, 2005 included $60.0 million in energy revenues, of which 78% were contracted.
This compares to $53.4 million of energy revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2004; 70.7%
of which were contracted. Higher contracted energy sales drove the overall increase in energy
revenues, as new and higher contract rates became effective on January 1, 2005. Capacity revenues
were $45.6 million and $44.5 million in the three months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Capacity revenues are stable quarter versus quarter as they are fully contracted.
Other revenues include coal sales, derivative and financial revenues and Fresh Start-related
contract amortization. For the three months ended June 30, 2005, other revenues totaled $3.4
million compared to $4.6 million for the three months ended June 30, 2004 due to lower Fresh Start
amortization and lower coal sales.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses for our South Central region for the three months ended June 30, 2005 were
$113.7 million or 104% of South Centrals revenues, as compared to $83.1 million or 81% of revenues
for the three months ended June 30, 2004. The increase of operating expenses is primarily driven
by the increase in cost of energy. Total cost of energy in South Central was $71.5 million as
compared to $50.4 million in 2004, an increase of $21.1 million. A number of forced and unforced
outages combined with higher contract demand due to hot weather in June required the purchase of
energy to meet contract load obligations at prices higher than our coal-based generating assets.
Second quarter purchased energy costs were up $23.7 million compared to last year. An average price
increase of $11.21 per megawatt hour of purchased energy also contributed to the higher cost versus
second quarter 2004. This increase was offset by $3.7 million lower coal cost due to 17.5% lower
generation.
Other operating expenses were $27.1 million and $18.1 million for June 30, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. O&M for our South Central region was $15.7 million for the second quarter 2005 as
compared to $10.7 million in the second quarter 2004. Of this increase, $5.6 million is related to
higher major maintenance due to both planned and unplanned outages.
Non-income based taxes and G&A
expenses for South Central for the three months ended June 30, 2005 were $11.4 million as compared
to $7.4 million for the three months ended June 30, 2004. The increase is due to the new NRG
allocations methodology as discussed in Note 10, Segment Reporting, to the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements. Additionally, much of the South Central regional office had been recorded as
corporate costs in the second quarter of 2004.
Western Region Results
For the period ending June 30, 2005, the Western region incurred an operating loss of $1.8
million, as compared to a $1.2 million loss for the period ended June 30, 2004. The negative
variance in operating costs is due to the expiration of the Red Bluff RMR agreement in December
2004.
Other North America Region Results
49
For the three months ended June 30, 2005, the Other North America region realized an operating
loss of $1.9 million on revenues of $9.7 million, as compared to operating income of $9.0 million
and revenues of $29.6 million for the three months ended June 30, 2004. This decrease of $10.9
million in operating income is due to the sale of Kendall in late 2004. Kendall had operating
income of $7.3 million and revenues of $20.1 million in the second quarter of 2004. Operating
expenses and depreciation and amortization for our Other North America region for the three months
ended June 30, 2005 were $9.5 million and $2 million respectively. For the second quarter of 2004,
operating expenses and depreciation and amortization were $13.6 million and $6.9 million,
respectively. The favorable variance in both of these is related to the sale of Kendall.
Australia Region Results
Operating Income
For the period ending June 30, 2005, the Australia regions operating income was $1.7 million,
as compared to a $11.0 million operating loss for the period ended June 30, 2004. Higher
generation of 0.98 million MWh and 3% higher pool prices this quarter versus second quarter 2004
were the drivers for the increase in operating income.
Revenues
Revenues
from our Australia region totaled $57.1 million for the three months ended June 30,
2005 compared to $36.8 million for the three months ended
June 30, 2004, an increase of $20.3
million. Revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2005 included $36.3 million in energy
revenues compared to $28.3 million of energy revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2004.
These favorable results during 2005 were largely driven by higher generation, which increased from
1.3 million MWh to 1.4 million MWh, or 8% higher versus second quarter 2004. The increase in
generation was due to the full commercialization of our Playford station in late 2004. Further, a
planned outage in the second quarter of 2004 contributed to the difference. Other revenues include
derivative and financial revenues, natural gas sales, and Fresh Start-related contract
amortization. Other revenues increased this quarter over second quarter 2004 from $8.5 million to
$20.9 million. The increase is due to less contract amortization in 2005 versus 2004 of $4.3
million, derivative revenues of $4.6 million, and $2.2 million of financial revenues.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses for our Australia region for the three months ended June 30, 2005 were
$55.5 million or 97% of revenues, as compared to $47.7 million or 130% of revenues
for the three months ended June 30, 2004. Cost of energy for our Australia region for the three
months ended June 30, 2005 was $24.4 million as compared to $18.4 million for the three months
ended June 30, 2004. The $6 million increase in cost of energy is related to increased costs
associated with our Playford facility, which was not fully operational in the second quarter of
2004. Higher cost of gas for the Osborne power plant and higher cost of purchased energy totaling
$3.6 million, also unfavorably impacted the cost of energy. Other operating expenses for Australia
for the three months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 were $25 million and $22.4 million, respectively.
The increase is due to the new NRG allocations methodology as discussed in Note 10 to the
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. These results do not include the equity earnings of
our Gladstone investment.
For the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2004
Consolidated Results
Net Income
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, net income was $46.5 million, or $0.43 per diluted
weighted average share of common stock compared to net income of $113.3 million or $1.13 per
diluted weighted average share of common stock for the six months ended June 30, 2004. The year
began with mild temperatures for the winter months and spring, where in the Northeast region
temperatures ranged from -7.5ºF to +4.5ºF from the average, whereas in June, the Northeast region
had significant heat, up to 9ºF above average1. With gas prices 13.6%
higher2 than the first six months of 2004, spark spreads, and to a lesser extent coal
dark spreads, were strong, while oil spreads were compressed relative to the first six months of
2004. Our New York City assets benefited
|
|
|
1 |
|
Information available from the National
Climatic Data Center of the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, or
NOAA |
|
2 |
|
Per the Henry Hub gas price index published
by Platts Gas Daily |
50
from the increased spark spreads as generation was 100% higher versus last year. We also
recorded $33.1 million of net unrealized losses associated with forward sales of electricity
supporting our Northeast assets. Additionally, our South Central region experienced a number of
planned and unplanned outages over the first six months of 2005 which resulted in 5% lower
generation and a $23.6 million decrease in operating income. In our Australia region, increased
generation from the Playford station only partially offset the impact of weak pool prices due to a
mild summer season during the first quarter.
Net income results were favorably impacted by the $11.6 million pre-tax gain on the sale of
our Enfield investment, lower interest expense, and higher other income. In December 2004, we
refinanced our Senior Credit Facility, decreasing our interest expense by 212.5 basis points as
compared to the facility in place during the first six month of the 2004. Additionally, during the
first quarter of 2005, we re-purchased $415.8 million of our Second Priority Notes, further
contributing to the reduced interest expense versus the period ended June 30, 2004. Other income
for the period ended June 30, 2005 was favorable versus the period ended June 30, 2004 by $21.4
million, primarily due to a $13.5 million gain from a settlement relating to the TermoRio project
in Brazil, a $3.5 million contingent gain related to a previously sold project, the Crockett
Cogeneration Facility, and $6.8 million in higher interest income due to higher average outstanding
cash balances and more efficient cash management. These favorable variances were offset by higher
operating expenses and decreased equity earnings for the six months ended June 30, 2005 as compared
to the same period in 2004. Additionally, during the first half of 2005 operating expenses
increased due to more extensive planned outages as compared to the same period in 2004. Equity
earnings were negatively impacted by the results of WCP, whose CDWR contract expired in December
2004.
Revenues from Majority-Owned Operations
Revenues from majority-owned operations were $1,185.7 million for the six months ended June
30, 2005 compared to $1,173.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Revenues for the six
months ended June 30, 2005 included $763.1 million of energy revenues compared to $715.9 million of
energy revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Of the $763.1 million, 85% are merchant
revenues; in the second quarter of 2004, 70% of our energy revenues were merchant. The increase in
energy revenues versus 2004 were largely driven by the increased merchant generation from our New
York City assets, which doubled for the period June 30, 2005 as compared to the six months ended
June 30, 2004, and to a lesser extent, to our NEPOOL assets, where generation increased by 37.7%.
The increased generation from these assets can be attributed to outages of local competitors during
the early part of the year and to the significant heat in June. South Central also recognized
higher energy revenues for the first six months of 2005 as compared to the period ended June 30,
2004. Energy sales at South Central were favorable due to the higher energy prices driven by gas
prices, favorable weather in the first quarter, increased contract rates, and local nuclear plant
outages in the first quarter. Increased generation and energy revenues from those operations were
offset by declines in energy revenues from our Western New York facilities because of planned and
unplanned outages. Additionally, a one time payment of $38.5 million from the Connecticut Light
and Power settlement contributed to energy revenue during the second quarter of 2004.
Capacity revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $274.9 million compared to
$299.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Capacity revenues were unfavorable versus
last year due to the loss of capacity revenues from the Kendall facility, which was sold in the
fourth quarter of 2004, and the addition of new generation and increased imports in New York, which
depressed capacity prices for our assets in the Western New York market during the first half of 2005.
This loss was partially offset by $23.9 million additional capacity revenues during the period
related to our Connecticut RMR settlement agreement, which was approved by FERC on January 22,
2005. Alternative revenues and O&M fees for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $94.7 million
and $9.1 million, respectively. This compares to $88.8 million of alternative energy revenues and
$10.5 million of O&M fees for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Other revenues include
derivative and financial revenues, natural gas sales, Fresh Start-related contract amortization,
and expense recovery revenues. For the six months ended June 30, 2005, other revenues totaled $43.8
million compared to $59.5 million of other revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Other
revenues were positively impacted by $16.8 million in lower contract amortization in 2005 versus
2004 as contracts rolled off, $5.8 million in higher gas sales, and gains from financial hedges
relative to the second quarter of 2004. This is offset by the net $33.1 million in mark-to-market
losses through June 30, 2005 and $14.5 million in lower expense recovery revenues associated with
our Connecticut RMR agreements.
Cost of Majority-Owned Operations
Cost of majority-owned operations for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was $889.4 million or
75% of revenues. Cost of majority-owned operations for the six months ended June 30, 2004 was
$735.0 million or 62.7% of revenues from majority-owned operations. Cost of energy for the period
ended June 30, 2005 was $623.9 versus $490.8 million for the same period in 2004. Cost of energy
for our Northeast region increased by $83.5 million, driven primarily by increased gas and oil
costs, both of which were driven by increased generation from our New York City assets and, to a
lesser extent, our NEPOOL assets. Our South Central regions cost
51
of energy increased by $39.5 million, 80% of which was due to higher purchased energy costs.
Because of a number outages over the first half of the year, South Central was forced to purchase
energy to fill its load obligation under its long-term contracts.
O&M costs for the first six months of 2005 totaled $244.1 million versus $218.8 million in the
comparable period of 2004. This increase is driven by the increase in major maintenance projects
and more extensive outages in 2005, as compared to 2004. The low-sulfur coal conversions and
turbine overhauls of the Western New York plants and Indian River plant is a main focus for many
of the major maintenance and outages in 2005. South Central also went through a significant outage
to install a low-NOX burner on one of its units.
Depreciation and Amortization
Our depreciation and amortization expense for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 was
$96.2 million and $108.2 million, respectively. The decrease in depreciation and amortization from
2005 to 2004 is primarily due to the 2004 sale of our Kendall plant, which contributed $10.4
million in depreciation and amortization expense in the first six months of 2004.
General, Administrative and Development
Our general, administrative and development costs, or G&A, for the six months ended June 30,
2005 were $103.1 million compared to $82.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004.
Corporate costs represent $51.2 million or 4.3% of revenues and $39.6 million or 3.4% of revenues
for the periods ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively. G&A costs have been adversely impacted
by $8.7 million of increased insurance expense, $2.2 million of bad debt expense associated with a
third party, and increased consulting costs related to Sarbanes Oxley compliance for our 2004
year-end audit.
Corporate Relocation Charges
During the six months ended June 30, 2005, charges related to our corporate relocation
activities were $3.9 million as compared to $6.8 million for the same period in 2004. Included in
this years charges is $2.8 million related to the lease abandonment charges associated with our
former Minneapolis office with the remainder primarily related to the relocation, recruitment and
transition costs. Second quarter 2004 charges include employee severance and termination benefits
and relocation, recruitment and transition costs.
Corporate Reorganization Charges
For the six months ended June 30, 2004, we incurred $3.6 million in corporate reorganization
charges associated with our emergence from bankruptcy.
Equity in Earnings of Unconsolidated Affiliates
During the six months ended June 30, 2005, equity earnings from our investments in
unconsolidated affiliates was $53.4 million compared to $63.8 million for the six months ended June
30, 2004. Our earnings in WCP accounted to $8.5 million and $27.9 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The decrease in WCPs equity earnings is due to the
expiration of the CDWR contract in December 2004. WCPs decrease is partially offset by the
favorable impact of Enfields and Gladstones year-over-year results. Equity earnings for our
Enfield investment, which was sold on April 1, 2005, were $16 million for the six months ended June
30, 2005 versus $12.1 million in the comparable period in of 2004. For the six months ended June
30, 2005 results for Enfield include approximately $12 million of unrealized gain associated with
mark-to-market increase in the fair value of energy-related derivative instruments, as compared to
$9.1 million of unrealized gain for the same period of 2004. Gladstones equity earnings were
$11.7 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005 as compared to $6.7 million for the same
period in June 2004.
Other equity investments included in the 2005 results include MIBRAG which comprised $7.9
million and $10.9 million for the periods ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively. MIBRAGs
equity earnings for 2005 were negatively impacted by second quarter planned outages by two of its
primary customers, reducing the amount of coal purchased from MIBRAG by 8 million
(approximately $10.3 million). Our equity earnings were negatively impacted by our 50% share of
this amount.
Write Downs and Gains/(Losses) on Sales of Equity Method Investments
52
During the six months ended June 30, 2005, we sold our 25% interest in Enfield. The sale
resulted in net pre-tax proceeds of $64.6 million and pre-tax gain of $11.6 million, including the
post-closing working capital adjustments. During the six months ended June 30, 2004, we sold our
Loy Yang investment which resulted in a $1.3 million loss, offset by a $0.7 million gain associated
with the sale of Calpine Cogeneration.
Other income, net
Other income had a net increase of $21.4 million during the six months ended June 30, 2005
as compared to the same period in 2004. Other income in 2005 was favorably impacted by a $13.5
million gain from the settlement related to our TermoRio project in Brazil and a contingent gain of
$3.5 million related to the sale of a former project, the Crockett Cogeneration Facility, which was
sold in 2002. Other income was also favorably impacted by $6.8 million of higher interest income
related to more efficient management of higher average cash balances.
Refinancing expense
Refinancing expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 were $25 million and
$30.4 million, respectively. In the first half of 2005, we redeemed and purchased a total of
$415.8 million of our Second Priority Notes. As a result of the redemption and purchases, we
incurred $34.8 million in premiums and write-offs of deferred financing costs. Additionally, projects in our
Australia region refinanced their project debt during the first six months of 2005 resulting in the
write-off of $9.8 million of debt premium. During the six months ended June 30, 2004, we
refinanced certain amounts of our term loans with additional corporate level high yield notes,
which resulted in $15.1 million of prepayment penalties and a $15.3 million write-off of deferred
financing costs.
Interest expense
Interest expense for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was $106.6 million as compared to
$129.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Interest expense was favorably impacted by
the sale of Kendall in the fourth quarter of 2004. Kendall incurred $13 million of interest
expense in the six months ended June 30, 2004. Additionally, refinancing of our Senior
Credit Facility lowered our interest rate by 212.5 basis points and the $415.8 million
redemption and purchases of our Second Priority Notes during the first quarter of 2005 reduced
interest expense on our corporate debt by approximately $20.8 million. Australia also refinanced and
paid down $57.2 million of their project debt during the first six months of 2005, resulting in a
$4.5 million lower interest expense for the six months ended June 30, 2005 as compared to the same
period in 2004.
Income Tax Expense
Income tax expense was $12.9 million and $50.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005
and 2004, respectively. The overall effective tax rate was 21.9% and 33.4% for the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The effective income tax rate for the six months ended June
30, 2005 and 2004 differs from the U.S. statutory rate of 35% due to the earnings in foreign
jurisdictions taxed at rates lower than the U.S. statutory rate, rendering an effective tax rate of
11.1% and 19.7%, respectively, on foreign income. Our 2005 domestic income tax expense partially
offset the low foreign effective tax rate due to the Subpart F inclusion and taxation for our gain
on the sale of Enfield, totaling $11.4 million.
The effective tax rate may vary from period to period depending on, among other factors, the
geographic and business mix of earnings and losses and the creation of valuation allowances in
accordance with SFAS No. 109. These factors and others, including our history of pre-tax earnings
and losses, are taken into account in assessing the ability to realize deferred tax assets.
Income from Discontinued Operations, net of Income Taxes
We classified as discontinued operations the operations and gains/losses recognized on the
sale of projects that were sold or were deemed to have met the required criteria for such
classification pending final disposition. During the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, we
recorded a gain from discontinued operations of $0.7 million and $12.4 million, respectively.
Discontinued operations for the six months ended June 30, 2005 consist of various expenses related
to NRG McClain to effect its liquidation. During the six months ended June 30, 2004, discontinued
operations consisted of the results of our NRG McClain LLC, Penobscot Energy Recovery Company, or
PERC, Compania Boliviana De Energia Electrica S.A. Bolivian Power Company Limited, or Cobee, Hsin
Yu, LSP Energy (Batesville) and four NEO Corporation projects (NEO Nashville LLC, NEO Hackensack
LLC, NEO Prima Deshecha and NEO Tajiguas LLC). All discontinued operations were sold prior to
December 31, 2004.
53
Regional Discussion
Northeast Region Results
Operating Income
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, operating income for the Northeast region was $73.3
million, as compared to $141.9 million for the same period in 2004. The year began with mild
temperatures for the winter months and spring, where in the Northeast region temperatures ranged
from -7.5ºF to +4.5ºF from the average, whereas in June, the Northeast region had significant heat,
up to 9ºF above average1. With gas prices 13.6%2 higher than the first six
months of 2004, spark spreads, and to a lesser extent coal dark spreads, were strong, while oil
spreads were compressed relative to the first six months of June 2004. The Northeasts New York
City assets benefited from the increased spark spreads as they doubled their generation output
versus last year, from 0.4 million MWh to 0.8 million MWh. Generation from the NEPOOL assets
increased by 37.7%, but oil margins decreased by over 50% versus the first six months of 2004, as
our cost per MWh increased by 24% in comparison to the same period in 2004. Additionally, the
Northeast recorded $33.1 million of net unrealized losses associated with forward sales of
electricity supporting our Northeast assets. Operating income results for the Northeast were also
negatively impacted by increases in non-fuel operating expenses. This is due to the increased
number of planned and unplanned outages for the six months ended June 30, 2005 versus the same
period in 2004.
Revenues
Revenues from our Northeast region totaled $648.1 million for the six months ended June 30,
2005 compared to $605.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Revenues for the six
months ended June 30, 2005 included $513.2 million in energy revenues compared to $442.3 million
for the same period in 2004. Of this $70.9 million increase, $61.7 million and $23.3 million can
be attributed to our New York City and NEPOOL assets, respectively. Our New York City assets
doubled their generation for the six months ended June 30, 2005 as compared to 2004, while our
NEPOOL assets increased their generation by 37.7%. The increased generation from these assets are
due to outages of local competitors during the period and to the significant heat in June. This
was offset by lower energy revenues from our Western New York assets, because of scheduled and
unscheduled outages during the first six months of 2005. Capacity revenues for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 were $137.7 million compared to $130.7 million for the six months ended June
30, 2004. Capacity revenues were favorable versus the last year due to $23.9 million additional
capacity revenues recorded during the second quarter of 2005 related to our Connecticut RMR settlement agreement
approved by FERC on January 22, 2005. These settlement revenues were offset, however, by lower
capacity revenues from our Western New York plants. Capacity prices in this region were negatively
impacted by the addition of new capacity supply and increased imports into New York. Other
revenues include derivative and financial revenues, natural gas sales, Fresh Start-related contract
amortization, and expense recovery revenues. For the six months ended June 30, 2005, other
revenues totaled a loss of $3.1 million compared to $32.6 million of other revenues for the six
months ended June 30, 2004. Other revenues were adversely impacted by the lower expense recovery
revenues related to the Connecticut RMR agreement of $14.5 million and $33.1 million in
mark-to-market unrealized losses in the first half of 2005. These mark-to-market unrealized losses
were partly offset by less contract amortization in 2005 versus 2004 and gains realized on hedge
transactions booked to financial revenues as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2004.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $574.8 million or 89% of the
Northeasts revenues, as compared to $463.4 million or 77% of revenues for the six months ended
June 30, 2004. The increase in operating expenses is primarily driven by the increase in the cost
of energy. Fuel costs in the Northeast were $342.7 million as compared to $259.2 million in 2004.
Oil fuel costs in our Northeast region increased by $49.5 million, where 61% of the increase was
due to increased generation. Gas fuel costs for our Northeast region increased by $40.9 million,
due to 100% higher generation from our New York City plants. Coal costs increased by $9.1 million,
due to increased costs, as our coal-fired generation in the Northeast decreased for the first six
months of 2005 as compared to 2004, with outages at our Western New York and Indian River
facilities. Indian River was particularly impacted by the rising coal costs. Indian River burns
eastern coal which has experienced high price volatility versus western coal. As such, this plant
was more adversely affected by the overall increase in coal prices.
O&M for our Northeast region was $133.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005 as
compared to $119.2 million in the six months ended June 2004. The low-sulfur conversion projects
continue at our Western New York plants and began at our Indian
|
|
|
1 |
|
Information available from the National
Climatic Data Center of the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, or
NOAA |
|
2 |
|
Per the Henry Hub gas price index published
by Platts Gas Daily |
54
River plant this year. Additionally, major outages related to turbine overhauls took place at
our Western New York and Indian River plants. Other operating expenses for the Northeast region
include the administrative regional office costs, insurance and corporate allocations. Other
operating costs totaled $194.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005 as compared to $168.2
million in 2004. This increase is due to the increase in the corporate allocations per our new
allocation methodology as discussed in Note 10, Segment Reporting, to the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements. Additionally, the Northeasts regional office costs were largely recorded as
corporate costs in 2004.
South Central Region Results
Operating Income
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, the South Central region realized operating income of
$6.8 million, as compared to $31.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. During the
first six months of the 2005, our Big Cajun II facility experienced several forced outages.
Generation for the first six months of 2005 decreased by 5% from 4.9 to 4.8 million MWh versus the
same period in 2004. These outages required the purchase of additional energy to meet its contract
load-following obligation in the merchant market at costs higher than our coal-based generating
assets. During the first six months of 2005, South Central had two planned outages versus one
major outage during the first six months of 2004, which increased major maintenance by $7.9 million
as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2004.
Revenues
Revenues from our South Central region were $226.1 million for the six months ended June 30,
2005 compared to $197.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Revenues for the six
months ended June 30, 2005 included $128.8 million in energy revenues, of which 69% were
contracted. This compares to $99.8 million of energy revenues for the six months ended June 30,
2004, 75% of which were contracted. South Central energy revenues were favorably impacted by
increased merchant energy sales. In addition, merchant energy sales were favorable versus last
year due to higher power prices, favorable weather, and nuclear plant outages in the region.
Capacity revenues were $90.8 and $89.8 million in the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Capacity revenues are fully contracted. Other revenues include derivative and
financial revenues and Fresh Start-related contract amortization. For the six months ended June
30, 2005, other revenues totaled $6.4 million compared to $8.1 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2004, with the decrease attributable to lower contract amortization and lower coal sales.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $219.2 million or 97% of South
Centrals revenues, as compared to $164 million or 83% of revenues for the six months ended June
30, 2004. The increase of operating expenses is primarily driven by increased fuel costs. Total
cost of energy in South Central was $138 million as compared to $98.5 million in 2004. Of this
$39.5 million increase, $32.1 million is due to higher purchased energy costs as compared to the
six months ended June 30, 2004. Over the first six months of 2005, our Big Cajun II facility
experienced a number of forced outages, requiring the purchase of energy to meet contract load
obligations. Purchased energy per MWh hour increased by 20% versus the same period in 2004, from
$45 to $54.14. O&M for our South Central region was $29 million for the six months ended June 30,
2005 as compared to $20.7 million in the comparable period in 2004. The increase in O&M is related
to increased major maintenance. During the first six months of 2005, South Central had two planned
outages versus one major outage during the first six months of 2004. Other operating expenses for
South Central for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $51.0 million as compared to $34.0
million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. The increase is largely due to the new NRG
allocations methodology as discussed in Note 10, Segment Reporting, to the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements. Additionally, much of the South Central regional office had been recorded as
corporate costs in the second quarter of 2004.
Western Region Results
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, the Western region realized an operating loss of $3.3
million, as compared to an operating loss of $6.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004.
The primary driver of the lower operating loss is related to the payment of CAISO penalties paid by
our Red Bluff and Chowchilla facilities in 2004, offset by the expiration of the Red Bluff RMR
contract as of December 31. 2004.
Other North America Region Results
55
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, the Other North America region realized an operating
loss of $7.9 million on revenues of $14.8 million, as compared to operating income of $11.1 million
and revenues of $50.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. This unfavorable variance is
primarily related to the sale of Kendall. Kendall had operating income of $14.1 million and
revenues of $37.2 million in the six months ended June 30, of 2004. Operating expenses and
depreciation and amortization for our Other North America region for the six months ended June 30,
2005 were $18.7 million and $4 million, respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2004,
operating expenses and depreciation and amortization were $24.6 million and $14.5 million,
respectively. The favorable variance in both of these is driven by the sale of Kendall, with the
variance in operating expense partially offset by a bad debt allowance of $2.2 million recorded in
2005 for a receivable due from a third-party.
Australia Region Results
Operating Income
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, the Australia region realized an operating loss of
$0.9 million, as compared to $5.6 million in operating income for the six months ended June 30,
2004. Unseasonably mild weather and weak pool prices in the first quarter drove the unfavorable
results as compared to last year. Higher generation helped to offset weak pool prices, with
generation increasing 6.0% over the generation from the first six months of 2004.
Revenues
Revenues from our Australia region totaled $105.9 million for the six months ended June 30,
2005 compared to $99.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Revenues for the six months
ended June 30, 2005 included $68.1 million in energy revenues compared to $82.3 million of energy
revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2004. These unfavorable results versus 2004 were
largely driven by weak pool prices, partially offset by the increased generation. An unseasonably
mild summer in Australia drove the average pool price down to $24.53 per MWh from $31.58 per MWh in
the first six months of 2005, a reduction of 22% versus the first six months in 2004. Due to the
full commercialization of the Playford station, generation for the six months ended June 2005 was
1.4 million MWh which was slightly ahead of the 1.3 million MWh generated in the same period of
2004. For the six months ended June 30, 2005, other revenues totaled $37.8 million compared to
$16.7 million of other revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Other revenues were
favorably impacted by lower contract amortization of $9.4 million and $7.7 million of gains
realized on hedge transactions booked to financial revenues as compared to the six months ended
June 30, 2004.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses for our Australia region for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $94.1
million, as compared to $81.4 million, for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Fuel costs and
purchased energy accounted for $5.1 million of the increase and higher O&M costs account for $3.7
million of the increase. These increases are due to the additional costs of the Playford Station,
which was not fully commercialized during the same period in 2004. Other operating expenses for
Australia for the six months ended June 30, 2005 increased over the same period in 2004 due to the
new NRG allocations methodology as discussed in Note 10, Segment Reporting, to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES AND CHANGES IN ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based
upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these financial
statements and related disclosures in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles, or
GAAP, requires the application of appropriate technical accounting rules and guidance as well as
the use of estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities,
revenues and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities. The
application of these policies necessarily involves judgments regarding future events, including the
likelihood of success of particular projects, legal and regulatory challenges. These judgments, in
and of themselves, could materially impact the financial statements and disclosures based on
varying assumptions, which may be appropriate to use. In addition, the financial and operating
environment also may have a significant effect, not only on the operation of the business, but on
the results reported through the application of accounting measures used in preparing the financial
statements and related disclosures, even if the nature of the accounting policies have not changed.
On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, utilizing historic experience, consultation
with experts and other methods we consider reasonable. In any case, actual results may differ
significantly from our estimates. Any effects on our business, financial
56
position or results of operations resulting from revisions to these estimates are recorded in
the period in which the facts that give rise to the revision become known.
See Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, to the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements for details of changes in accounting standards.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
In December 2004, we issued $420.0 million of convertible preferred stock and used the
proceeds from such issuance to redeem $375.0 million of the Second Priority Notes in February 2005.
Also in January 2005 and in March 2005, we used existing cash to purchase, at market prices, $25.0
million and $15.8 million, respectively, in face value of our Second Priority Notes. These notes
are held in treasury by NRG Energy. As of June 30, 2005 and August 3, 2005, we had $1.31 billion in
aggregate principal amount of Second Priority Notes, excluding those held in treasury, $447.8
million in principal amount outstanding under the term loan and $350.0 million of the funded letter
of credit facility outstanding. As of August 3, 2005, $161.6 million of undrawn letters of credit
capacity remain available under the funded letter of credit facility, and we had not drawn down on
our revolving credit facility.
In connection with our power generation business, we manage the commodity price risk
associated with our supply activities and our electric generation facilities. This includes forward
power sales, fuel and energy purchases and emission credits. In order to manage these risks, we
enter into financial instruments to hedge the variability in future cash flows from forecasted
sales of electricity and purchases of fuel and energy. We utilize a variety of instruments
including forward contracts, future contracts, swaps and options. Certain of these contracts allow
counterparties to require NRG to post margin collateral. As of June 30, 2005 and August 3, 2005, we
have posted $205.7 million and $306.4 million, respectively, in collateral to support these
contracts.
Capital Expenditures
Capital expenditures were approximately $36.5 million and $64.7 million for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2005 and June 30, 2004, respectively. We anticipate that our 2005 capital
expenditures will be approximately $125 million and will relate to the operation and maintenance of
our existing generating facilities.
Liquidity
As of June 30, 2005 our liquidity was $1.2 billion and includes $910 million of unrestricted
and restricted cash. Our liquidity also includes $150.0 million of available capacity under our
revolving line of credit and $171.5 million of availability under our letter of credit facility. As
of December 31, 2004 our liquidity was $1.6 billion and included $1.2 billion of unrestricted and
restricted cash. Our liquidity also included $150.0 million of available capacity under our
revolving line of credit and $192.9 million of availability under our letter of credit facility.
NRG
has committed to repurchase, on August 11, 2005,
$250 million of NRGs outstanding
common stock from an affiliate of Credit Suisse First Boston LLC, or
CSFB. NRG will fund the
planned repurchase with existing cash balances. To enable this share
repurchase under NRGs
high yield debt indenture, NRG will issue simultaneously in a private transaction, $250
million of perpetual preferred stock. On August 5, 2005, NRG obtained
an amendment to its corporate credit agreement which allowed NRG to
use cash proceeds from the preferred issuance to
repurchase approximately $229 million of our 8% high yield notes at 108% of par.
Other Liquidity Matters NOLs, Deferred Tax Assets and Repatriation of Foreign Funds
As of June 30, 2005, we have a US NOL carryforward of $18.5 million which will expire through
2024. We believe that it is more likely than not that benefit will not be realized on the deferred
tax assets relating to the NOL carryforwards. This assessment included consideration of positive
and negative factors, including our current financial position and results of operations, projected
future taxable income, including projected operating and capital gains, and available tax planning
strategies. Therefore, as of June 30, 2005, a consolidated valuation allowance of $725.3 million
was recorded against the net deferred tax assets, including NOL carryforwards in accordance with
SFAS No. 109.
Pending our evaluation of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, management intends to
indefinitely reinvest the earnings from our foreign operations. Currently, our management is
reviewing our reinvestment plan pursuant to the Act which provides for a low tax cost on earnings
repatriated in 2005 and reinvested in the companys U.S. operations. We are presently estimating a
maximum
57
cash balance amount of $307 million which could be remitted from foreign operations to the
U.S. by year end and resulting in a federal tax cost of 5.25% under the Act to the extent the
Company has earnings and profits. Pending our conclusive evaluation of the Companys cumulative
earnings and profits position, we cannot assess the range of income tax cost at this time.
As of June 30, 2005, there is no tax effect resulting from this legislation since management
has not concluded upon a repatriation plan. The Company expects to conclude on this issue by the
fourth quarter of 2005.
Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Six Months Ended |
|
|
June 30, 2005 |
|
June 30, 2004 |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
91,519 |
|
|
|
317,357 |
|
Net cash provided by investing activities |
|
|
148,546 |
|
|
|
1,558 |
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(527,265 |
) |
|
|
(85,672 |
) |
Net Cash Provided By Operating Activities
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, cash provided by operating activities was $91.5
million, a decrease of $225.8 million from the six months ended June 30, 2004. The main
contributors to the decrease were a net receipt of $125 million during the six months ended June
30, 2004 related to a bankruptcy-related net receivable and cash payments of $157 million during
the six months ended June 30, 2005 for cash collateral to support the trading activities by our
Power Marketing group. These amounts are offset by the receipt of $22 million in refundable tax
credits during 2005, a $9 million increase in distributions from
WCP above equity earnings and other working capital movement.
Net Cash Provided By Investing Activities
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, cash provided by investing activities was $148.5
million, an increase of $146.9 million from the six months ended June 30, 2004. During the six
months ended June 30, 2005 we received $64.6 million for the sale of Enfield and $70.8 million
related to the TermoRio settlement. During the same period in 2004, we received $88.9 million for
the sale of equity method investments and discontinued operations. In 2005, cash from investing
increased as restrictions on cash were released, primarily as a result of our refinancing of
Flinders debt. At Flinders, restricted cash was reduced by $38.2 million in 2005, compared to an
increase of $10.5 million in 2004. During 2004 there were additional movements of cash into
restricted accounts by Batesville in the amount of $10 million and a one time increase of $16.1
million at our Peakers Finance Company, or Peakers, that did not recur in 2005. Batesville was
sold during 2004 and the increase at Peakers was a one time catch-up following the project level
debt restructuring.
Our capital expenditures for the six months ended June 2005 are $28.1 million less than
year-to-date June 2004 as a result of the refurbishment of our Playford station in Australia during
2004, and a major maintenance project in 2004 at our Big Cajun II which qualified as a capital
expenditure.
Net Cash Used in Financing Activities
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, cash used by financing activities was $527.3 million,
an increase of $441.6 million compared to a use of $85.7 million in the same period last year. The
activity for the six months ended June 30, 2005 consists of the redemption and repurchase of $415.8
million of our Second Priority Secured Notes and the refinancing our Flinders debt, which resulted
in a net prepayment of $57.2 million and an increase in deferred financing costs of $1.6 million.
During the second quarter of 2005, we repaid an additional $10 million of our Flinders debt. For
the six months ended June 30, 2004, cash used by financing activities of $85.7 million reflects
normal scheduled principal payments. In addition, during the same period, we refinanced our term
loan facility with an additional $475.0 million of Second Priority Secured Notes at a premium of
$28.5 million. Proceeds from this offering were used to repay $503.5 million of our then recently
issued term loan.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
Obligations Under Certain Guarantee Contracts
58
NRG Energy and certain of its subsidiaries enter into guarantee arrangements in the normal
course of business to facilitate commercial transactions with third parties. These arrangements
include financial and performance guarantees, stand-by letters of credit, debt guarantees, surety
bonds and indemnifications. See Note 29, Guarantees and Other Contingent Liabilities, to the
Companys financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2004, and Note 14, Guarantees, to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for further
details of the guarantee arrangements.
Retained or Contingent Interests
NRG Energy does not have any material retained or contingent interests in assets transferred
to an unconsolidated entity.
Derivative Instruments obligations
As of June 30, 2005, NRG does not have any contracts that would have been accounted for as a
derivative instrument, except that it is both indexed to our own stock and classified as
stockholders equity, and therefore excluded from the scope of SFAS No. 133 pursuant to paragraph
11(a).
Obligations Arising Out of a Variable Interest in an Unconsolidated Entity
As of June 30, 2005, we have not entered into any financing structure that is designed to be
off-balance sheet that would create liquidity, financing or incremental market risk or credit risk
to us. However, we have numerous investments with an ownership interest percentage of 50% or less
in energy and energy related entities that are accounted for under the equity method of accounting.
Our pro-rata share of non-recourse debt held by unconsolidated affiliates was approximately $199.2
million and $251.7 million as of June 30, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. In the normal
course of business we may be asked to loan funds to unconsolidated affiliates on both a long and
short-term basis. Such transactions are generally accounted for as accounts payable and receivable
to/from affiliates and notes payable/receivable to/from affiliates and if appropriate, bear
market-based interest rates.
Contractual Obligations and Commercial Commitments
We have a variety of contractual obligations and other commercial commitments that represent
prospective cash requirements in addition to our capital expenditure programs, as disclosed in our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.
In August 2004, we entered into a contract to purchase 1,540 aluminum railcars from Freight
Car America, formerly Johnstown America Corporation to be used for the transportation of low sulfur
coal from Wyoming to NRGs coal burning generating plants, including our New York and South Central
facilities. On February 18, 2005, we entered into a ten-year operating lease agreement with GE for
the lease of 1,500 railcars. Delivery of the railcars from Freight Car America commenced in
February 2005 and is expected to be completed by August 2005. We have assigned certain of our
rights and obligations for 1,500 railcars under the purchase agreement with Freight Car America to
GE. Accordingly, the railcars which we lease from GE under the arrangement described above will be
purchased by GE from Freight Car America in lieu of our purchase of those railcars.
In December 2004, we entered into a long-term coal transport agreement with the Burlington
Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company and affiliates of American Commercial Lines LLC to deliver
low sulfur coal to our Big Cajun II facility in New Roads, Louisiana beginning April 1, 2005. In
March 2005, we entered into an agreement to purchase coal over a period of four years and nine
months from Buckskin Mining Company, or Buckskin. The coal will be sourced from Buckskins mine in
the Powder River Basin, Wyoming, and will be used primarily in NRGs coal-burning generation plants
in the South Central region of the United States. Including this contract and other contracts,
total coal purchase obligations increased by $174.4 million, which are expected to be paid over the
course of the next two years.
In April 2005, we amended our contract for a five-year coal rail transportation agreement with
CSX Transportation, Inc. and Union Pacific Railroad Company, to deliver low sulfur coal to our
Dunkirk and Huntley facilities in Buffalo, New York, beginning April 1, 2005. Although the
amendment does not change our minimum financial commitments, we are now obligated to transport at
least 95% of our coal supplies for our Dunkirk and Huntley facilities with CSX Transportation, Inc.
and Union Pacific Railroad Company.
Commitments and Contingencies
See Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies, to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
for a discussion of commitments and contingencies.
59
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
We are exposed to several market risks in our normal business activities. Market risk is the
potential loss that may result from market changes associated with our merchant power generation
or with an existing or forecasted financial or commodity transaction. The types of market risks we
are exposed to are commodity price risk, interest rate risk and currency exchange risk. In order to
manage these risks we utilize various fixed-price forward purchase and sales contracts, futures and
option contracts traded on the New York Mercantile Exchange, and swaps and options traded in the
over-the-counter financial markets to:
|
|
|
Manage and hedge our fixed-price purchase and sales commitments; |
|
|
|
|
Manage and hedge our exposure to variable rate debt
obligations; |
|
|
|
|
Reduce our exposure to the volatility of cash market prices; and |
|
|
|
|
Hedge our fuel requirements for our generating facilities. |
Commodity Price Risk
Commodity price risks result from exposures to changes in spot prices, forward prices,
volatilities in commodities, and correlations between various commodities, such as natural gas,
electricity, coal and oil. A number of factors influence the level and volatility of prices for
energy commodities and related derivative products. These factors include:
|
|
|
Seasonal daily and hourly changes in demand, |
|
|
|
|
Extreme peak demands due to weather conditions, |
|
|
|
|
Available supply resources, |
|
|
|
|
Transportation availability and reliability within and between regions, |
|
|
|
|
Changes in the nature and extent of federal and state regulations. |
As part of our overall portfolio, we manage the commodity price risk of our merchant
generation by entering into various derivative or non-derivative instruments to hedge the
variability in future cash flows from forecasted sales of electricity and purchases of fuel. These
instruments include forward purchase and sale contracts, futures and option contracts traded on the
New York Mercantile Exchange, and swaps and options traded in the over-the-counter financial
markets. The portion of forecasted transactions hedged may vary based upon managements assessment
of market, weather, operational, and other factors.
While some of the contracts we use to manage risk represent commodities or instruments for
which prices are available from external sources, other commodities and certain contracts are not
actively traded and are valued using other pricing sources and modeling techniques to determine
expected future market prices, contract quantities, or both. We use our best estimates to determine
the fair value of commodity and derivative contracts we hold and sell. These estimates consider
various factors including closing exchange and over-the-counter price quotations, time value,
volatility factors, and credit exposure. However, it is likely that future market prices could vary
from those used in recording mark-to-market derivative instrument valuation, and such variations
could be material.
We measure the sensitivity of our portfolio to potential changes in market prices using value
at risk. Value at risk is a statistical model that attempts to predict risk of loss based on market
price volatility. We calculate value at risk using a variance/covariance technique that models
positions using a linear approximation of their value. Our value at risk calculation includes
mark-to-market and non mark-to-market energy assets and liabilities.
We utilize a diversified value at risk model to calculate the estimate of potential loss in
the fair value of our energy assets and liabilities including generation assets, load obligations
and bilateral physical and financial transactions. The key assumptions for our diversified model
include (1) a lognormal distribution of price returns, (2) one-day holding period, (3) a 95%
confidence interval, (4) a rolling 24-month forward looking period and (5) market implied price
volatilities and historical price correlations.
This model encompasses all of our generating assets in the following regions: California,
ENTERGY, NEPOOL, NYISO and PJM. The estimated maximum potential loss in fair value of our commodity
portfolio, including generation assets, load obligations and bilateral physical and financial
transactions calculated using the diversified VAR model is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
Quarter ended June 30, 2005 |
|
$ |
20.6 |
|
|
Average |
|
|
21.5 |
|
High |
|
|
25.3 |
|
Low |
|
|
14.6 |
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
Year ended December 31, 2004 |
|
|
26.7 |
|
Average |
|
|
40.3 |
|
High |
|
|
53.4 |
|
Low |
|
|
26.7 |
|
In order to provide additional information for comparative purposes to our peers we also
utilize value at risk to model the estimate of potential loss of financial derivative instruments
included in derivative instruments valuation of assets and liabilities. This estimation includes
those energy contracts accounted for as a hedge under SFAS No. 133, as amended. The estimated
maximum potential loss in fair value of the financial derivative instruments calculated using the
diversified VAR model as of June 30, 2005 is $29.1 million.
Due to the inherent limitations of statistical measures such as value at risk, the relative
immaturity of the competitive markets for electricity and related derivatives, and the seasonality
of changes in market prices, the value at risk calculation may not capture the full extent of
commodity price exposure. Additionally, actual changes in the value of options may differ from the
value at risk calculated using a linear approximation inherent in our calculation method. As a
result, actual changes in the fair value of mark-to market energy assets and liabilities could
differ from the calculated value at risk, and such changes could have a material impact on our
financial results.
Interest Rate Risk
We are exposed to fluctuations in interest rates through our issuance of fixed rate and
variable rate debt. Exposures to interest rate fluctuations may be mitigated by entering into
derivative instruments known as interest rate swaps, caps, collars and put or call options. These
contracts reduce exposure to interest rate volatility and result in primarily fixed rate debt
obligations when taking into account the combination of the variable rate debt and the interest
rate derivative instrument. Our risk management policy allows us to reduce interest rate exposure
from variable rate debt obligations.
As of June 30, 2005, we had various interest rate swap agreements with notional amounts
totaling approximately $1.2 billion. If the swaps had been discontinued on June 30, 2005, we would
have owed the counter-parties approximately $32.2 million. Based on the investment grade rating of
the counter-parties, we believe that our exposure to credit risk due to nonperformance by the
counter-parties to our hedging contracts is insignificant.
We have both long and short-term debt instruments that subject us to the risk of loss
associated with movements in market interest rates. As of June 30, 2005, a 100 basis point change
in interest rates would result in a $6.2 million change in interest expense on a rolling twelve
month basis.
At June 30, 2005, the fair value of our long-term debt was $3.3 billion, compared with the
carrying amount of $3.2 billion. We estimate that a 1% decrease in market interest rates would have
increased the fair value of our long-term debt by $54.7 million.
Currency Exchange Risk
We expect to continue to be subject to currency risks associated with foreign denominated
distributions from our international investments. In the normal course of business, we may receive
distributions denominated in the Euro, Australian Dollar and the Brazilian Real. As
of June 30, 2005, neither we, nor any of our consolidating subsidiaries, had any material
outstanding foreign currency exchange contracts.
Credit Risk
Credit risk relates to the risk of loss resulting from non-performance or non-payment by
counter-parties pursuant to the terms of their contractual obligations. We monitor and manage the
credit risk of NRG Energy, Inc. and its subsidiaries through credit policies which include an (i)
established credit approval process, (ii) daily monitoring of counter-party credit limits, (iii)
the use of credit mitigation measures such as margin, collateral, credit derivatives or prepayment
arrangements, (iv) the use of payment netting agreements and (v) the use of master netting
agreements that allow for the netting of positive and negative exposures of various contracts
associated with a single counter-party. Risks surrounding counter-party performance and credit
could ultimately impact the amount and timing of expected cash flows. We have credit protection
within various agreements to call on additional collateral support if necessary. As of June 30,
2005 and August 3, 2005, we held collateral support of $178.7 million and $179.5 respectively, from
counter-parties.
61
Additionally NRG has concentrations of suppliers and customers among electric utilities,
energy marketing and trading companies and regional transmission operators, particularly NYISO and
ISO-NE. NYISO and ISO-NE are ISOs or RTOs that act as clearing agents for market participants in
their specific control area, thereby diffusing credit risk by requiring collateralization based on
their respective financial assurance policies as approved by regulatory authorities. These
concentrations of counter-parties may impact NRGs overall exposure to credit risk, either
positively or negatively, in that counter-parties may be similarly affected by changes in economic,
regulatory and other conditions.
Significant Customers
For the six months ended June 30, 2005, we derived approximately 44.3% of our total revenues
from majority-owned operations from two customers: NYISO accounted for 31.8% and ISO New England
accounted for 12.5%. We account for the revenues attributable to NYISO and ISO-NE as part of our
North American power generation segment. ISO-NE and NYISO are ISOs or RTOs and are FERC-regulated
entities that administer day-ahead and real-time energy markets, capacity and ancillary service
markets and manage transmission assets collectively under their respective control to provide
non-discriminatory access to the transmission grid. The NYISO exercises operational control over
most of New York States transmission facilities. ISO-NE has operational control over most of the
New England transmission systems. We anticipate that NYISO and ISO-NE will continue to be
significant customers given the scale of our asset base in these areas.
Fair Value of Derivative Instruments
As the Company engages principally in the trading and marketing of its generation assets, most
of our commercial activities qualify for hedge accounting under the requirements of SFAS No.133.
In order to so qualify, the physical generation and sale of electricity must be highly probable at
inception of the trade and throughout the period it is held, as is the case with our base-load coal
plants. For this reason, trades in support of the companys peaking units will not generally
qualify for hedge accounting treatment and any changes in fair value are likely to be reflected on
a mark-to-market basis in the statement of operations. The majority of trades in support of our
base-load coal units will normally qualify for hedge accounting treatment and any fair value
movements will be reflected in the balance sheet as part of Other Comprehensive Income.
As part of the trading and marketing of our generation assets, we may enter into forward power
sales contracts, forward gas purchase contracts and other energy related commodities financial
instruments to mitigate variability in earnings due to fluctuations in spot market prices, hedge
fuel requirements at generation facilities and protect fuel inventories. In addition, in order to
mitigate interest rate risk associated with the issuance of our variable rate and fixed rate debt,
we enter into interest rate swap agreements.
The tables below disclose the derivative contracts accounted for at fair value. Specifically,
these tables disaggregate realized and unrealized changes in fair value; identify changes in fair
value attributable to changes in valuation techniques; disaggregate estimated fair values at June
30, 2005 based on whether fair values are determined by quoted market prices or more subjective
means; and indicate the maturities of contracts at June 30, 2005.
Derivative Activity Gains/(Losses)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
Fair value of contracts at December 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
(43,671 |
) |
Contracts realized or otherwise settled during the period |
|
|
(68,197 |
) |
Changes in fair value |
|
|
(98,280 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Fair value of contracts at June 30, 2005 |
|
$ |
(210,148 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Sources of Fair Value Gains/(Losses)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value of Contracts at Period End as of June 30, 2005 |
|
|
Maturity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity |
|
|
|
|
Less than |
|
Maturity |
|
Maturity |
|
in excess |
|
Total Fair |
|
|
1 Year |
|
1-3 Years |
|
4-5 Years |
|
of 5 Years |
|
Value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prices actively Quoted |
|
$ |
(62,234 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,611 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(89,845 |
) |
Prices based on models and other
valuation methods |
|
|
(3,575 |
) |
|
|
(22,871 |
) |
|
|
(14,875 |
) |
|
|
(27,964 |
) |
|
|
(69,285 |
) |
Prices provided by other external sources |
|
|
(14,935 |
) |
|
|
(6,952 |
) |
|
|
(5,415 |
) |
|
|
(23,716 |
) |
|
|
(51,018 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(80,744 |
) |
|
$ |
(57,434 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,290 |
) |
|
$ |
(51,680 |
) |
|
$ |
(210,148 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62
We may use a variety of financial instruments to manage our exposure to fluctuations in
foreign currency exchange rates on our international project cash flows, interest rates on our cost
of borrowing and energy and energy related commodities prices.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our principal
executive officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer, we conducted an
evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(e) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Based on this evaluation, our principal executive
officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer concluded that our disclosure
controls and procedures were effective as of the end of the period covered by this report on Form
10-Q.
As indicated in the certification accompanying the signature page to this report, the
Certifying Officers have certified that, to the best of their knowledge, the consolidated financial
statements, and other financial information included in this report on Form 10-Q, fairly present in
all material respects the financial conditions, results of operations and cash flows of NRG Energy,
Inc. as of, and for the periods presented in this report.
There have not been any changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as such term
is defined in Rules 13a15(f) and 15d15(f) under the Exchange Act), during the fiscal quarter to
which this report relates that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially
affect our internal control over financial reporting.
63
Part II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
For a discussion of material legal proceedings in which we were involved through June 30,
2005, see Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies, to our condensed consolidated financial
statements contained in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
None.
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
None.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
The stockholders of NRG Energy, Inc. voted on four items at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders held
on May 24, 2005:
|
1. |
|
The election of Class II Directors to a three-year term. |
|
|
2. |
|
The proposal to approve an amendment to Article Seven of the Amended and Restated
Certification of Incorporation. |
|
|
3. |
|
The proposal to approve an amendment deleting Article Sixteen of the Amended and
Restated Certificate of Incorporation. |
|
|
4. |
|
The proposal to ratify the appointment of KPMG LLP as NRGs independent registered
public accounting firm. |
There were 87,456,104 shares of common and preferred stock entitled to vote at the meeting and
a total of 72,607,900 shares (83.41%) were represented at the meeting.
The three individuals named below were elected to serve a three-year term as Class II
Directors expiring at the annual meeting of stockholders in 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nominee |
|
Votes For |
|
Votes Withheld |
Lawrence S. Coben |
|
|
71,307,302 |
|
|
|
1,300,598 |
|
Herbert H. Tate |
|
|
72,451,302 |
|
|
|
156,598 |
|
Walter R. Young |
|
|
72,451,602 |
|
|
|
156,298 |
|
The proposal to approve the amendment to Article Seven of the Amended and Restated Certificate
of Incorporation was approved with 70,071,754 shares voting for, 2,522,991 shares voting against,
13,155 shares abstaining and zero broker non-votes.
The proposal to approve the amendment deleting Article Sixteen of the Amended and Restated
Certificate of Incorporation was approved with 72,548,334 shares voting for, 40,860 shares voting
against, 18,706 shares abstaining and zero broker non-votes.
The proposal to ratify the appointment of KPMG LLP as independent registered public accounting
firm was ratified with 71,955,548 shares voting for, 646,011 shares voting against, 6,341 shares
abstaining and zero broker non-votes.
Item 5. Other Information
NRG has changed the date of its 2006 Annual Meeting of Stockholders from May 23, 2006, as set
forth in its Proxy Statement filed April 12, 2005, to April 27, 2006.
NRG
has committed to repurchase, on August 11, 2005, $250 million of NRGs outstanding
common stock from an affiliate of Credit Suisse First Boston LLC, or CSFB. NRG will fund the
planned repurchase with existing cash balances. To enable this share repurchase under NRGs
high yield debt indenture, NRG will issue simultaneously in a private transaction, $250
million of perpetual preferred stock. On August 5, 2005, NRG obtained an amendment to its
corporate credit agreement which allowed NRG to use cash proceeds from the preferred issuance
to repurchase approximately $229 million of our 8% high yield notes at 108% of par.
64
Item 6. Exhibits
(a) Exhibits
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Form of NRG Energy, Inc. Long Term
Incentive Plan Performance Unit Agreement |
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
First Amendment, dated as of
August 5, 2005, to the Credit Agreement, dated as of
December 23, 2003, as amended and restated as of
December 24, 2004, by and among NRG Energy, Inc., NRG Power
Marketing Inc., the lenders from time to time party thereto, Credit
Suisse First Boston, acting through its Cayman Islands Branch, and
Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P., as joint lead book runners, joint
lead arrangers and co-documentation agents, Credit Suisse First
Boston, acting through its Cayman Islands Brand, as administrative
agent and collateral agent, and Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P.,
as syndication agent. |
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
31.3
|
|
Certification of Controller pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
32
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Controller pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. |
65
SIGNATURES
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.
|
|
|
|
|
NRG ENERGY, INC. |
|
|
(Registrant) |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ DAVID CRANE |
|
|
|
|
|
David Crane, |
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ROBERT C. FLEXON |
|
|
|
|
|
Robert C. Flexon, |
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
(Principal Financial Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JAMES J. INGOLDSBY |
|
|
|
|
|
James J. Ingoldsby, |
|
|
Controller |
|
|
(Principal Accounting Officer) |
|
|
|
Date: August 9, 2005 |
|
|
66
Exhibit Index
Exhibits
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Form of NRG Energy, Inc. Long Term
Incentive Plan Performance Unit Agreement |
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
First Amendment, dated as of August
5, 2005, to the Credit Agreement, dated as of December 23, 2003,
as amended and restated as of December 24, 2004, by and among
NRG Energy, Inc., NRG Power Marketing Inc., the lenders from time to
time party thereto, Credit Suisse First Boston, acting through its
Cayman Islands Branch, and Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P., as
joint lead book runners, joint lead arrangers and co-documentation
agents, Credit Suisse First Boston, acting through its Cayman Islands
Brand, as administrative agent and collateral agent, and Goldman
Sachs Credit Partners L.P., as syndication agent. |
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
31.3
|
|
Certification of Controller pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
32
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Controller pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. |
67
EX-10.1
Exhibit 10.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NRG ENERGY, INC. LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
PERFORMANCE STOCK UNIT AGREEMENT
|
|
|
«First_Name» «Last_Name» «Suffix»
«Address»
«City», «State» «Zip»
Congratulations on your selection as a Participant under the NRG Energy, Inc. Long-Term Incentive
Plan (Plan). You have been chosen by NRG Energy, Inc. (the Company) to receive
Performance Stock Units (PUs) under the Plan.
This Performance Stock Unit Agreement (this Agreement) constitutes the Grant Agreement
pursuant to Section 9 of the Plan. If there is any inconsistency between the terms of this
Agreement and the terms of the Plan, the Plans terms shall completely supersede and replace the
conflicting terms of this Agreement. Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Agreement
shall have the meaning assigned to them in the Plan. You are sometimes referred to as the
Participant in this Agreement.
PLEASE NOTE THAT BY SIGNING THIS AGREEMENT YOU ARE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE
TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT AND THE PLAN, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION TERMS AND CONDITIONS THAT MAY
LIMIT YOUR ABILITY TO PURCHASE THE COMMON STOCK UNDERLYING THE PUs GRANTED IN THIS AGREEMENT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You are hereby granted PUs as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date of Grant:
|
|
August 1, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting Commencement Date:
|
|
Date of Grant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting Period:
|
|
Please refer to Section 2 of this Agreement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of PUs:
|
|
«PUs» |
-1-
2. |
|
Vesting Schedule. |
|
|
|
Provided that you have been continuously employed by the Company during the vesting period, the
PUs will vest on the third anniversary of the Date of Grant based on NRGs Total Shareholder
Return, in accordance with the following schedule: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Threshold |
|
Stock Price |
|
Cost of Equity |
|
Payout * |
Maximum
|
|
$ |
63.75 |
|
|
|
18.0 |
% |
|
200% of Target
= Number of PUs in
Section 1 of this
agreement multiplied by
2. |
Target
|
|
$ |
54.50 |
|
|
|
12.0 |
% |
|
100% of Target
= Number of PUs in
Section 1 of this
agreement. |
< Target
|
|
< $54.50
|
|
< 12.0%
|
|
0% of Target
= Number of PUs in
Section 1 multiplied by
0. |
|
|
|
* |
|
Payout (# of PUs) is interpolated for performance falling between Target and Maximum
levels. |
|
|
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if there is a Change in Control (as defined in the Plan) of
the Company, the PUs shall vest in full immediately upon such Change in Control. |
|
3. |
|
Conversion of PU and Issuance of Shares |
|
|
|
Upon vesting of the Award, one share of Common Stock shall be issued for each PU that vests on
such vesting date, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Plan. |
|
4. |
|
Transfer of PUs |
|
|
|
Unless otherwise permitted by the Committee or Section 14 of the Plan, the PUs may not be sold,
transferred, pledged, assigned or otherwise alienated or hypothecated, other than pursuant to a
will or the laws of descent and distribution. Any attempted disposition in violation of this
Section 4 or Section 14 of the Plan shall be void. |
|
5. |
|
Status of Participant |
|
|
|
The Participant shall not be, or have rights as, a stockholder of the Company with respect to
any of the shares of Common Stock subject to the Award unless such Award has vested, and shares
underlying the PU have been issued and delivered to him or her. The Company shall not be
required to issue or transfer any certificates for shares of Common Stock upon vesting of the
Award until all applicable requirements of law have been complied with and such shares have been
duly listed on any securities exchange on which the Common Stock may then be listed. |
-2-
6. |
|
No Effect on Capital Structure |
|
|
|
The Award shall not affect the right of the Company or any Subsidiary to reclassify,
recapitalize or otherwise change its capital or debt structure or to merge, consolidate, convey
any or all of its assets, dissolve, liquidate, windup, or otherwise reorganize. |
|
7. |
|
Expiration and Forfeiture of Award |
|
|
|
Your Award shall vest and/or expire in the circumstances described below in this Section 7. As
used herein, Termination of Service means termination of a Participants employment by or
service to the Company, including any of its Subsidiaries. |
|
(a) |
|
Death. |
|
|
|
|
Upon a Termination of Service by reason of death, the Award shall vest in full and the
Common Stock underlying the Award shall be issued and delivered to the Participants legal
representatives, heirs, legatees, or distributees. |
|
|
(b) |
|
Termination of Service other than as a result of Death. |
|
|
|
|
Upon a Termination of Service by any reason other than death, including without limitation
as a result of Disability, Retirement, voluntary resignation or termination for Cause, any
unvested portion of the Award shall expire and be forfeited to the Company. |
8. |
|
Committee Authority |
|
|
|
Any question concerning the interpretation of this Agreement, any adjustments required to be
made under the Plan, and any controversy that may arise under the Plan or the Grant Agreement
shall be determined by the Committee in its sole discretion. Any decisions by the Committee
regarding the Plan or this Agreement shall be final and binding. |
|
9. |
|
Plan Controls |
|
|
|
The terms of this Agreement are governed by the terms of the Plan, as it exists on the date of
the grant and as the Plan is amended from time to time. In the event of any conflict between
the provisions of this Agreement and the provisions of the Plan, the terms of the Plan shall
control. |
|
10. |
|
Limitation on Rights; No Right to Future Grants; Extraordinary Item. |
|
|
|
By entering into this Agreement and accepting the Award, the Participant acknowledges that: (a)
the Plan is discretionary and may be modified, suspended or terminated by the Company at any
time as provided in the Plan, provided that, except as provided in Section 17 of the Plan, no
amendment to this Agreement shall adversely affect in a material manner the Participants rights
under this Agreement without his or her written consent; (b) the grant of the Award is a
one-time benefit and does not create any contractual or other right to receive future grants of
awards or benefits in lieu of awards; (c) all determinations with respect to any such future
grants, including, but not limited to, the times when awards will be granted, the number of
shares subject to each award, the award price, if any, and the time or times when each award
will be settled, will be at the sole discretion of the Company; (d) participation in the Plan is
voluntary; (e) the value of the Award is an extraordinary item which is outside the scope of the
Participants employment contract, if any, unless expressly provided for in any such employment
contract; (f) the Award is not part of normal or expected compensation for |
-3-
|
|
any purpose, including without limitation for calculating any benefits, severance, resignation,
termination, redundancy, end of service payments, bonuses, long-service awards, pension or
retirement benefits or similar payments, and the Participant will have no entitlement to
compensation or damages as a consequence of the forfeiture of any unvested portion of the Award
as a result of the Participants Termination of Service for any reason; (g) the future value of
the Common Stock subject to the Award is unknown and cannot be predicted with certainty, (h)
neither the Plan, the Award nor the issuance of the shares underlying the Award confers upon the
Participant any right to continue in the employ or service of (or any other relationship with)
the Company or any Subsidiary, nor do they limit in any respect the right of the Company or any
Subsidiary to terminate the Participants employment or other relationship with the Company or
any Subsidiary, as the case may be, at any time with or without Cause, and (i) the grant of the
Award will not be interpreted to form an employment relationship with the Company or any
Subsidiary; and furthermore, the grant of the Award will not be interpreted to form an
employment contract with the Company or any Subsidiary. |
|
11. |
|
General Provisions |
|
(a) |
|
Notice |
|
|
|
|
Whenever any notice is required or permitted hereunder, such notice must be in writing and
delivered in person or by mail (to the address set forth below if notice is being delivered
to the Company) or electronically. Any notice delivered in person or by mail shall be
deemed to be delivered on the date on which it is personally delivered, or, whether actually
received or not, on the third business day after it is deposited in the United States mail,
certified or registered, postage prepaid, addressed to the person who is to receive it at
the address set forth in this Agreement. Notices delivered to the Participant in person or
by mail shall be addressed to the address for the Participant in the records of the Company.
Notices delivered to the Company in person or by mail shall be addressed as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company:
|
|
NRG Energy, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
Attn: Vice President, Human Resources |
|
|
|
|
211 Carnegie Center |
|
|
|
|
Princeton, NJ 08450 |
|
|
|
The Company or the Participant may change, by written notice to the other, the address
previously specified for receiving notices. |
|
|
(b) |
|
No Waiver |
|
|
|
|
No waiver of any provision of this Agreement will be valid unless in writing and signed by
the person against whom such waiver is sought to be enforced, nor will failure to enforce
any right under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of the same or a waiver of any
other right hereunder. |
|
|
(c) |
|
Undertaking |
|
|
|
|
The Participant hereby agrees to take whatever additional action and execute whatever
additional documents the Company may deem necessary or advisable in order to carry out or
effect one or more of the obligations or restrictions imposed on either the Participant or
the Award pursuant to the express provisions of this Agreement. |
-4-
|
(d) |
|
Entire Contract |
|
|
|
|
This Agreement and the Plan constitute the entire contract between the parties hereto with
regard to the subject matter hereof. This Agreement is made pursuant to the provisions of
the Plan and will in all respects be construed in conformity with the express terms and
provisions of the Plan. |
|
|
(e) |
|
Successors and Assigns |
|
|
|
|
The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding on, the
Company and its successors and assigns and Participant and Participants legal
representatives, heirs, legatees, distributees, assigns and transferees by operation of law. |
|
|
(f) |
|
Securities Law Compliance |
|
|
|
|
The Company currently has an effective registration statement on file with the Securities
and Exchange Commission with respect to the shares of Common Stock subject to the Award.
The Company intends to maintain this registration but has no obligation to the Participant
to do so. If the registration ceases to be effective, the Participant will not be able to
transfer or sell shares of Common Stock issued pursuant to the Award unless exemptions from
registration under applicable securities laws are available. Such exemptions from
registration are very limited and might be unavailable. Participant agrees that any resale
of the shares of Common Stock issued pursuant to the Award shall comply in all respects with
the requirements of all applicable securities laws, rules and regulations (including,
without limitation, the provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and the respective rules and regulations promulgated thereunder) and any other
law, rule or regulation applicable thereto, as such laws, rules, and regulations may be
amended from time to time. The Company shall not be obligated to either issue shares of
Common Stock or permit the resale of any such shares if such issuance or resale would
violate any such requirements. |
|
|
(g) |
|
Taxes |
|
|
|
|
Participant acknowledges that the removal of restrictions with respect to an PU will give
rise to a withholding tax liability, and that no shares of Common Stock are issuable
hereunder until such withholding obligation is satisfied in full. The Participant agrees to
remit to the Company the amount of any taxes required to be withheld. The Committee, in its
sole discretion, may permit Participant to satisfy all or part of such tax obligation
through withholding of the number of shares of Common Stock otherwise issued to him or her
hereunder and/or by the Participant transferring to the Company nonrestricted shares of
Common Stock previously owned by the Participant for at least six (6) months prior to the
vesting of the Award hereunder, with the amount of the withholding to be credited based on
the current Fair Market Value of the Common Stock as of the date the amount of tax to be
withheld is determined. |
|
|
(h) |
|
Information Confidential |
|
|
|
|
As partial consideration for the granting of the Award, the Participant agrees that he or
she will keep confidential all information and knowledge that the Participant has relating
to the manner and amount of his or her participation in the Plan; provided, however, that |
-5-
|
|
|
such information may be disclosed as required by law and may be given in confidence to the
Participants spouse, tax and financial advisors, or to a financial institution to the
extent that such information is necessary to secure a loan. |
|
|
(i) |
|
Governing Law |
|
|
|
|
Except as may otherwise be provided in the Plan, the provisions of this Agreement shall be
governed by the laws of the state of Delaware, without giving effect to principles of
conflicts of law. |
|
|
(j) |
|
Code Section 409A Compliance |
|
|
|
|
Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement, to the extent that the Committee determines
that any Award granted under this Agreement is subject to Section 409A of the Code and fails
to comply with the requirements of Section 409A of the Code, notwithstanding anything to the
contrary contained in the Plan or in this Agreement, the Committee reserves the right to
amend, restructure, terminate or replace the Award in order to cause the Award to either not
be subject to Section 409A of the Code or to comply with the applicable provisions of such
section. |
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first written
above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NRG ENERGY, INC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ David Crane |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
|
David Crane |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title:
|
|
President & CEO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PARTICIPANT: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-6-
EX-10.2
Exhibit 10.2
EXECUTION COPY
FIRST AMENDMENT TO CREDIT AGREEMENT
FIRST AMENDMENT dated as of August 5, 2005 (this First Amendment), to the Credit
Agreement dated as of December 23, 2003, as amended and restated as of December 24, 2004 (as
further amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time, the Credit
Agreement), among NRG ENERGY, INC., a Delaware corporation (the Company), NRG POWER
MARKETING INC., a Delaware corporation (together with the Company, the Borrowers), the
LENDERS from time to time party thereto, CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON, acting through its Cayman
Islands Branch, and GOLDMAN SACHS CREDIT PARTNERS L.P., as joint lead book runners, joint lead
arrangers and co-documentation agents, CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON, acting through its Cayman
Islands Branch, as administrative agent (in such capacity and together with its successors, the
Administrative Agent) and as collateral agent, and GOLDMAN SACHS CREDIT PARTNERS L.P., as
syndication agent.
WHEREAS, the Borrowers and the Administrative Agent, among others, are parties to the Credit
Agreement;
WHEREAS, the Borrowers have requested that the Lenders agree to amend certain provisions of
the Credit Agreement as set forth in this First Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Lenders whose signatures appear below, constituting at least the Required
Lenders, are willing to amend the Credit Agreement on the terms and subject to the conditions set
forth herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are
hereby acknowledged, and in consideration of the premises contained herein, the parties hereto
agree as follows:
1. Defined Terms. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined herein
shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Credit Agreement.
2. Amendment of Section 1.01 (Defined Terms). Section 1.01 of the Credit Agreement is
hereby amended by adding the following defined terms in the proper alphabetical order:
First Amendment shall mean the First Amendment dated as of August 5, 2005 to this
Agreement.
First Amendment Effective Date shall mean the date on which the First Amendment
becomes effective.
3. Amendment of Section 3.23 (Energy Regulation). Section 3.23(c) of the Credit
Agreement is hereby amended by adding after the first appearance of the word Subsidiaries the
following clause: (other than Subsidiaries regulated as steam utilities or chilled water
providers).
4. Amendment of Section 6.05 (Restricted Payments; Restrictive Agreements).
(i) Section 6.05(a) of the Credit Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the words and (x)
in the first parenthetical in clause (C) of such Section and substituting therefor , (x) and
(xii).
(ii) Section 6.05(b) of the Credit Agreement is hereby amended by (a) deleting (i) the word
and at the end of clause (x) and (ii) the period at the end of clause (xi) of such Section and
(b) adding the following clause at the end of paragraph (b) of such Section:
and (xii) the repurchase or redemption from and after the First Amendment Effective
Date of Senior Notes in an aggregate principal amount (excluding prepayment or redemption
premiums and accrued interest) not to exceed $228,750,000 with the proceeds of the issuance
or sale of Equity Interests of the Company (other than Disqualified Stock) (it being
understood, for the avoidance of doubt, that the proviso in Section 6.05(b)(ii) shall not
apply to the net cash proceeds of the issuance or sale of Equity Interests described in this
clause (xii)).
5. Representations and Warranties. In order to induce the other parties hereto to
enter into this First Amendment, each of the Borrowers represents and warrants to each other party
hereto that, as of the First Amendment Effective Date (as defined below):
(a) this First Amendment has been duly authorized, executed and delivered by each of the
Borrowers and this First Amendment and the Credit Agreement, as amended hereby, constitutes each of
the Borrowers legal, valid and binding obligation, enforceable against it in accordance with its
terms, subject to applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or other laws
affecting creditors rights generally and subject to general principles of equity, regardless of
whether considered in a proceeding in equity or at law;
(b) the representations and warranties set forth in each Loan Documents are, after giving
effect to this First Amendment, true and correct in all material respects on and as of the First
Amendment Effective Date with the same effect as though made on and as of the First Amendment
Effective Date, except to the extent such representations and warranties relate to an earlier date,
in which case such representations and warranties shall be true and correct in all material
respects on and as of such earlier date, provided that the references to the Credit
Agreement in such representations and warranties shall be deemed to refer to the Credit Agreement
as amended pursuant to this First Amendment; and
(c) no Event of Default or Default has occurred and is continuing.
6. Conditions to Effectiveness of this First Amendment. This First Amendment shall
become effective on the date (the First Amendment Effective Date) on which:
(a) The Administrative Agent shall have received duly executed and delivered counterparts of
this First Amendment that, when taken together, bear the signatures of each of the Borrowers and
the Required Lenders.
2
(b) The Company shall have paid to the Administrative Agent all outstanding fees, costs and
expenses owing to the Administrative Agent as of such date.
7. Continuing Effect; No Other Amendments. Except as expressly set forth in this
First Amendment, all of the terms and provisions of the Credit Agreement are and shall remain in
full force and effect and the Borrowers shall continue to be bound by all of such terms and
provisions. The amendments provided for herein are limited to the specific provisions of the
Credit Agreement specified herein and shall not constitute an amendment of, or an indication of the
Administrative Agents or the Lenders willingness to amend or waive, any other provisions of the
Credit Agreement or the same provisions for any other date or purpose. This First Amendment shall
constitute a Loan Document.
8. Expenses; Indemnification. The Borrowers jointly and severally agree to pay and
reimburse the Administrative Agent for all its reasonable out-of-pocket costs and expenses incurred
in connection with the preparation and execution and delivery of this First Amendment, and any
other documents prepared in connection herewith, and the transactions contemplated hereby,
including, without limitation, reasonable fees, disbursements and other charges of counsel to the
Administrative Agent and the customary charges of IntraLinks, Syndrak or any other third-party
internet workspace utilized in connection with this First Amendment. Without limiting the
foregoing, the Borrowers also hereby acknowledge that the provisions of Section 9.05 of the Credit
Agreement (including, without limitation, the indemnification provisions of clause (b) thereof)
shall apply in connection with this First Amendment.
9. Counterparts. This First Amendment may be executed by one or more of the parties
to this First Amendment on any number of separate counterparts and all of said counterparts taken
together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed
signature page of this First Amendment by facsimile transmission shall be effective as delivery of
a manually executed counterpart hereof. A set of the copies of this First Amendment signed by all
the parties shall be lodged with the Company and the Administrative Agent. The execution and
delivery of this First Amendment by the Borrowers, the Lenders party hereto and the Administrative
Agent shall be binding upon the Loan Parties, the Lenders, the Agents and all future holders of the
Loans.
10. Effect of Amendment. On the First Amendment Effective Date, the Credit Agreement
shall be amended as provided herein. The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that (a) this First
Amendment and any other Loan Documents executed and delivered in connection herewith do not
constitute a novation, or termination of the Secured Obligations (as defined in the Credit
Agreement) under the Credit Agreement as in effect prior to the First Amendment Effective Date; (b)
such Secured Obligations are in all respects continuing (as amended hereby) with only the terms
thereof being modified to the extent provided in this First Amendment; and (c) the Liens and
security interests as granted under the Security Documents securing payment of such Secured
Obligations are in all respects continuing and in full force and effect and secure the payment of
the Secured Obligations.
11. GOVERNING LAW. THIS FIRST AMENDMENT AND THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES
UNDER THIS FIRST AMENDMENT SHALL BE
3
GOVERNED BY, AND CONSTRUED AND INTERPRETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW
YORK.
[Signature Pages Follow]
4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this First Amendment to be executed
and delivered by their respective duly authorized officers as of the date first above written.
|
|
|
|
|
|
NRG ENERGY, INC.
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ GEORGE P. SCHAEFER
|
|
|
|
Name: |
George P. Schaefer |
|
|
|
Title: |
VP and Treasurer |
|
|
|
NRG POWER MARKETING INC.
|
|
|
By: |
GEORGE P. SCHAEFER
|
|
|
|
Name: |
George P. Schaefer |
|
|
|
Title: |
VP and Treasurer |
|
|
|
CREDIT SUISSE, CAYMAN ISLANDS BRANCH
(formerly known as Credit Suisse First Boston,
acting through its Cayman Islands Branch),
as Administrative Agent,
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ JAMES MORAN
|
|
|
|
Name: |
James Moran |
|
|
|
Title: |
Managing Director |
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ GREGORY S. RICHARDS
|
|
|
|
Name: |
Gregory S. Richards |
|
|
|
Title: |
Associate |
|
|
SIGNATURE
PAGE TO FIRST AMENDMENT DATED AS OF AUGUST 5, 2005, TO
THE NRG ENERGY, INC. AND NRG POWER MARKETING INC.
AMENDED AND RESTATED CREDIT AGREEMENT
DATED AS OF DECEMBER 24, 2004
To Approve the First Amendment:
Name of Institution:
6
EX-31.1:
EXHIBIT 31.1
CERTIFICATION
I, David Crane, certify that:
|
1. |
|
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NRG Energy, Inc.; |
|
|
2. |
|
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report; |
|
|
3. |
|
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; |
|
|
4. |
|
The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: |
|
(a) |
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to
the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
|
|
(b) |
|
Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for
external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; |
|
|
(c) |
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and |
|
|
(d) |
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and |
|
5. |
|
The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): |
|
(a) |
|
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and |
|
|
(b) |
|
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have
a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting. |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ DAVID CRANE |
|
|
|
|
|
David Crane |
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
Date: August 9, 2005 |
|
|
68
EX-31.2:
EXHIBIT 31.2
CERTIFICATION
I, Robert C. Flexon, certify that:
|
1. |
|
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NRG Energy, Inc.; |
|
|
2. |
|
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report; |
|
|
3. |
|
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; |
|
|
4. |
|
The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: |
|
(a) |
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to
the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
|
|
(b) |
|
Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for
external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; |
|
|
(c) |
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and |
|
|
(d) |
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and |
|
5. |
|
The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): |
|
(a) |
|
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and |
|
|
(b) |
|
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have
a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting. |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ROBERT C. FLEXON |
|
|
|
|
|
Robert C. Flexon |
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
(Principal Financial Officer) |
|
|
|
Date: August 9, 2005 |
|
|
69
EX-31.3:
EXHIBIT 31.3
CERTIFICATION
I, James J. Ingoldsby, certify that:
|
1. |
|
I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NRG Energy, Inc.; |
|
|
2. |
|
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report; |
|
|
3. |
|
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; |
|
|
4. |
|
The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: |
|
(a) |
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to
the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
|
|
(b) |
|
Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for
external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; |
|
|
(c) |
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and |
|
|
(d) |
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and |
|
5. |
|
The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): |
|
(a) |
|
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and |
|
|
(b) |
|
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have
a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting. |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JAMES J. INGOLDSBY |
|
|
|
|
|
James J. Ingoldsby |
|
|
Controller |
|
|
(Principal Accounting Officer) |
|
|
|
Date: August 9, 2005 |
|
|
70
EX-32
EXHIBIT 32
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Quarterly Report of NRG Energy, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (Form 10-Q), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
such officers knowledge:
(1) The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2) The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Form 10-Q.
|
|
|
Date: August 9, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ DAVID CRANE |
|
|
|
|
|
David Crane, |
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ROBERT C. FLEXON |
|
|
|
|
|
Robert C. Flexon, |
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
(Principal Financial Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JAMES J. INGOLDSBY |
|
|
|
|
|
James J. Ingoldsby, |
|
|
Controller |
|
|
(Principal Accounting Officer) |
The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and
is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within
the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to NRG
Energy, Inc. and will be retained by NRG Energy, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
71