NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED INTERIM FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (UNAUDITED)
1
.
GENERAL
ITC Holdings and its subsidiaries are engaged in the transmission of electricity in the United States. Through our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries, we own and operate high-voltage systems in Michigan’s Lower Peninsula and portions of Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma that transmit electricity from generating stations to local distribution facilities connected to our systems. ITC Holdings is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Investment Holdings.
Basis of Presentation
These condensed consolidated interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with the notes to the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2017
included in ITC Holdings’ annual report on Form 10-K for such period.
The accompanying condensed consolidated interim financial statements have been prepared using GAAP and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of SEC Regulation S-X as they apply to interim financial information. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and notes required by GAAP for complete financial statements. These accounting principles require us to use estimates and assumptions that impact the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. Actual results may differ from our estimates.
The condensed consolidated interim financial statements are unaudited, but in our opinion include all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring adjustments) necessary for a fair statement of the results for the interim period. The interim financial results are not necessarily indicative of results that may be expected for any other interim period or the fiscal year.
2
.
RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
Recently Adopted Pronouncements
Revenue from Contracts with Customers
In May 2014, the FASB issued authoritative guidance requiring entities to apply a new model for recognizing revenue from contracts with customers. Subsequent updates have been issued primarily to provide implementation guidance related to the initial guidance issued in May 2014. The guidance requires entities to evaluate their revenue recognition arrangements using a five-step model to determine when a customer obtains control of a transferred good or service.
The guidance may be adopted using either (a) a full retrospective method, whereby comparative periods would be restated to present the impact of the new standard, with the cumulative effect of applying the standard recognized as of the earliest period presented, or (b) a modified retrospective method, under which comparative periods would not be restated and the cumulative effect of applying the standard would be recognized at the date of initial adoption. We adopted the guidance effective January 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective approach; however, we did not identify or record any adjustments to the opening balance of retained earnings on adoption.
Substantially all of our revenue from contracts with customers is generated from providing transmission services to customers based on tariff rates, as approved by the FERC, and is in the scope of the new guidance. The true-up mechanisms under our Formula Rates are considered alternative revenue programs of rate-regulated utilities and are outside the scope of the new guidance, as they are not considered to be contracts with customers. The implementation of the new standard did not have a material impact on the amount and timing of revenue recognition. However, the following summarizes the impacts of the adoption of this new accounting guidance on our financial statements:
|
|
•
|
Modification of our condensed consolidated statements of operations to present operating revenues arising from alternative revenue programs (Formula rate true-up) separately from revenues in the scope of the new guidance (Transmission and other services). In connection with this presentation change, we adopted an accounting policy whereby only the initial origination of our alternative revenue program revenue is reported in the Formula rate true-up line on our condensed consolidated statements of operations. When those amounts are subsequently included in the price of utility service and billed or refunded to customers, we account for that event as the recovery or settlement of the associated regulatory asset or regulatory liability, respectively.
|
|
|
•
|
Addition of
Note 3
to address the requirement to provide more information regarding the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows.
|
|
|
•
|
Addition of
Note 4
to provide more information about changes in accounts receivable from customers.
|
Recognition and Measurement of Financial Instruments
In January 2016, the FASB issued authoritative guidance amending the classification and measurement of financial instruments. The guidance requires entities to carry most investments in equity securities at fair value and recognize changes in fair value in net income, unless the investment results in consolidation or equity method accounting. Additionally, the new guidance amends certain disclosure requirements associated with the fair value of financial instruments. The guidance is required to be adopted using a modified retrospective approach, with limited exceptions. The guidance impacts the accounting for certain of our investments previously accounted for as available-for-sale with changes in fair value recorded in other comprehensive income; upon adoption of the guidance on January 1, 2018, we began accounting for such investments with changes in fair value reported in net income. We recorded an immaterial adjustment to retained earnings in accordance with the modified retrospective adoption requirement.
Presentation of Restricted Cash in the Statement of Cash Flows
In November 2016, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on the presentation of restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents within the statement of cash flows. The new guidance specifies that restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents shall be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. The guidance does not, however, provide a definition of restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. We adopted the guidance effective for interim and annual periods beginning on January 1, 2018, using a retrospective approach as required.
Restricted cash includes cash and cash equivalents that are legally or contractually restricted for use or withdrawal or are formally set aside for a specific purpose. See reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash in
Note 15
.
The following summarizes the impact of this adoption on our previously reported amounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended
|
(in millions)
|
June 30, 2017
|
Restricted cash - Beginning balance
|
$
|
3
|
|
Restricted cash - Ending balance
|
3
|
|
Change - Other non-current assets and liabilities, net within condensed consolidated statements of cash flow
|
$
|
—
|
|
Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost
In March 2017, the FASB issued guidance that requires entities to disaggregate the current service cost component of net benefit cost (i.e., net periodic pension cost and net periodic postretirement benefit cost) and present it in the same statement of operations line item as other current compensation costs for employees (i.e., within General and administrative for us). Entities are required to present the other components of net benefit cost (“non-service costs”) elsewhere in the statement of operations and outside operating income. The line or lines containing such other components must be appropriately described on the face of the statement of operations; otherwise, disclosure of the location of such other costs in the statement of operations is required. We elected to present the non-service costs within the line “
Other (income) and expenses — net
” in the condensed consolidated statements of operations and include disclosure within
Note 9
. In addition, the new guidance allows capitalization of only the service cost component of net benefit cost.
We adopted the guidance effective January 1, 2018. The changes regarding cost capitalization were applied prospectively while the changes to the presentation of net benefit cost in the condensed consolidated statements of operations were adopted retrospectively. We applied the practical expedient that permits entities to use amounts previously disclosed in the pension and postretirement welfare footnotes as the estimation basis for the retrospective adjustments to the condensed consolidated statements of operations. The following summarizes the impact of this adoption on our previously reported amounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Six months ended
|
(in millions)
|
June 30, 2017
|
|
June 30, 2017
|
General and administrative
|
Reported
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
61
|
|
Adjustment
|
(1
|
)
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Adjusted
|
$
|
29
|
|
|
$
|
60
|
|
Other (income) and expenses — net
|
Reported
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
Adjustment
|
1
|
|
|
1
|
|
Adjusted
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from AOCI
In February 2018, the FASB issued guidance that permits entities to reclassify the stranded tax effects resulting from the TCJA from AOCI to retained earnings. The stranded tax effects were the result of the revaluation of deferred taxes through net income as a result of the tax rate change, with no adjustment to the tax effects recorded in AOCI. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning January 1, 2019; however, we have elected to early adopt the guidance as of January 1, 2018. We elected to apply the guidance in the period of adoption, accounted for as a change in accounting principle resulting from the adoption of new accounting guidance. We recorded a
$1 million
adjustment to AOCI and retained earnings upon adoption. We apply an investment by investment approach to releasing income tax effects from AOCI.
Recently Issued Pronouncements
We have considered all new accounting pronouncements issued by the FASB and concluded the following accounting guidance, which has not yet been adopted by us, may have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Accounting for Leases
In February 2016, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on accounting for leases, which impacts accounting by lessees as well as lessors. In January 2018, additional guidance was issued that provides an optional transition practical expedient to not evaluate under the new guidance existing or expired easements that were not previously accounted for as leases under current guidance. The new guidance creates a dual approach for lessee accounting, with lease classification determined in accordance with principles in existing lease guidance. Statement of operations presentation differs depending on the lease classification; however, both types of leases result in lessees recognizing a right-of-use asset and a lease liability, with limited exceptions. Under existing accounting guidance, operating leases are not recorded on the balance sheet of lessees. The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years and will be applied using a modified retrospective approach, with possible optional practical expedients.
We expect to elect a package of practical expedients that will allow us to not reassess whether any expired or existing contract is a lease or contains a lease, the lease classification of any expired or existing leases, and the initial direct costs for any existing leases. We also expect to elect an additional practical expedient that permits entities to not evaluate existing land easements that were not previously accounted for as leases.
We are currently assessing the impact this guidance will have on our consolidated financial statements, including our disclosures, and continue to monitor standard-setting activities that may affect the transition requirements of the new lease standard.
Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities
In August 2017, the FASB issued authoritative guidance to make targeted improvements to hedge accounting to better align with an entity’s risk management objectives and to reduce the complexity of hedge accounting. Among other changes, the new guidance simplifies hedge accounting by (a) allowing more time for entities to complete initial quantitative hedge effectiveness assessments, (b) enabling entities to elect to perform subsequent effectiveness assessments qualitatively, (c) eliminating the concept of recognizing periodic hedge ineffectiveness for cash flow hedges, (d) requiring the change in fair value of a derivative to be recorded in the same statement of operations line item as the earnings effect of the hedged item, and (e) permitting additional hedge strategies to qualify for hedge accounting. In addition, the guidance modifies existing disclosure requirements and adds new disclosure requirements, including tabular disclosures about both (a) the total amounts reported in the statement of operations for each income and expense line item that is affected by hedging and (b) the effects of hedging on those line items. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The guidance is required to be adopted on a modified retrospective basis to existing hedging relationships and on a prospective basis for the presentation and disclosure requirements. We do not expect a significant impact upon adoption, but we would add the required disclosures, as applicable.
3
.
REVENUE
Our total revenues are comprised of revenues which arise from three classifications including transmission services, other services revenue, and formula rate true-up. As other services revenue is immaterial, it is presented in combination with transmission services on the condensed consolidated statements of operations.
Transmission Services
Through our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries, we generate nearly all our revenue from providing electric transmission services over our transmission systems. As independent transmission companies, our transmission services are provided and
revenues are received based on our tariffs, as approved by the FERC. The transmission revenue requirements at our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries are set annually using Formula Rates and remain in effect for a one-year period. By updating the inputs to the formula and resulting rates on an annual basis, the revenues at our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries reflect changing operating data and financial performance, including the amount of network load on their transmissions systems (for our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries), operating expenses and additions to property, plant and equipment when placed in service, among other items.
We recognize revenue for transmission services over time as transmission services are provided to customers (generally using an output measure of progress based on transmission load delivered). Customers simultaneously receive and consume the benefits provided by the Regulated Operating Subsidiaries’ services. We recognize revenue in the amount to which we have the right to invoice because we have a right to consideration in an amount that corresponds directly with the value to the customer of performance completed to date. As billing agents, MISO and SPP independently bill our customers on a monthly basis and collect fees for the use of our transmission systems. No component of the transaction price is allocated to unsatisfied performance obligations.
Transmission service revenue includes an estimate for unbilled revenues from service that has been provided but not billed by the end of an accounting period. Unbilled revenues are dependent upon a number of factors that require management’s judgment including estimates of transmission network load (for the MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries) and preliminary information provided by billing agents. Due to the seasonal fluctuations of actual load, the unbilled revenue amount generally increases during the spring and summer and decreases during the fall and winter. See
Note 4
for information on changes in unbilled accounts receivable.
Other
Services Revenue
Other services revenue consists of rental revenues, easement revenues, and amounts from providing ancillary services. A portion of other services revenue is treated as a revenue credit and reduces gross revenue requirement when calculating net revenue requirement under our Formula Rates. Total other services revenue for the
three months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
were
$2 million
and
$3 million
, respectively, and for the
six months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
were
$3 million
and
$4 million
, respectively.
Formula Rate True-Up
The true-up mechanism under our Formula Rates is considered an alternative revenue program of a rate-regulated utility given it permits our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries to adjust future rates in response to past activities or completed events in order to collect our actual revenue requirements under our Formula Rates. In accordance with our accounting policy, only the current year origination of the true-up is reported as a formula rate true-up. See “Cost-based Formula Rates with True-Up Mechanism” in
Note 5
for more information on our Formula Rates.
4
.
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
The following table presents the components of accounts receivable on the balance sheet:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Trade accounts receivable
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
Unbilled accounts receivable
|
126
|
|
|
108
|
|
Other
|
9
|
|
|
9
|
|
Total accounts receivable
|
$
|
137
|
|
|
$
|
119
|
|
5
.
REGULATORY MATTERS
Cost-Based Formula Rates with True-Up Mechanism
The transmission revenue requirements at our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries are set annually using Formula Rates and remain in effect for a
one year
period. By updating the inputs to the formula and resulting rates on an annual basis, the revenues at our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries reflect changing operational data and financial performance, including the amount of network load on their transmission systems (for our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries), operating expenses and additions to property, plant and equipment when placed in service, among other items. The formula used to derive the rates does not require further action or FERC filings each year, although the formula inputs remain subject to legal challenge at the FERC. Our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries will continue to use the formula to calculate their respective annual revenue requirements unless the FERC determines the resulting rates to be unjust and unreasonable and another mechanism is determined by the FERC to be just and reasonable. See “Rate of Return on Equity Complaints” in
Note 14
for detail on ROE matters for our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries and “Challenge to Independence Incentive Adders for Transmission Rates” discussed in
Note 5
herein.
Our rates include a true-up mechanism, whereby our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries compare their actual revenue requirements to their billed revenues for each year to determine any over- or under-collection of revenue requirements. Revenue is recognized for services provided during each reporting period based on actual revenue requirements calculated using the formula. Our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries accrue or defer revenues to the extent that the actual revenue requirement for the reporting period is higher or lower, respectively, than the amounts billed relating to that reporting period. The amount of accrued or deferred revenues is reflected in future revenue requirements and thus flows through to customer bills within
two years
under the provisions of our Formula Rates.
The net changes in regulatory assets and liabilities associated with our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries’ Formula Rate revenue accruals and deferrals, including accrued interest, were as follows during the
six months ended June 30, 2018
:
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
Total
|
Net regulatory liability as of December 31, 2017
|
$
|
(35
|
)
|
Net refund of 2016 revenue deferrals and accruals, including accrued interest
|
10
|
|
Net revenue deferral for the six months ended June 30, 2018
|
(13
|
)
|
Net regulatory liability as of June 30, 2018
|
$
|
(38
|
)
|
Regulatory assets and liabilities associated with our Regulated Operating Subsidiaries’ Formula Rate revenue accruals and deferrals, including accrued interest, are recorded in the condensed consolidated statements of financial position at
June 30, 2018
and
December 31, 2017
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Current regulatory assets
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
18
|
|
Non-current regulatory assets
|
12
|
|
|
11
|
|
Current regulatory liabilities
|
(33
|
)
|
|
(38
|
)
|
Non-current regulatory liabilities
|
(32
|
)
|
|
(26
|
)
|
Net regulatory liability
|
$
|
(38
|
)
|
|
$
|
(35
|
)
|
Reposting of Rates for Regulated Operating Subsidiaries
As a result of the reduction in the federal tax rate arising from the enactment of the TCJA, the 2018 projected Formula Rates for our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries have been reposted. On March 15, 2018, the FERC granted a waiver which allows us the ability to adjust the rates effective back to January 1, 2018 for our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries and allows MISO to return to customers excess amounts previously collected in 2018. Our rates included in MISO invoices for services provided in March 2018 reflected the lower corporate tax rate. Resettlement of invoices for services provided in January and February 2018 occurred in April 2018 when the services were billed. We recorded a reduction of revenue of
$16 million
in the first quarter of 2018, which was offset through a lower income tax provision for our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries and as such did not impact net income.
In addition, the 2018 projected Formula Rates for ITC Great Plains, which are settled by SPP, have been reposted. On May 25, 2018, the FERC granted a waiver which allows us the ability to adjust the rate effective back to January 1, 2018 and allows SPP to return to customers excess amounts previously collected in 2018. As of June 30, 2018, we recorded a current regulatory liability and a reduction of revenue of
$4 million
related to the resettlement of invoices for services provided in January through May 2018. This reduction of revenue will be offset through a lower income tax provision for ITC Great Plains and as such should not impact net income.
MISO Funding Policy for Generator Interconnections
On June 18, 2015, the FERC issued an order initiating a proceeding, pursuant to Section 206 of the FPA, to examine MISO’s funding policy for generator interconnections, which allowed a TO to unilaterally elect to fund network upgrades and recover such costs from the interconnection customer. In this order, the FERC found that the MISO funding policy may be unduly discriminatory, and suggested the MISO funding policy be revised to require mutual agreement between the interconnection customer and TO for the TO funded network upgrades. In the absence of such mutual agreement, the facilities would be funded solely by the interconnection customer. On January 8, 2016, MISO made a compliance filing to revise its funding policy to adopt the FERC suggestion to require mutual agreement between the customer and TO, with an effective date of June 24, 2015. Our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries, along with another MISO TO, appealed the FERC’s orders on this issue. On January 26, 2018, the D.C. Circuit Court issued an opinion which concluded that evidence does not support the FERC’s position as applied to TOs without affiliated generation assets. In addition, the opinion noted that the FERC did not adequately respond to the argument that a generator funding entitlement would compel a TO to construct, own, and operate facilities without compensation, which would force the TO to accept additional risk without corresponding return.
As a result, the court vacated the orders and remanded this case to FERC. On March 24, 2018, our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries and the other MISO TO that participated in the appeal at the D.C. Circuit Court filed a motion at FERC that asks FERC to implement the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision and order MISO to amend its tariff to reinstate the self-fund option effective June 24, 2015 and to permit MISO TOs that were unable to elect self-funding in GIAs that were executed since June 24, 2015 to amend those GIAs to include the self-fund option. The motion is pending at FERC. We do not expect the resolution of this proceeding to have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.
Rate of Return on Equity Complaints
See “Rate of Return on Equity Complaints” in
Note 14
for a discussion of the ROE complaints.
Challenge to Independence Incentive Adders for Transmission Rates
On April 20, 2018, Consumers Energy, IP&L, Midwest Municipal Transmission Group, Missouri River Energy Services, Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency & WPPI Energy filed a complaint with the FERC under section 206 of the FPA, challenging the independence incentive adders that are included in transmission rates charged by ITC’s operating subsidiaries in the MISO region. The independence incentive adder was established to encourage investment in transmission infrastructure and adders were awarded to the MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries in recognition of their status as independent transmission-only companies. The adders allow either
50
basis points or
100
basis points
to be added to the MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries’ authorized ROE, subject to any ROE cap established by FERC. The MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries have answered the complaint and we are awaiting an order from FERC. We believe the likelihood of a material adverse result to our consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial condition is remote.
Calculation of Accumulated Deferred Income Tax Balances in Projected Formula Rates
On June 21, 2018, FERC issued an order initiating a proceeding and paper hearings, pursuant to Section 206 of the FPA, to examine the methodology used by a group of TOs, including ITCTransmission and ITC Midwest, for calculating balances of accumulated deferred income taxes (“ADIT”) in forward-looking Formula Rates. The order is based on a previous FERC decision for another group of TOs in which FERC concluded that the two-step averaging methodology for ADIT is no longer necessary to comply with IRS normalization rules in light of IRS guidance issued in 2017. The Regulated Operating Subsidiaries only utilize the two-step averaging methodology for their posted Formula Rate and not for purposes of the true-up. As a result, we do not expect the resolution of this proceeding to have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.
6
.
GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS
Goodwill
At
June 30, 2018
and
December 31, 2017
, we had goodwill balances recorded at ITCTransmission, METC and ITC Midwest of
$173 million
,
$454 million
and
$323 million
, respectively, which resulted from the ITCTransmission and METC acquisitions and ITC Midwest’s acquisition of the IP&L transmission assets, respectively.
Intangible Assets
We have recorded intangible assets as a result of the METC acquisition in 2006. The carrying value of these assets was
$24 million
and
$26 million
(net of accumulated amortization of
$35 million
and
$33 million
) as of
June 30, 2018
and
December 31, 2017
, respectively.
We have also recorded intangible assets for payments made by and obligations of ITC Great Plains to certain TOs to acquire rights, which are required under the SPP tariff to designate ITC Great Plains to build, own and operate projects within the SPP region, including two regional cost sharing projects in Kansas. The carrying amount of these intangible assets was
$14 million
(net of accumulated amortization of
$2 million
) at both
June 30, 2018
and
December 31, 2017
.
We have recorded
$1 million
of other intangible assets at both
June 30, 2018
and
December 31, 2017
.
We recognized
$1 million
of amortization expense of our intangible assets during each of the three month periods ended
June 30, 2018
and
2017
, and recorded
$2 million
during each of the six month periods ended
June 30, 2018
and
2017
. For each of the next five years, we expect the annual amortization of our intangible assets that have been recorded as of
June 30, 2018
to be
$3 million
per year.
7
.
DEBT
ITC Holdings
Senior Unsecured Notes
On November 14, 2017, ITC Holdings completed the private offering of
$500 million
aggregate principal amount of unsecured
2.70%
Senior Notes, due November 15, 2022, and
$500 million
aggregate principal amount of unsecured
3.35%
Senior Notes, due November 15, 2027, (collectively, the “2017 Senior Notes”). In connection with the offering of the 2017 Senior Notes, ITC Holdings also entered into a registration rights agreement with the representatives of the initial purchasers named therein. Pursuant to this registration rights agreement, ITC Holdings agreed to use its commercially reasonable efforts to file with the SEC and cause to become effective a registration statement with respect to registered exchange offers to exchange each series of 2017 Senior Notes issued in the offering for an issue of notes having terms substantially identical to the applicable series of 2017 Senior Notes (except for provisions relating to the transfer restrictions, registration rights and payment of additional interest) (the “Exchange Offers”). On June 19, 2018, ITC Holdings completed the Exchange Offers, pursuant to an effective registration statement on Form S-4, under which all of the 2017 Senior Notes issued in the offering were exchanged for an issue of notes having terms substantially identical to the applicable series of 2017 Senior Notes (except for provisions in the 2017 Senior Notes relating to transfer restrictions, registration rights and payment of additional interest).
Commercial Paper Program
ITC Holdings has an ongoing commercial paper program for the issuance and sale of unsecured commercial paper in an aggregate amount not to exceed
$400 million
outstanding at any one time. As of
June 30, 2018
, ITC Holdings had
$13 million
of commercial paper issued and outstanding under the program with a weighted-average interest rate of
2.31%
and weighted average remaining days to maturity of
5 days
. The amount outstanding as of June 30, 2018, was classified as debt maturing within one year in the condensed consolidated statements of financial position.
ITCTransmission
First Mortgage Bonds
On March 29, 2018, ITCTransmission issued
$225 million
aggregate principal amount of
4.00%
First Mortgage Bonds due March 30, 2053. The proceeds were used to refinance
$100 million
of
5.75%
First Mortgage Bonds due April 1, 2018 and repay the existing indebtedness under the revolving credit agreement in March 2018. Proceeds were also used to repay the
$50 million
of borrowings under the term loan credit agreement due March 23, 2019. Remaining proceeds will be used to partially fund capital expenditures and for general corporate purposes. ITCTransmission’s First Mortgage bonds were issued under its First Mortgage and Deed of Trust and secured by a first mortgage lien on substantially all of its real property and tangible personal property.
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
We may use derivative financial instruments, including interest rate swap contracts, to manage our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates. The use of these financial instruments mitigates exposure to these risks and the variability of our operating results. We are not a party to leveraged derivatives and do not enter into derivative financial instruments for trading or speculative purposes. At
June 30, 2018
, ITC Holdings did not have any interest rate swaps outstanding.
Revolving Credit Agreements
At
June 30, 2018
, ITC Holdings and certain of its Regulated Operating Subsidiaries had the following unsecured revolving credit facilities available:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
Total
Available
Capacity
|
|
Outstanding
Balance (a)
|
|
Unused
Capacity
|
|
Weighted Average
Interest Rate on
Outstanding Balance
|
|
Commitment
Fee Rate (b)
|
ITC Holdings
|
$
|
400
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
400
|
|
(c)
|
—%
|
(d)
|
0.175
|
%
|
ITCTransmission
|
100
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
—%
|
(e)
|
0.10
|
%
|
METC
|
100
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
3.0%
|
(e)
|
0.10
|
%
|
ITC Midwest
|
225
|
|
|
153
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
3.0%
|
(e)
|
0.10
|
%
|
ITC Great Plains
|
75
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
3.0%
|
(e)
|
0.10
|
%
|
Total
|
$
|
900
|
|
|
$
|
255
|
|
|
$
|
645
|
|
|
|
|
|
____________________________
|
|
(a)
|
Included within long-term debt.
|
|
|
(b)
|
Calculation based on the average daily unused commitments, subject to adjustment based on the borrower’s credit rating.
|
|
|
(c)
|
ITC Holdings’ revolving credit agreement may be used for general corporate purposes, including to repay commercial paper issued pursuant to the commercial paper program described above, if necessary. While outstanding commercial paper does not reduce available capacity under ITC Holdings’ revolving credit agreement, the unused capacity under this agreement adjusted for the commercial paper outstanding was
$387 million
as of
June 30, 2018
.
|
|
|
(d)
|
Loan bears interest at a rate equal to LIBOR plus an applicable margin of 1.25% or at a base rate, which is defined as the higher of the prime rate, 0.50% above the federal funds rate or 1.00% above the one month LIBOR, plus an applicable margin of 0.25%, subject to adjustments based on ITC Holdings’ credit rating.
|
|
|
(e)
|
Loans bear interest at a rate equal to LIBOR plus an applicable margin of 1.00% or at a base rate, which is defined as the higher of the prime rate, 0.50% above the federal funds rate or 1.00% above the one month LIBOR, subject to adjustments based on the borrower’s credit rating.
|
Covenants
Our debt instruments contain numerous financial and operating covenants that place significant restrictions on certain transactions, such as incurring additional indebtedness, engaging in sale and lease-back transactions, creating liens or other encumbrances, entering into mergers, consolidations, liquidations or dissolutions, creating or acquiring subsidiaries and selling or otherwise disposing of all or substantially all of our assets. In addition, the covenants require us to meet certain financial ratios, such as maintaining certain debt to capitalization ratios and certain funds from operations to debt levels. As of
June 30, 2018
, we were not in violation of any debt covenant.
8
.
INCOME TAXES
In December 2017, the President of the United States signed into law the TCJA, which enacted significant changes to the Internal Revenue Code including a reduction in the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate from
35%
to
21%
effective for tax years beginning after 2017. During the
three months ended June 30, 2018
, Iowa enacted a reduction in corporate statutory income tax rates from
12.0%
to
9.8%
, effective January 1, 2021. Based upon the future change in rate, we have revalued the Iowa NOL at ITC Holdings. As a result, additional income tax expense of
$6 million
was recorded in the second quarter of 2018. For the
three months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
, our effective tax rates were
31%
and
37%
, respectively, and for the
six months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
, our effective tax rates were
27%
and
37%
, respectively.
We continue to evaluate the bonus depreciation exemption for regulated utilities. We have recorded an estimated provision for bonus depreciation for our fixed assets placed in service after September 27, 2017, which impacts our deferred tax assets and liabilities. We anticipate further clarification on this item from the IRS and the provisional amounts we have recorded under SAB 118 represent our best estimates as a result of the TCJA.
9
.
RETIREMENT BENEFITS AND ASSETS HELD IN TRUST
Pension Plan Benefits
We have a qualified defined benefit pension plan (“retirement plan”) for eligible employees, comprised of a traditional final average pay plan and a cash balance plan. The traditional final average pay plan is noncontributory, covers select employees, and provides retirement benefits based on years of benefit service, average final compensation and age at retirement.
The cash balance plan is also noncontributory, covers substantially all employees and provides retirement benefits based on eligible compensation and interest credits. Our funding practice for the retirement plan is to contribute amounts necessary to meet the minimum funding requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, plus additional amounts as we determine appropriate. During the second quarter of 2018, we contributed
$4 million
to the retirement plan. We
do not
expect to make any additional contributions to this plan in
2018
.
We also have two supplemental nonqualified, noncontributory, defined benefit pension plans for selected management employees (the “supplemental benefit plans” and, collectively with the retirement plan, the “pension plans”). The supplemental benefit plans provide for benefits that supplement those provided by the retirement plan. We contributed
$3 million
to the supplemental benefit plans during the second quarter of 2018. We
do not
expect to make any additional contributions to these plans in
2018
.
Net periodic benefit cost for the pension plans, by component, was as follows for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Six months ended
|
|
June 30,
|
|
June 30,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Service cost
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
Interest cost
|
1
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
2
|
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
(1
|
)
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Amortization of unrecognized loss
|
—
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
1
|
|
Net pension cost
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
The components of net pension cost other than the service cost component are included in the line item “
Other (income) and expenses — net
” in the condensed consolidated statements of operations.
Other Postretirement Benefits
We provide certain postretirement health care, dental and life insurance benefits for eligible employees. During the second quarter of 2018, we contributed
$4 million
to the postretirement benefit plan. We expect to make additional contributions of
$5 million
to the postretirement benefit plan during the second half of
2018
.
Net postretirement benefit plan cost, by component, was as follows for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Six months ended
|
|
June 30,
|
|
June 30,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Service cost
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
Interest cost
|
1
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
1
|
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
(1
|
)
|
|
—
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Net postretirement cost
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
The components of net postretirement cost other than the service cost component are included in the line item “
Other (income) and expenses — net
” in the condensed consolidated statements of operations.
Defined Contribution Plan
We also sponsor a defined contribution retirement savings plan. Participation in this plan is available to substantially all employees. We match employee contributions up to certain predefined limits based upon eligible compensation and the employee’s contribution rate. The cost of this plan was
$1 million
for each of the three month periods ended
June 30, 2018
and
2017
and
$3 million
and
$2 million
for the
six months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
, respectively.
10
.
FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
The measurement of fair value is based on a three-tier hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value. These tiers include: Level 1, defined as observable inputs such as quoted prices in active markets; Level 2, defined as inputs other than quoted prices in active markets that are either directly or indirectly observable; and Level 3, defined as unobservable inputs in which little or no market data exists, therefore requiring an entity to develop its own assumptions. Changes in economic conditions or model-based valuation techniques may require the transfer of financial instruments from one fair value level to another. In such instances, the transfer is reported at the beginning of the reporting period. For the
six months ended June 30, 2018
and the year ended
December 31, 2017
, there were
no
transfers between levels.
Our assets measured at fair value subject to the three-tier hierarchy at
June 30, 2018
, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using
|
|
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets for
Identical Assets
|
|
Significant
Other Observable
Inputs
|
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
|
(in millions)
|
(Level 1)
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
(Level 3)
|
Financial assets measured on a recurring basis:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mutual funds — fixed income securities
|
$
|
53
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Mutual funds — equity securities
|
2
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total
|
$
|
55
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Our assets measured at fair value subject to the three-tier hierarchy at
December 31, 2017
, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using
|
|
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets for
Identical Assets
|
|
Significant
Other Observable
Inputs
|
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
|
(in millions)
|
(Level 1)
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
(Level 3)
|
Financial assets measured on a recurring basis:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Mutual funds — fixed income securities
|
52
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Mutual funds — equity securities
|
1
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total
|
$
|
54
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
As of
June 30, 2018
and
December 31, 2017
, we held certain assets that are required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis. The assets included in the table consist of investments recorded within cash and cash equivalents and other long-term assets, including investments held in a trust associated with our supplemental benefit plans described in
Note 9
. Our mutual funds are publicly traded and are recorded at fair value based on observable trades for identical securities in an active market. Changes in the observed trading prices and liquidity of money market funds are monitored as additional support for determining fair value. Beginning on January 1, 2018, gains and losses for all mutual fund investments are recorded in earnings. Previously, gains and losses on available-for-sale investments were recorded in AOCI.
We also held non-financial assets that are required to be measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis. These consist of goodwill and intangible assets. We did not record any impairment charges on long-lived assets and no other significant events occurred requiring non-financial assets and liabilities to be measured at fair value (subsequent to initial recognition) during the
six months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
. For additional information on our goodwill and intangible assets, please refer to
Note 6
.
Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities
Fixed Rate Debt
Based on the borrowing rates obtained from third party lending institutions currently available for bank loans with similar terms and average maturities from active markets, the fair value of our consolidated long-term debt and debt maturing within one year, excluding revolving and term loan credit agreements and commercial paper, was
$5,029 million
and
$5,192 million
at
June 30, 2018
and
December 31, 2017
, respectively. These fair values represent Level 2 under the three-tier hierarchy described above. The total book value of our consolidated long-term debt and debt maturing within one year, net of discount and deferred financing fees and excluding revolving and term loan credit agreements and commercial paper, was
$4,955 million
and
$4,830 million
at
June 30, 2018
and
December 31, 2017
, respectively.
Revolving and Term Loan Credit Agreements
At
June 30, 2018
and
December 31, 2017
, we had a consolidated total of
$255 million
and
$271 million
, respectively, outstanding under our revolving and term loan credit agreements, which are variable rate loans. The fair value of these loans approximates book value based on the borrowing rates currently available for variable rate loans obtained from third party lending institutions. These fair values represent Level 2 under the three-tier hierarchy described above.
Other Financial Instruments
The carrying value of other financial instruments included in current assets and current liabilities, including cash and cash equivalents, special deposits and commercial paper, approximates their fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments.
11
.
STOCKHOLDER'S EQUITY
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income
The following table provides the components of changes in AOCI for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Six months ended
|
|
June 30,
|
|
June 30,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Balance at the beginning of period
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
Derivative instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification of net loss relating to interest rate cash flow hedges from AOCI to earnings (net of tax, of less than $1 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2018) (a)
|
1
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
—
|
|
Reclassification of deferred tax effects on interest rate cash flow hedges stranded in AOCI, subject to the TCJA, into retained earnings
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
—
|
|
Loss on interest rate swaps relating to interest rate cash flow hedges (net of tax of $1 and $2 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2017, respectively)
|
—
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
—
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Derivative instruments, net of tax
|
1
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
2
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Total other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax
|
1
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
2
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Balance at the end of period
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
____________________________
|
|
(a)
|
The reclassification of the net loss relating to interest rate cash flow hedges is reported in interest expense on a pre-tax basis.
|
The amount of net loss relating to interest rate cash flow hedges to be reclassified from AOCI to earnings for the 12-month period ending
June 30,
2019
is expected to be approximately
$1 million
(net of tax of less than
$1 million
). The reclassification is reported in interest expense on a pre-tax basis.
12
.
SHARE-BASED COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE SHARE PURCHASE PLAN
2017 Omnibus Plan
On March 7, 2018, pursuant to the 2017 Omnibus Plan, we granted
296,559
PBUs and
230,645
SBUs. Each PBU and SBU granted will be valued based on one share of Fortis common stock traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange, converted to U.S. dollars and settled only in cash. The awards vest on the date specified in a particular grant agreement, provided the service and performance criteria, as applicable, are satisfied. The PBUs and SBUs earn dividend equivalents which are also re-measured consistent with the target award and settled in cash at the end of the vesting period.
The granted awards and related dividend equivalents have no shareholder rights.
The aggregate fair value of all tranches of PBUs and SBUs as of
June 30, 2018
was
$14 million
and
$16 million
, respectively. At
June 30, 2018
, the total unrecognized compensation cost related to the PBUs and SBUs is
$11 million
and
$11 million
, respectively.
Employee Share Purchase Plan
We have an ESPP plan which enables ITC employees to purchase shares of Fortis common stock. Our cost of the plan is based on the value of our contribution, as additional compensation to a participating employee, equal to
10%
of an employee’s contribution up to a maximum annual contribution of
1%
of an employee’s base pay and an amount equal to
10%
of all dividends payable to Fortis on the Fortis shares allocated to an employee’s ESPP account. ITC Holdings implemented the ESPP during the second quarter of 2017. The cost of ITC Holdings’ contribution for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2018
and 2017 were less than
$1 million
.
13
.
RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Intercompany Receivables and Payables
ITC Holdings may incur charges from Fortis and other subsidiaries of Fortis that are not subsidiaries of ITC Holdings for general corporate expenses incurred. In addition, ITC Holdings may perform additional services for, or receive additional services from, Fortis and such subsidiaries. These transactions are in the normal course of business and payments for these services are settled through accounts receivable and accounts payable, as necessary. We had intercompany receivables from
Fortis and such subsidiaries of less than
$1 million
at
June 30, 2018
and
December 31, 2017
. We did not have any intercompany payables to Fortis and such subsidiaries at
June 30, 2018
and had less than
$1 million
at
December 31, 2017
.
Related party charges for corporate expenses from Fortis and such subsidiaries are recorded in general and administrative expense. Such expense for each of the
three months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
for ITC Holdings was
$2 million
. For each of the
six months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
such expense for ITC Holdings was
$4 million
. Related party billings for services to Fortis and other subsidiaries recorded as an offset to general and administrative expenses for ITC Holdings were less than
$1 million
for each of the
three and six months ended June 30, 2018
and
2017
.
Dividends
During the
six months ended June 30, 2018
, we paid dividends of
$100 million
to Investment Holdings. ITC Holdings also paid dividends of
$50 million
to Investment Holdings in July 2018.
14
.
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES
Environmental Matters
We are subject to federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations, which impose limitations on the discharge of pollutants into the environment, establish standards for the management, treatment, storage, transportation and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes and hazardous materials, and impose obligations to investigate and remediate contamination in certain circumstances. Liabilities relating to investigation and remediation of contamination, as well as other liabilities concerning hazardous materials or contamination, such as claims for personal injury or property damage, may arise at many locations, including formerly owned or operated properties and sites where wastes have been treated or disposed of, as well as properties currently owned or operated by us. Such liabilities may arise even where the contamination does not result from noncompliance with applicable environmental laws. Under some environmental laws, such liabilities may also be joint and several, meaning that a party can be held responsible for more than its share of the liability involved, or even the entire share. Although environmental requirements generally have become more stringent and compliance with those requirements more expensive, we are not aware of any specific developments that would increase our costs for such compliance in a manner that would be expected to have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position or liquidity.
Our assets and operations also involve the use of materials classified as hazardous, toxic or otherwise dangerous. Many of the properties that we own or operate have been used for many years, and include older facilities and equipment that may be more likely than newer ones to contain or be made from such materials. Some of these properties include aboveground or underground storage tanks and associated piping. Some of them also include large electrical equipment filled with mineral oil, which may contain or previously have contained PCBs. Our facilities and equipment are often situated on or near property owned by others so that, if they are the source of contamination, others’ property may be affected. For example, aboveground and underground transmission lines sometimes traverse properties that we do not own and transmission assets that we own or operate are sometimes commingled at our transmission stations with distribution assets owned or operated by our transmission customers.
Some properties in which we have an ownership interest or at which we operate are, or are suspected of being, affected by environmental contamination. We are not aware of any pending or threatened claims against us with respect to environmental contamination relating to these properties, or of any investigation or remediation of contamination at these properties, that entail costs likely to materially affect us. Some facilities and properties are located near environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands.
Litigation
We are involved in certain legal proceedings before various courts, governmental agencies and mediation panels concerning matters arising in the ordinary course of business. These proceedings include certain contract disputes, eminent domain and vegetation management activities, regulatory matters and pending judicial matters. We cannot predict the final disposition of such proceedings. We regularly review legal matters and record provisions for claims that are considered probable of loss.
Rate of Return on Equity Complaints
On November 12, 2013, the Association of Businesses Advocating Tariff Equity, Coalition of MISO Transmission Customers, Illinois Industrial Energy Consumers, Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc., Minnesota Large Industrial Group and Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group (collectively, the “complainants”) filed the Initial Complaint with the FERC under Section 206 of the FPA requesting that the FERC find the then current
12.38%
MISO regional base ROE rate (the “base ROE”) for all MISO TOs, including ITCTransmission, METC and ITC Midwest, to no longer be just and reasonable. The complainants sought a FERC order reducing the base ROE used in the formula transmission rates for our MISO Regulated
Operating Subsidiaries to
9.15%
, reducing the equity component of our capital structure and terminating the ROE adders approved for certain Regulated Operating Subsidiaries. The FERC set the base ROE for hearing and settlement procedures, while denying all other aspects of the Initial Complaint. The FERC set the refund effective date for the Initial Complaint as November 12, 2013.
On June 19, 2014, in a separate Section 206 complaint against the regional base ROE rate for ISO New England TOs, the FERC adopted a new methodology for establishing base ROE rates for electric transmission utilities. The new methodology is based on a two-step DCF analysis that uses both short-term and long-term growth projections in calculating ROE rates for a proxy group of electric utilities. The
FERC also reiterated that it can apply discretion in determining how ROE rates are established within a zone of reasonableness and reiterated its policy for limiting the overall ROE rate for any company, including the base and all applicable adders, at the high end of the zone of reasonableness set by the two-step DCF methodology. The new method presented in the ISO New England ROE case, including any revisions made in response to the decision of the D.C. Circuit Court in
Emera Maine v. FERC
, discussed below, will be used in resolving the MISO ROE cases.
On December 22, 2015, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision on the Initial Complaint, consistent with the new methodology adopted in the ISO New England decision in June 2014. On September 28, 2016, the FERC issued the September 2016 Order affirming the presiding administrative law judge’s initial decision and setting the base ROE at
10.32%
, with a maximum ROE of
11.35%
, effective for the period from November 12, 2013 through February 11, 2015 (the “Initial Refund Period”). Additionally, the rates established by the September 2016 Order will be used prospectively from the date of that order until a new approved rate is established by the FERC in ruling on the Second Complaint described below. The September 2016 Order resulted in an ROE used currently by ITCTransmission, METC and ITC Midwest of
11.35%
,
11.35%
and
11.32%
, respectively.
The September 2016 Order required all MISO TOs, including our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries, to provide refunds for the Initial Refund Period. The total refund for the Initial Complaint resulting from this FERC order, including interest, was
$118 million
for our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries and refunds were completed during the first six months of 2017.
On October 28, 2016, the MISO TOs, including our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries, filed a request with the FERC for rehearing of the September 2016 Order regarding the short-term growth projections in the two-step DCF analysis used by FERC to determine the cost of equity of public utilities. The complainants also filed a request for rehearing, citing that FERC erred in several material respects in the September 2016 Order. The FERC issued a tolling order on November 28, 2016 to allow for additional time to address the rehearing requests.
On February 12, 2015, the Second Complaint was filed with the FERC under Section 206 of the FPA by Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation, Mississippi Delta Energy Agency, Clarksdale Public Utilities Commission, Public Service Commission of Yazoo City and Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc., seeking a FERC order to reduce the base ROE used in the formula transmission rates of our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries to
8.67%
, with an effective date of February 12, 2015. The FERC set the Second Complaint for hearing and settlement procedures and set the refund effective date for the Second Complaint as February 12, 2015.
On June 30, 2016, the presiding administrative law judge issued an initial decision on the Second Complaint, which recommended a base ROE of
9.70%
for February 12, 2015 through May 11, 2016 (the “Second Refund Period”), with a maximum ROE of
10.68%
. The initial decision is a non-binding recommendation to the FERC on the Second Complaint, and all parties have filed briefs contesting various parts of the proposed findings and recommendations. FERC has not yet issued an order on the initial decision on the Second Complaint.
On April 14, 2017, in
Emera Maine v. FERC
, the D.C. Circuit Court vacated the precedent-setting FERC orders that revised the regional base ROE rate for the ISO New England TOs and established and applied the two-step DCF methodology for the determination of ROE. The court remanded the orders to the FERC for further justification of its establishment of the new base ROE for the New England TOs.
On September 29, 2017, certain MISO transmission owners, including our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries, filed a motion for the FERC to dismiss the Second Complaint, on the grounds that the Second Complaint fails as a matter of law to make the showings required by the D.C. Circuit Court’s decision in
Emera Maine v. FERC
to demonstrate that the currently effective base ROE of
10.32%
is unjust and unreasonable. Pending a determination by FERC on the merits of the motion, the estimated current regulatory liability that has been recorded in the condensed consolidated statements of financial position for the Second Complaint has not been modified.
If the Second Complaint is not dismissed, we expect the FERC to establish a new base ROE and zone of reasonableness that will be used, along with any ROE adders, to calculate the refund liability for the Second Refund Period and future ROEs
for our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries. As of
June 30, 2018
, the estimated range of refunds for the related refund period is from
$108 million
to
$147 million
on a pre-tax basis. Our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries had an estimated current regulatory liability for the Second Complaint of
$147 million
and
$145 million
as of
June 30, 2018
and December 31, 2017, respectively. The recognition of the obligations associated with the complaints resulted in a reduction of net income and additional revenue and interest expense as set forth in the table below for the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Six months ended
|
|
June 30,
|
|
June 30,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Revenue increase
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Interest expense increase
|
1
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
3
|
|
Estimated net income reduction
|
1
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
2
|
|
It is possible that the outcome of these matters could differ from the estimated range of losses and materially affect our consolidated results of operations due to the uncertainty of the calculation of an authorized base ROE along with the zone of reasonableness, which is subject to significant discretion by the FERC. Further uncertainty regarding the outcome of the Initial Complaint and the Second Complaint and the timing of completion of these matters has been introduced due to the
Emera Maine v. FERC
decision.
As of
June 30, 2018
, our MISO Regulated Operating Subsidiaries had a total of approximately
$3 billion
of equity in their collective capital structures for ratemaking purposes. Based on this level of aggregate equity, we estimate that each
10
basis point reduction in the authorized ROE would reduce annual consolidated net income by approximately
$3 million
.
In a separate but related matter, in November 2014, METC, ITC Midwest and other MISO TOs filed a request with the FERC, under FPA Section 205, for authority to include a
50
basis point incentive adder for RTO participation in each of the TOs’ Formula Rates. On January 5, 2015, the FERC approved the use of this incentive adder, effective January 6, 2015. Additionally, ITC Midwest filed a request with the FERC, under FPA Section 205, in January 2015 for authority to include a
100
basis point incentive adder for independent transmission ownership, which is currently authorized for ITCTransmission and METC. On March 31, 2015, the FERC approved the use of a
50
basis point incentive adder for independence, effective April 1, 2015. On April 30, 2015, ITC Midwest and an intervenor, RPGI, filed separate requests with the FERC for rehearing on the approved incentive adder for independence, and both requests were subsequently denied by the FERC on January 6, 2016. RPGI has filed an appeal of the FERC’s decisions, which remains pending. Beginning September 28, 2016, these incentive adders have been applied to METC’s and ITC Midwest’s base ROEs in establishing their total authorized ROE rates, subject to the maximum ROE limitation in the September 2016 Order of
11.35%
.
Development Projects
We are pursuing strategic development projects that may result in payments to developers that are contingent on the projects reaching certain milestones indicating that the projects are financially viable. We believe it is reasonably possible that we will be required to make these contingent development payments up to a maximum amount of
$125 million
for the period from 2018 through 2022. In the event it becomes probable that we will make these payments, we would recognize the liability and the corresponding intangible asset or expense as appropriate.
15
.
SUPPLEMENTAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Reconciliation of Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash
The following table provides a reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash reported on the condensed consolidated statements of financial position that sum to the total of the same such amounts shown in the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2017
|
|
2016
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$
|
12
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
|
$
|
66
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
Restricted cash included in:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-current assets
|
2
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
3
|
|
Total cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash
|
$
|
14
|
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
68
|
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
Restricted cash included in other non-current assets primarily represents cash on deposit to pay for vegetation management, land easements and land purchases for the purpose of transmission line construction.
Supplementary Cash Flows Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended
|
|
June 30,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Supplementary cash flows information:
|
|
|
|
Interest paid (net of interest capitalized) (a)
|
$
|
130
|
|
|
$
|
110
|
|
Income tax refunds received
|
13
|
|
|
1
|
|
Supplementary non-cash investing and financing activities:
|
|
|
|
Additions to property, plant and equipment and other long-lived assets (b)
|
101
|
|
|
93
|
|
Allowance for equity funds used during construction
|
18
|
|
|
16
|
|
____________________________
|
|
(a)
|
Amount for the six months ended June 30, 2017 includes
$9 million
of interest paid associated with the ROE complaints. See
Note 14
for information on the ROE complaints.
|
|
|
(b)
|
Amounts consist of current and accrued liabilities for construction, labor, materials and other costs that have not been included in investing activities. These amounts have not been paid for as of
June 30, 2018
or
2017
, respectively, but will be or have been included as a cash outflow from investing activities when paid.
|
16
.
SEGMENT INFORMATION
We identify reportable segments based on the criteria set forth by the FASB regarding disclosures about segments of an enterprise, including the regulatory environment of our subsidiaries and the business activities performed to earn revenues and incur expenses. The following tables show our financial information by reportable segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Six months ended
|
OPERATING REVENUES:
|
June 30,
|
|
June 30,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Regulated Operating Subsidiaries
|
$
|
297
|
|
|
$
|
310
|
|
|
$
|
584
|
|
|
$
|
615
|
|
Intercompany eliminations
|
(7
|
)
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
(14
|
)
|
Total Operating Revenues
|
$
|
290
|
|
|
$
|
303
|
|
|
$
|
569
|
|
|
$
|
601
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Six months ended
|
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES:
|
June 30,
|
|
June 30,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Regulated Operating Subsidiaries
|
$
|
147
|
|
|
$
|
164
|
|
|
$
|
290
|
|
|
$
|
326
|
|
ITC Holdings and other
|
(33
|
)
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
(68
|
)
|
|
(70
|
)
|
Total Income Before Income Taxes
|
$
|
114
|
|
|
$
|
129
|
|
|
$
|
222
|
|
|
$
|
256
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Six months ended
|
NET INCOME:
|
June 30,
|
|
June 30,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Regulated Operating Subsidiaries
|
$
|
109
|
|
|
$
|
101
|
|
|
$
|
215
|
|
|
$
|
200
|
|
ITC Holdings and other
|
79
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
161
|
|
Intercompany eliminations
|
(109
|
)
|
|
(101
|
)
|
|
(215
|
)
|
|
(200
|
)
|
Total Net Income
|
$
|
79
|
|
|
$
|
81
|
|
|
$
|
161
|
|
|
$
|
161
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL ASSETS:
|
June 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
(in millions)
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
Regulated Operating Subsidiaries
|
$
|
8,963
|
|
|
$
|
8,688
|
|
ITC Holdings and other
|
4,846
|
|
|
4,799
|
|
Reconciliations / Intercompany eliminations (a)
|
(4,733
|
)
|
|
(4,664
|
)
|
Total Assets
|
$
|
9,076
|
|
|
$
|
8,823
|
|
____________________________
|
|
(a)
|
Reconciliation of total assets results primarily from differences in the netting of deferred tax assets and liabilities in our segments as compared to the classification in our condensed consolidated statements of financial position.
|