Annual Report (Form 10-K), fiscal year 1993

ITEM 1. BUSINESS.
GENERAL
CMS Energy
CMS Energy, incorporated in Michigan in 1987, is the parent holding company of Consumers and Enterprises. Consumers, a combination electric and gas utility company serving most of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, is the largest subsidiary of CMS Energy. Consumers' customer base includes a mix of residential, commercial and diversified industrial customers, the largest of which is the automotive industry. Enterprises is engaged in several non-utility energy-related businesses including: 1) oil and gas exploration and production, 2) development and operation of independent power production facilities, 3) gas marketing services to end- users, and 4) transmission and storage of natural gas. For further information about subsidiary operations, see Item 1. BUSINESS. SUBSIDIARIES. CMS Energy is exempt from registration under PUHCA, see Item 1. BUSINESS. CMS ENERGY AND CONSUMERS REGULATION.
CMS Energy's consolidated operating revenue in 1993 was derived approximately 61 percent from sales of electric energy, approximately 37 percent from sale, transportation and storage of natural gas, and approximately 2 percent from oil and gas exploration and production activities. Consumers' consolidated operations in the electric and gas businesses account for the major share of CMS Energy's total assets, revenue and income. CMS Energy's share of unconsolidated non-utility electric generation and gas transmission revenue for 1993 was $337 million.
Consumers
Consumers was incorporated in Michigan in 1968 and is the successor to a corporation of the same name which was organized in Maine in 1910 and which did business in Michigan from 1915 to 1968.
Consumers is a public utility serving almost 6 million of Michigan's 9 million residents in 67 of the 68 counties in Michigan's Lower Peninsula. Industries in Consumers' service area include automotive, metal, chemical, food and wood products and a diversified group of other industries. Consumers' consolidated operating revenue in 1993 was derived approximately 64 percent from its electric business and approximately 36 percent from its gas business. Consumers' retail rates and certain other aspects of its business are subject to the jurisdiction of the MPSC. Consumers has five direct subsidiaries. For further information about subsidiary operations, see Item 1. BUSINESS. SUBSIDIARIES.
BUSINESS SEGMENTS
CMS Energy conducts its principal operations through the following five business segments: electric utility operations; gas utility operations; oil and gas exploration and production operations; independent power production; and gas transmission and marketing. Consumers or subsidiaries of Consumers are engaged in two segments: electric operations and gas operations. Consumers' electric and gas businesses are regulated utility operations.
Consumers Electric Utility Operations Consumers generates, purchases, transmits and distributes electricity and renders electric service in 61 of the 68 counties in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. Prin- cipal cities served include Battle Creek, Flint, Grand Rapids, Jackson, Kalamazoo, Muskegon, Saginaw and Wyoming.
Consumers Gas Utility Operations Consumers purchases, transports, stores, and distributes gas and renders gas service in 40 of the 68 counties in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. Principal cities served include Bay City, Flint, Jackson, Kalamazoo, Lansing, Pontiac and Saginaw, as well as the suburban Detroit area. Consumers' wholly owned subsidiary, Michigan Gas Storage, is engaged in the transportation and storage of natural gas in interstate commerce.
CMS Enterprises CMS Generation Independent Power Production CMS Generation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Enterprises, invests in, develops, converts and/or constructs and operates non-utility power generation plants both domestically and internationally. CMS Generation currently has ownership in- terests in power plants in Michigan, Cali- fornia, Connecticut, New York and Argentina.
CMS Enterprises NOMECO Oil and Gas Exploration and Production NOMECO, a wholly owned subsidiary of Enterprises, and subsidiaries of NOMECO are engaged in the exploration for and production of oil and natural gas in Michigan and 12 other states, the Gulf of Mexico, Australia, Colombia, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Thailand and Yemen. NOMECO has 11 active wholly owned subsidiaries which are engaged in the exploration, development and operation of oil and gas interests and rights.
CMS Enterprises Gas Transmission and Storage Enterprises has two subsidiaries which participate in non-utility natural gas businesses, including transportation, treating, storage and marketing.
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
CMS Energy
For information with respect to operating revenue, net operating income (loss) and assets and liabilities attributable to all of CMS Energy's business segments, refer to its Consolidated Financial Statements and to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 1993, in Item 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA, which is incorporated herein by reference.
Consumers
For information with respect to the operating revenue, net operating income (loss) and assets and liabilities attributable only to Consumers' business segments, refer to its Consolidated Financial Statements and to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended Decem- ber 31, 1993, in Item 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA, which is incorporated herein by reference.
EMPLOYEES
CMS Energy
As of February 28, 1994, CMS Energy and its subsidiaries had 9,874 full- time employees and 294 part-time employees for a total of 10,168 employees.
Consumers
As of February 28, 1994, Consumers and its subsidiaries had 9,434 full- time employees and 277 part-time employees for a total of 9,711 employees. This total includes 4,212 full-time operating, maintenance and construction employees of Consumers who are represented by the Union. A new collective bargaining agreement was negotiated between Consumers and the Union which became effective on June 1, 1992 and, by its terms, will continue in full force and effect until June 1, 1995.
SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING MCV COST RECOVERY ISSUES
The MCV Partnership was formed in January 1987 by subsidiaries of Consumers and Dow to convert a portion of Consumers' abandoned Midland Nuclear Plant into a natural gas-fueled, combined cycle cogeneration facility. The MCV Facility has been certified as a Qualifying Facility under PURPA. CMS Energy, certain other affiliates and the other partners in the MCV Partnership made certain contingent undertakings related to the MCV Partnership's sale and leaseback transaction. These included, but were not limited to, indemnifications related to tax matters and a commitment to extend a $10 million standby working capital facility to the MCV Partnership. In addition, CMS Energy and certain of its affiliates undertook certain indemnifications related to environmental matters regarding the site. Consumers' current interests in the MCV Partnership and the MCV Facility are discussed more fully in Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
In 1987, Consumers signed a PPA with the MCV Partnership for the purchase of up to 1,240 megawatts of capacity for a 35-year period beginning with the MCV Facility's commercial operation in March 1990. Consumers' cost recovery from its electric customers for the amount of capacity purchased by Consumers from the MCV Partnership, the price paid by Consumers for that capacity and associated energy, and the method of rate recovery for those purchases had been at issue before the MPSC and the Michigan appellate courts since Consumers' first attempt to recover those costs in its annual power supply cost recovery proceedings. Because the MPSC consistently denied Consumers full recovery of the costs it incurred for its purchases from the MCV Partnership, Consumers incurred significant ongoing annual losses. On March 31, 1993, the MPSC issued an Opinion and Order on a Revised Settlement Proposal, which had been submitted by Consumers, CMS Energy, the MPSC Staff, and ten qualifying facility developers, approving it with certain modifications. For a discussion of the Revised Settlement Proposal as approved by the MPSC's March 31, 1993 Order, see Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, which is incorporated by reference herein. With Consumers' acceptance of the MPSC's decision on the Revised Settlement Proposal, the uncertainties surrounding Consumers' cost recoveries related to its purchases from the MCV Partnership were resolved to a sufficient degree that Consumers effected a quasi-reorganization as of December 31, 1992 in which Consumers' accumulated deficit was eliminated against other paid-in capital. Following this quasi-reorganization Consumers resumed paying dividends in 1993. The quasi-reorganization is more fully described in Note 7 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
A dispute has arisen between the MCV Partnership and Consumers relating to the impact of the order on the fixed energy charge payment, currently approx- imately 7 percent of the charges for capacity and energy, called for in the PPA and Consumers' ability to exercise its rights under the regulatory out provision based on the issuance of the Settlement Order. In accordance with the dispute resolution provisions set out in the PPA, an arbitrator acceptable to both parties has been selected and the arbitration of this dispute has commenced. Consumers is unable to predict the outcome of such arbitration proceedings or of any possible settlement of the issues underlying this dispute. On March 4, 1994, the lessors of the MCV Facility filed a lawsuit in federal district court against CMS Energy, Consumers and CMS Holdings relating to the MCV Partnership's failure to object to the Settlement Order in light of Consumers' interpretation of the Settlement Order, which is the subject of the arbitration between the MCV Partnership and Consumers. While CMS Energy and Consumers believe this lawsuit to be without merit, they are unable to predict the outcome of this action. For a discussion of the arbitration proceedings and the lawsuit filed by the lessors, see Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS, which are incorporated by reference herein.
CONSUMERS ELECTRIC UTILITY OPERATIONS
Consumers had approximately 1.5 million electric customers at December 31, 1993. Electric system energy sales by Consumers in 1993 totaled 31.66 billion kWh, a 3.8 percent increase from 1992. Electric operating revenue in 1993 was $2.077 billion, an increase of 11.5 percent from 1992. A peak demand of 6,226 MW was achieved in August 1993, representing an increase of 4.8 percent from the peak achieved in 1992 predominantly as a result of warmer than normal weather and improved industrial sales. Consumers' reserve margin was approximately 21 percent in 1993 and 19 percent in 1992, based on weather adjusted peaks.
Including the Ludington pumped storage facility, in which it has a 51 percent ownership and capacity entitlement, Consumers owns and operates 28 electric generating plants with an aggregate net demonstrated capability available to Consumers, as of 1993 for summer conditions, of 6,299 MW. See Item 2.



ITEM 2. PROPERTIES.
CHARACTER OF OWNERSHIP
The principal properties of CMS Energy and its subsidiaries are owned in fee, except that most electric lines and gas mains are located, pursuant to ease- ments and other rights, in public roads or on land owned by others. The statements under this item as to ownership of properties are made without regard to tax and assessment liens, judgments, easements, rights of way, contracts, reservations, exceptions, conditions, immaterial liens and encum- brances, and other outstanding rights. None of these outstanding rights impairs the usefulness of such properties.
Substantially all of Consumers' properties are subject to the lien of its First Mortgage Bond Indenture.
CONSUMERS ELECTRIC UTILITY PROPERTIES
Consumers' electric generating system consists of five fossil-fueled plants, two nuclear plants, one pumped storage hydroelectric facility, seven gas combustion turbine plants and 13 hydroelectric plants.
Consumers' electric transmission and distribution lines owned and in service are as follows:
Structure Sub-Surface (Miles) (Miles)
Transmission 345,000 volt 1,137 - 138,000 volt 3,246 4 120,000 volt 19 - 46,000 volt 4,066 9 23,000 volt 31 7 ------ ----- Total transmission 8,499 20
Distribution (2,400-24,900 volt) 50,359 4,756 ------ ----- Total transmission and distribution 58,858 4,776 ====== ===== Consumers owns substations having an aggregate transformer capacity of 36,249,290 kilovoltamperes.
CONSUMERS GAS UTILITY PROPERTIES
Consumers' gas distribution and transmission system consists of 20,768 miles of distribution mains and 1,084 miles of transmission lines throughout the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. Consumers owns and operates five compressor stations with a total of 116,070 installed horsepower.
Consumers' gas storage fields, listed below, have an aggregate certified storage capacity of 241.5 bcf:
Total Certified Field Name Location Storage Capacity (bcf)
Overisel Allegan and Ottawa Counties 64.0 Salem Allegan and Ottawa Counties 35.0 Ira St Clair County 7.5 Lenox Macomb County 3.5 Ray Macomb County 66.0 Northville Oakland, Washtenaw and Wayne Counties 25.8 Puttygut St Clair County 16.6 Four Corners St Clair County 3.8 Swan Creek St Clair County .6 Hessen St Clair County 18.0 Lyon - 34 Oakland County .7
Michigan Gas Storage owns and operates two compressor stations with a total of 46,600 installed horsepower. Its transmission system consists of 547 miles of pipelines within the Lower Peninsula of Michigan.
Michigan Gas Storage's gas storage fields, listed below, have an aggregate certified storage capacity of 117 bcf:
Total Certified Field Name Location Storage Capacity (bcf)
Winterfield Osceola and Clare Counties 75.0 Cranberry Lake Clare and Missaukee Counties 30.0 Riverside Missaukee County 12.0
Consumers' gas properties also include the Marysville gas reforming plant, located in Marysville, Michigan. Huron entered into a partnership with PanCanadian Petroleum Company and CanStates Investments to use the expanded capacity of the underground caverns at the Marysville plant for commercial storage of liquid hydrocarbons. On February 1, 1994 PanCanadian Petroleum Company purchased CanStates Investments. In addition, Consumers and Novacor Hydrocarbons, Inc. are partners in a partnership to use certain hydrocarbon fractionation facilities at the plant.
CMS ENERGY OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION PROPERTIES
NOMECO has carried on a domestic oil and gas exploration program since 1967. In 1976, NOMECO entered its first venture outside the United States.
Net oil and gas production by NOMECO for the years 1991 through 1993 is shown in the following table.
Thousands of barrels of oil and millions of cubic feet of gas, except for reserves
1993 1992 1991
Natural gas (a) 18,487 17,578 14,714 Oil and condensate (a) 1,716 1,417 1,260 Plant products (a) 186 291 283 Average daily production (b) Oil 5.6 4.9 4.1 Gas 62.3 59.2 50.5
Reserves to annual production ratio Oil (MMbbls) 19.1 22.6 21.9 Gas (bcf) 10.9 11.8 13.0
(a) Revenue interest to NOMECO (b) NOMECO working interest (includes NOMECO's share of royalties)
The following table shows NOMECO's undeveloped net acres of oil and gas leasehold interests at December 31.
Net Acres 1993 1992
Michigan 77,672 120,740 Louisiana (a) 37,295 39,226 Texas (a) 8,083 10,411 North Dakota 5,635 - Indiana 5,034 715 Other states 2,184 2,581 ------- --------- Total domestic 135,903 173,673 ------- --------- Thailand 188,000 188,000 Yemen 120,563 - Papua New Guinea 96,825 63,220 Equatorial Guinea 83,334 83,334 Ecuador 69,160 69,160 New Zealand 602 1,544 China (b) - 589,334 ------- --------- Total international 558,484 994,592 ------- --------- Total 694,387 1,168,265 ======= ========= (a) Includes offshore acreage.
(b) Acreage excluded at year-end 1993 as part of an agreement with the state oil company to discontinue its current exploration program because it has been unsuccessful.
CONSUMERS OTHER PROPERTIES
CMS Midland owns a 49 percent interest in the MCV Partnership which was formed to construct and operate the MCV Facility. The MCV Facility has been sold to five owner trusts and leased back to the MCV Partnership. CMS Holdings is a limited partner in the FMLP, which is a beneficiary of one of these trusts. CMS Holdings' indirect beneficial interest in the MCV Facility is 35 percent.
Consumers owns fee title to 1,140 acres of land in the City and Township of Midland, Midland County, Michigan, occupied by the MCV Facility. The land is leased to the owners of the MCV Facility by five separate leases, each leasing an undivided interest and in the aggregate totaling 100 percent, for an initial term ending December 31, 2035 with possible renewal terms to June 15, 2090.
Consumers owns or leases three principal General Office buildings in Jackson, Michigan and 53 Regional and other field offices at various locations in Michigan's Lower Peninsula. Of these, two of the General Office buildings and eleven of the Regional and other field offices are leased. Also owned are miscellaneous parcels of real estate not now used in utility operations.
CMS ENERGY OTHER PROPERTIES
Various subsidiaries of CMS Generation own interests in independent power plants, including a 50 percent partnership interest in a 30 MW wood waste- fueled power plant near Susanville, California; a 50 percent partnership interest in a 54 MW coal and wood waste-fueled power plant in Filer City, Michigan; a 50 percent partnership interest in a 34 MW wood waste-fueled power plant in Grayling Township, Michigan; a 50 percent interest in a 26 MW tire burning power plant near Sterling, Connecticut; a 50 percent interest in a wood waste-fueled power plant in Lyons Falls, New York; an 18.6 percent interest in a consortium which owns an 88 percent interest in a 50 MW fossil-fueled plant in San Nicolas, Argentina; a 25 percent interest in a consortium which owns a 59 percent interest in two hydroelectric power plants, with a total of 1,320 MW of capacity, on the Limay River in western Argentina; and a 50 percent ownership interest in a 18 MW wood waste-fueled power plant near Chateaugay, New York.
CMS Gas Transmission owns a 75 percent interest in a general partnership which owns and operates a 25-mile, 16-inch natural gas transmission pipeline in Jackson and Ingham Counties, Michigan; owns a 24 percent limited partnership interest in the Saginaw Bay Area Limited Partnership which owns 125 miles of 10-inch and 16-inch natural gas transmission pipeline in north-central Michigan; owns a 44 percent limited partnership interest in a partnership that owns certain pipelines of 20 and 12 miles interconnected to the Saginaw Bay Area Limited Partnership facilities; owns a 60 percent interest in a partnership that owns and operates a natural gas treating plant in Otsego County, Michigan; and owns 100 percent interest in 41 miles of gas transmission pipeline in Otsego and Montmorency Counties, Michigan.
CMS Energy, through certain subsidiaries owns approximately 6,000 acres of undeveloped land in Benzie and Manistee Counties, Michigan, approximately 53 acres of undeveloped land in Muskegon County, Michigan, and approximately 300 acres in undeveloped land in Emmet County, Michigan.
CONSUMERS CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
Capital expenditures during 1993 for Consumers and its subsidiaries totaled $509 million for capital additions and $52 million for demand-side management programs. These capital additions include approximately $31 million for environmental protection additions. Of the $509 million, $265 million was incurred for electric utility additions, $126 million for gas utility additions, $58 million for capital leases (see Note 14 to Consumers' Consolidated Financial Statements incorporated by reference herein), and $60 million for other additions and capital investments.
In 1994, capital expenditures are estimated to be $513 million for capital additions and $40 million for demand-side management programs. These capital addition estimates include approximately $48 million related to environmental protection additions. Of the $513 million, $290 million will be incurred for electric utility additions, $98 million for gas utility additions, $73 million for capital leases, and $52 million for other additions and capital investments.
CMS ENERGY CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
Capital expenditures during 1993 for CMS Energy and its subsidiaries totaled $714 million for capital additions and $52 million for demand-side management programs. These capital additions include approximately $31 million for environmental protection additions. Of the $714 million, $509 million was incurred by Consumers as discussed above. The remaining $205 million in capital additions include $81 million for oil and gas exploration, $110 million for independent power production and $14 million for gas transmission and marketing.
In 1994, capital expenditures are estimated to be $752 million for capital additions and $40 million for demand-side management programs. This capital addition estimate includes approximately $48 million related to environmental protection additions. Of the $752 million, $513 million will be incurred by Consumers as discussed above. The remaining $239 million in capital additions will be incurred as follows: $117 million for oil and gas exploration, $84 million for independent power production and $38 million for gas transmission and marketing.
ITEM 3.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Consumers and some of its subsidiaries and affiliates are parties to certain routine lawsuits and administrative proceedings incidental to their businesses involving, for example, claims for personal injury and property damage, contractual matters, income taxes, and rates and licensing. Reference is made to the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included herein for additional information regarding various pending administrative and judicial proceedings involving rate, operating and environmental matters.
The Attorney General, ABATE, and the MPSC Staff typically intervene in MPSC proceedings concerning Consumers. Unless otherwise noted below, these parties have intervened in such proceedings. For many years, almost every significant MPSC order affecting Consumers has been appealed. Appeals from such MPSC orders are pending in the Michigan Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court. Consumers is vigorously pursuing these matters. Under Michigan civil procedure, parties may file a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals which serves as a notice of appeal. The grounds on which the appeal is being made are not set forth until a later date when the parties file their briefs.
1. Electric Rate Case Proceedings
A. Appeal of MPSC Orders Related to the Abandoned Midland Nuclear Plant Investment
In November 1983, Consumers filed an electric rate case with the MPSC which sought recovery of its investment in the abandoned portion of the Midland nuclear plant. This case was separated into two phases in September 1984: a financial stabilization phase, MPSC Case No. U-7830, Step 3A, and a prudence phase, MPSC Case No. U-7830, Step 3B. Numerous orders were issued in these cases, including one issued in 1985 in the financial stabilization phase which contained certain conditions to Consumers' receiving financial stabilization rate relief.
On May 7, 1991, the MPSC issued final orders in both Step 3A and Step 3B proceedings in which, among other things, the MPSC ruled that Consumers could recover approximately $760 million of the $2.1 billion of abandoned Midland investment. Consumers, as well as the Attorney General and ABATE, among others, filed applications for rehearing with the MPSC of the May 7 Orders in Step 3A and Step 3B. which were all denied by the MPSC. Several parties, including Consumers, have appealed the MPSC determinations in these orders to the Court of Appeals. The Attorney General and ABATE primarily disagree with the standard used by the MPSC to determine the amount of investment that is recoverable by Consumers from its electric customers, contending that recovery should not be allowed for utility assets that have not been placed in service. Consumers disagrees with the date the MPSC determined it would have been prudent for Consumers to abandon construction of the Midland nuclear facility and the reduction in recoverable investment that resulted from this determination. All briefs have been filed in these appeals. Oral argument has not yet been scheduled on the Step 3B appeals; oral argument was held on the Step 3A appeal in December 1993.
B. Appeal of 1991 General Electric Rate Case Order
On May 7, 1991, the MPSC issued an order in Case No. U-9346, a general electric rate case the MPSC ordered Consumers to file in response to a complaint filed by ABATE. On July 1, 1991, the MPSC issued another order in this proceeding modifying the May 7 Order. These orders, together with the other orders discussed in paragraph A above, reduced Consumers' electric retail rates by an annual amount of approximately $73 million.
Certain aspects of the May 7, 1991 and July 1, 1991 electric rate case orders were appealed by the Attorney General, ABATE, and the Michigan Association of Home Builders. The appeals of the Attorney General and the Michigan Association of Home Builders have both been dismissed. ABATE's appeal, which primarily seeks a reduction in the rates authorized by the MPSC, remains pending. Briefs have been filed in the ABATE appeal and oral argument was held in December 1993.
C. 1993 Electric Rate Case
On May 10, 1993, Consumers filed an application with the MPSC seeking an increase in its base electric rates (MPSC Case No. U-10335). As a result of the new statutory federal tax rate and interest rate savings resulting from the refinancing of certain long-term debt, Consumers subsequently revised its requested electric rate increase to approximately $133 million in 1994 while its requested electric rate increase for 1995 remained at $38 million. In their initial brief, the MPSC Staff recommended approximately $98 million in annual rate relief beginning in 1994. The MPSC Staff also recommended a lower return on electric common equity (11.75 percent compared with Consumers' proposal of 13.25 percent), and using a projected actual equity ratio in the projected capitalization structure rather than a target ratio. The MPSC Staff did not support Consumers' request for additional rate relief for 1995 as part of this proceeding, but did support Consumers' rate design proposal to significantly reduce the level of cross-subsidization of residential customers' rates by commercial and industrial customers.
A PFD was issued in this case on March 4, 1994. In the PFD the ALJ recommended a rate increase in 1994 of approximately $83 million with no incremental increase in 1995 to be granted as part of this proceeding. The ALJ adopted MPSC Staff's recommendation of an 11.75 percent return on common equity and the use of 1994 projected actual capital structure rather than the target structure proposed by Consumers. The PFD rejected a proposal made by Consumers through which returns above the authorized level would be shared with customers, but recommended the implementation of a performance incentive proposal Consumers had initially proposed with some modifications. The PFD also recommended the adoption of the cross- subsidization reduction proposed by Consumers modified so that subsidization would be immediately reduced by 50 percent in 1994 rates rather than the phased-in 20 percent per year over a three year period reduction proposed by Consumers.
Exceptions to the PFD are due March 18 with replies to exceptions due April 1. The PFD is not binding on the MPSC. An order of the MPSC will be issued sometime thereafter.
D. 1986 Proceedings - Palisades Outages
The Palisades nuclear plant was out of service for maintenance from May 1986 until April 1987. In the 1986 PSCR reconciliation case decided December 22, 1988, the MPSC disallowed recovery of $22.4 million of replacement power costs associated with the 1986 portion of this outage and refunds to the customers were made. In an appeal filed in 1989 and now pending decision by the Court of Appeals, Consumers is challenging the adequacy of the MPSC's findings supporting the disallowance. Oral arguments were held in December 1993 and in March 1994 the Court of Appeals affirmed the MPSC order in a per curiam opinion.
2. Settlement Proposals Relating to Consumers' Purchases from the MCV Partnership
On March 31, 1993, the MPSC issued the Settlement Order which approved with modifications the Revised Settlement Proposal filed by Consumers, the MPSC Staff and 10 small power and cogeneration developers. The scope of the Settlement Order included three major components: 1) treatment of cost recovery issues regarding the PPA, 2) resolution of PURPA issues raised by certain developers of Qualifying Facilities that had wanted contracts with Consumers, and 3) resolution of the remand to the MPSC ordered by the Court of Appeals in the Capacity Charge Order. In December 1992, Consumers recognized an after-tax loss of $343 million for the present value of estimated future underrecoveries of power costs under the PPA as a result of the Settlement Order. On May 26, 1993, the MPSC denied petitions filed by the Attorney General, ABATE, MMCG and a small project developer which requested a rehearing of the Settlement Order by the MPSC. ABATE and the Attorney General have filed claims of appeal of the Settlement Order and the May 26, 1993 MPSC order with the Court of Appeals. Briefs have been filed with the Court of Appeals on this matter but oral argument has not yet been scheduled. In their respective briefs in opposition to the Settlement Order, ABATE and the Attorney General essentially reiterate the arguments they made before the MPSC in their petitions for rehearing. The substance of ABATE's and the Attorney General's arguments is that the MPSC exceeded its authority in approving the Revised Settlement Proposal as modified by the Settlement Order and the rates established thereby are not just and reasonable and lack evidentiary support. ABATE and the Attorney General also contend that the MPSC's procedures for the hearing on the Revised Settlement Order violated due process and denied ABATE and the Attorney General a fair hearing. In defense of the Settlement Order, the Independent Cogenerators, Consumers and the MPSC argue in their respective briefs to the Court of Appeals that the determinations of the MPSC in the Settlement Order are lawful and reasonable and that the Attorney General and ABATE have failed to meet the statutory burden of proof minimally necessary for the Court of Appeals to find otherwise.
In accordance with the terms of the Settlement Order, appeals of MPSC orders relating to MCV cost recovery issues in Consumers' 1990, 1991 and 1992 PSCR cases that had been pending before the Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court have been withdrawn.
3. MPSC Case No. U-10029 - Intrastate Gas Supply
In November 1991, Consumers filed with the MPSC Case No. U-10029 seeking several kinds of relief with respect to a contract with one of Consumers' intrastate gas suppliers, North Michigan, including lowering a contract price. North Michigan filed an objection with the MPSC and in July 1992 filed a collateral case in Federal Court seeking an injunction to block the MPSC case. On April 8, 1993, the Federal Court dismissed Northern Michigan's suit. An appeal of the Federal Court's decision is pending in the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
On February 8, 1993, the MPSC issued an order granting Consumers' request to lower the price to be paid North Michigan under its contract. In March 1993, North Michigan filed an appeal of the MPSC's February 8, 1993 order with the Court of Appeals. In July 1993, consistent with the MPSC's February 8, 1993 Order, Consumers notified North Michigan that it planned to terminate the contract in November 1993. In early October 1993, North Michigan sought to have the Court of Appeals stay Consumers' cancellation of the contract. The Court of Appeals denied this request in late October 1993 and Consumers terminated its contract with North Michigan effective November 1, 1993. If the MPSC order is overturned, Consumers would have to pay North Michigan higher contract costs for purchases in 1993 which may not be authorized by the MPSC for recovery from Consumers' customers. Should North Michigan obtain a favorable decision on all of the issues on appeal, including Consumers' termination of the contract in 1993, Consumers' total remaining exposure would be $24 million, for which Consumers previously accrued a loss. Consumers cannot predict the outcome of this appeal.
4. Palisades Plant - Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage
In April 1993, the NRC amended its regulations, effective May 7, 1993, to approve the design of the dry spent fuel storage casks to be used by Consumers at Palisades. In May 1993, the Attorney General and certain other parties commenced litigation to block Consumers' use of the storage casks, alleging that the NRC had failed to comply adequately with the National Environmental Policy Act. As of February, 1994, the courts have declined to prevent such use and have refused to issue temporary restraining orders or stays. Several appeals related to this matter are now pending at the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. As of mid-August 1993, Consumers has loaded two dry storage casks with spent nuclear fuel and expects to load additional casks in 1994 prior to Palisades' 1995 refueling outage.
5. CMS Energy's Exemption Under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935
CMS Energy is exempt from registration under PUHCA. In December 1991, the Attorney General and the MMCG filed a request with the SEC for the revocation of CMS Energy's exemption. In January 1992, CMS Energy responded to the revocation request affirming its position that it is entitled to the exemption. In April 1992, the MPSC filed a statement with the SEC that recommended that the SEC impose nine conditions on CMS Energy's exemption. The suggested conditions would (1) preclude CMS Energy's making non-utility investments without prior SEC approval; (2) prohibit CMS Energy's subsidiaries from making any upstream loans without prior SEC approval; (3) prohibit CMS Energy from pledging Consumers' assets as security without prior SEC approval; (4) prohibit the sale or transfer of utility securities or assets by CMS Energy without SEC concurrence; (5) prevent Consumers paying other than "normal" dividend; (6) require that all contracts and leases over $500,000 annual cost be filed with the SEC and MPSC; (7) require that access to the books and records of CMS Energy, its affiliates and their joint ventures, be provided to the SEC and the MPSC; (8) establish complaint procedures, with penalty provisions for addressing challenges to CMS Energy's compliance with the conditions; and (9) require that all pleadings filed with the SEC relating to the conditions be served contemporaneously on the MPSC. On July 9, 1993, the Attorney General submitted to the SEC a response to the MPSC's statement opposing the MPSC's recommendations and reiterating his argument that CMS Energy should not be allowed an exemption under PUHCA. On July 12, 1993, the MMCG submitted to the SEC a reply to CMS Energy's January 1992 response to the revocation request. On September 30, 1993, CMS Energy responded to the Attorney General's and the MMCG's July submissions. CMS Energy also contemporaneously submitted comments on the MPSC's April 1992 statement. In its response to the Attorney General and MMCG, CMS Energy again refuted the allegations made by the Attorney General and MMCG regarding CMS Energy's exemption, noting in particular that the matters complained of by the Attorney General and MMCG have all been addressed and resolved in proceedings before other regulatory and judicial authorities, primarily at the State level, with the Attorney General and MMCG participating. In its comments on the MPSC's April 1992 statement, CMS Energy updated events from the time the MPSC statement was filed during which the substantive issues underlying the MPSC's recommendations were resolved.
Should the SEC revoke CMS Energy's current exemption from registration under PUHCA, CMS Energy could either become a registered holding company or be granted a new exemption, possibly subject to conditions similar to those recommended by the MPSC. Registration under PUHCA could require divestment by CMS Energy of either its gas utility or electric utility business by some future date following registration. As a registered company, CMS Energy could also be precluded from engaging in businesses that are not functionally related to its utility operations; in addition, SEC approval would be required for the issuance of securities by CMS Energy and its subsidiaries. If divestiture of Consumers' gas utility or its electric utility business ultimately were required, the effect on Consumers and CMS Energy would depend on the method of divestitures and the extent of the proceeds received, which cannot now be predicted.
CMS Energy is vigorously contesting the revocation request and believes it will maintain the exemption. There has been no action taken by the SEC on this matter.
6. Ludington Pumped Storage Plant
In September 1993, the Court of Appeals overturned the dismissal of a lawsuit filed by the Attorney General in September 1986 seeking damages from Consumers and Detroit Edison for alleged injuries to fishing resources due to the operation of the jointly owned Ludington Pumped Storage Plant. In his 1986 complaint, the Attorney General had sought $147.9 million (including interest) in damages for past injuries and approximately $89,000 per day for future damages, subject to adjustment based on the adequacy of the barrier net installed at the plant and other changed conditions. In a second lawsuit, filed in 1987, the Attorney General had also sought to have the plant's bottom lands lease agreement with the State declared void. The Court of Appeals' September 1993 ruling upheld the lower court's dismissal relating to the breach of claim, but would allow the Attorney General to continue his lawsuit for damages against Consumers and Detroit Edison, limiting the recovery of potential damages to those occurring not more than 3 years before filing the lawsuit in 1986. On October 14, 1993, the Court of Appeals made minor modifications to its opinion. Consumers and Detroit Edison have filed an application for leave to appeal with the Michigan Supreme Court seeking a reversal of the September 1993 Court of Appeals' Order and have the trial court's dismissal of the damages claim affirmed. The Attorney General filed a brief in opposition to Consumers' and Detroit Edison's application and also filed an application with the Michigan Supreme Court seeking reversal of the Court of Appeals' rulings as to the lease claims and the statute of limitations holding. The decision to grant or deny these applications is pending at the Michigan Supreme Court.
7. Stray Voltage Lawsuit
Consumers experienced an increase in complaints during 1993 relating to so-called stray voltage. Claimants contend that stray voltage results when small electrical currents present in grounded electric systems are diverted from their intended path. Investigation by Consumers of prior stray voltage complaints disclosed that many factors, including improper wiring and malfunctioning of on-farm equipment can lead to the stray voltage phenomenon. Consumers maintains a policy of investigating all customer calls regarding stray voltage and working with customers to address their concerns including, when necessary, modifying the configuration of the customer's hook-up to Consumers. On October 27, 1993, a complaint seeking certification as a class action suit was filed against Consumers in a local circuit court. The complaint alleged that in excess of a billion dollars of damages, primarily related to production by certain livestock owned by the purported class, were being incurred as a result of stray voltage from electricity being supplied by Consumers. Consumers believes the allegations to be without merit and has vigorously opposed the certification of the class and this suit. On March 11, 1994, the court decided to deny class certification for this complaint and to dismiss, subject to refiling as separate suits, the October lawsuit with respect to all but one of the named plaintiffs.
8. Gas Supplier Dispute
On September 1, 1993, Consumers commenced gas purchases from Trunkline under a continuation of prior sales agreements at a reduced price compared to prior gas sales. Some of Consumers' direct gas suppliers, who have their contract price tied to the price Consumers pays Trunkline, have claimed that the reduced Trunkline gas cost is not a proper reference price under their contracts with Consumers. To date, four suppliers have filed lawsuits, one in Canada, making these charges and seeking open pricing and/or renegotiation of the pricing provision for their contracts, and also seeking damages for breach of contract. Consumers is disputing these claims and has sought declaratory and other relief on this issue in Michigan courts against nine suppliers. Certain of the suppliers also allege that, absent successful renegotiation, they have the right to terminate their supply contracts with Consumers and have involved the MCV Partnership in the litigation claiming termination rights with respect to the MCV Partnership's supply contracts that were negotiated during the same period. Consumers has reached an agreement in principle to settle with three of the suppliers. Consumers cannot predict the outcome of this matter.
Additionally, three of these direct gas suppliers of Consumers made filings with the FERC in Trunkline's Order 636 restructuring case seeking to preclude Trunkline's ability to make the sales to Consumers which commenced on September 1, 1993. Consumers and Trunkline vigorously opposed these filings and in December 1993, the FERC issued an order which, among other things, allowed Trunkline to continue sales of gas to Consumers under tariffs on file with the FERC.
9. Arbitration Proceedings Between Consumers and the MCV Partnership
A dispute has arisen between the MCV Partnership and Consumers relating to the impact of the Settlement Order on the fixed energy charge payment called for in the PPA and Consumers' ability to exercise its rights under the regulatory out provision based on the issuance of the Settlement Order. In accordance with the dispute resolution provisions set out in the PPA, an arbitrator acceptable to both parties has been selected and the arbitration of this dispute has commenced. Consumers is unable to predict the outcome of such arbitration proceedings or of any possible settlement of the issues underlying this dispute. The lessors of the MCV Facility have filed a lawsuit in federal district court against CMS Energy, Consumers and CMS Holdings. It alleges breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and negligent or fraudulent misrepresentation relating to the MCV Partnership's failure to object to the Settlement Order in light of Consumers' interpretation of the Settlement Order, which is the subject of an arbitration between the MCV Partnership and Consumers. The action alleges damages in excess of $1 billion and seeks injunctive relief relative to Consumers' payments of the fixed energy charge. CMS Energy and Consumers believe that at all times they and CMS Holdings have conducted themselves properly and that the action is without merit. They also believe that a significant portion of the alleged damages represent fixed energy charges in dispute in the arbitration. CMS Energy and Consumers are unable to predict the outcome of this action.
10. 1991 Gas Rate Settlement
On December 19, 1991, the MPSC approved a settlement in Case No. U-10037 concerning Consumers' gas rates which had been entered into by Consumers and the MPSC Staff. The settlement provides that Consumers is required to make certain expenditures for gas operation and maintenance activities in 1992, and provides for refunds if these expenditure levels are not met, or if Consumers' gas earnings exceed certain levels. Both the Attorney General and ABATE opposed approval of the settlement agreement and ABATE sought rehearing of the December 19, 1991 Order. On April 15, 1992, the MPSC denied the rehearing request. Both ABATE and the Attorney General have appealed the MPSC's order. On March 10, 1994, the Court of Appeals issued a per curiam opinion affirming the MPSC order.
11. Investigative Demand
On July 17, 1991, the Attorney General served a civil investigative demand upon Consumers and CMS Energy indicating that the Attorney General was investigating "possible violations" of the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act by CMS Energy and Consumers and certain of their affiliates, primarily in connection with potential acquisitions and dealings with electric generating companies including the MCV Partnership. CMS Energy and Consumers do not believe any violations of such Act have occurred. The Attorney General has not taken any action on this matter since 1991 and Consumers and CMS Energy believe that this investigation is no longer being pursued.
12. Environmental Matters
On September 23, 1993, the EPA filed an administrative complaint against Consumers under Superfund and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act. The complaint alleges, after release of a certain hazardous substance at its J. H. Campbell coal-fired electric generating plant, that Consumers did not immediately notify the appropriate governmental authorities of the release as soon as Consumers had knowledge of the release. The complaint proposes penalties aggregating $100,000. Consumers is disputing these allegations.
In addition, Consumers is subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the environment. Consumers has been named as a party to several actions involving environmental issues. However, based on its present knowledge and subject to future legal and factual developments, CMS Energy and Consumers believe that it is unlikely that these actions, individually or in total, will have a material adverse effect on their financial condition. See Item 1. BUSINESS. CONSUMERS AND CMS ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE.
13. Retail Wheeling Proceedings
In September 1992, in response to an application filed by ABATE, the MPSC issued an order commencing a joint contested case proceeding to consider experimental wheeling tariffs for Consumers and Detroit Edison. ABATE's proposal is that for an experimental period of five years utility customers with maximum demands of 5,000 kW or more be eligible for the retail wheeling tariff. Under the proposal, 60 megawatts of Consumers' load and 90 MW of Detroit Edison's load would be subject to displacement by retail wheeling. Consumers and Detroit Edison each opposed the proposed experimental retail wheeling tariff while the MPSC Staff cited concerns with the impact of the retail wheeling proposals on utility planning and procurement practices as well as regarding certain jurisdictional issues. In the PFD issued in August 1993, the ALJ determined that the MPSC could not order utilities to provide retail wheeling services and expressed concern regarding the proper pricing for this service should a utility voluntarily agree to provide the service.
14. Wholesale Wheeling Proceedings
Consumers has an approved open-access interconnection service schedule on file with the FERC for wholesale wheeling transactions. In 1992, Consumers also filed a separate but complementary open-access transmission tariff that would make both firm and non-firm transmission service available to eligible power generators, including investor-owned utilities, facilities that meet the ownership and technical requirements under PURPA, independent power producers, municipal and cooperative utilities. The FERC accepted the filing, effective May 2, 1992, subject to refund, and ordered a hearing before an ALJ. In September 1993, the ALJ issued an initial decision that would compel reductions of the tariff rates ranging from 25 percent to 65 percent. On November 1, 1993, Consumers filed exceptions with the FERC seeking reversal of the rate reductions proposed in the ALJ's initial decision. As of December 31, 1993, the amount of firm transmission service currently subject to the tariff is 23 MW.
ITEM 4.

ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
CMS Energy
None in the fourth quarter of 1993 for CMS Energy.
Consumers
None in the fourth quarter of 1993 for Consumers. However, at a special meeting held on January 31, 1994, the shareholders of Consumers approved the creation of a new class of stock, Class A preferred stock. The stock vote taken on the matter was as follows:
For Against Abstain Total --- ------- ------- -----
Common and Preferred Stock 84,611,652 103,849 38,072 84,753,573
Preferred Stock 502,863 103,849 38,072 644,784
PART II
ITEM 5.

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR CMS ENERGY'S AND CONSUMERS' COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS.
CMS Energy
Market prices for CMS Energy's common stock and related security holder matters are contained herein in Item 8, CMS Energy's Quarterly Financial and Common Stock Information, which is incorporated by reference herein. Number of common shareholders at February 28, 1994 was 66,250.
Consumers
Consumers' common stock is privately held by its parent, CMS Energy, and does not trade in the public market. In May, August, November and December 1993, Consumers paid $57 million, $21.5 million, $33.5 million and $21 million cash dividends, respectively, on its common stock.
ITEM 6.

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.
CMS Energy
Selected financial information is contained in Item 8, CMS Energy's Selected Financial Information which is incorporated by reference herein.
Consumers
Selected financial information is contained in Item 8, Consumers' Selected Financial Information which is incorporated by reference herein.
ITEM 7.

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.
CMS Energy
Management's discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is contained in Item 8, CMS Energy's Management's Discussion and Analysis which is incorporated by reference herein.
Consumers
Management's discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is contained in Item 8, Consumers' Management's Discussion and Analysis which is incorporated by reference herein.
ITEM 8.


ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA.
Index to Financial Statements:
CMS Energy Page
Selected Financial Information 51 Management's Discussion and Analysis 53 Consolidated Statements of Income 64 Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 65 Consolidated Balance Sheets 66 Consolidated Statements of Long-Term Debt 68 Consolidated Statements of Preferred Stock 69 Consolidated Statements of Common Stockholders' Equity 70 Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 71 Report of Independent Public Accountants 96 Quarterly Financial and Common Stock Information 97
Consumers Page
Selected Financial Information 101 Management's Discussion and Analysis 102 Consolidated Statements of Income 112 Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 113 Consolidated Balance Sheets 114 Consolidated Statements of Long-Term Debt 116 Consolidated Statements of Preferred Stock 117 Consolidated Statements of Common Stockholder's Equity 118 Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 119 Report of Independent Public Accountants 142 Quarterly Financial Information 143
CMS Energy Corporation
1993 Financial Statements
(This page intentionally left blank)
CMS Energy Corporation Management's Discussion and Analysis
CMS Energy is the parent holding company of Consumers and Enterprises. Consumers, a combination electric and gas utility company serving most of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, is the principal subsidiary of CMS Energy. Consumers' customer base includes a mix of residential, commercial and diversified industrial customers, the largest of which is the automotive industry. Enterprises is engaged in several non-utility energy-related businesses including: 1) oil and gas exploration and production, 2) development and operation of independent power production facilities, 3) gas marketing services to utility, commercial and industrial customers, and 4) storage and transmission of natural gas.
Consolidated 1993 Earnings
Consolidated net income for 1993 totaled $155 million or $1.90 per share, compared to net losses of $297 million or $3.72 per share in 1992 and $276 million or $3.44 per share in 1991. The increased net income reflects the Settlement Order related to power purchases from the MCV Partnership. Earnings also reflect record-setting utility electric sales and gas deliveries and additional earnings from the growth of non-utility businesses.
Cash Position, Financing and Investing
CMS Energy's primary ongoing source of operating cash is dividends from its principal subsidiaries. Consumers effected a quasi-reorganization as of December 31, 1992, which allowed it to resume paying common dividends (see Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). Consumers paid $133 million in common dividends in 1993 and declared a $16 million common dividend in January 1994 from 1993 earnings. CMS Energy also received cash dividends of $11 million from its non-utility subsidiaries. CMS Energy paid $49 million in cash dividends to common shareholders compared to $38 million in 1992. The $11 million increase reflects an annual increase of $.24 per share commencing third quarter 1993.
CMS Energy's consolidated cash requirements are met by its operating and financing activities. In 1993 and 1992, CMS Energy's consolidated cash inflow from operations was derived mainly from Consumers' sale and transportation of natural gas and its sale and transmission of electrici- ty, and from NOMECO's sale of oil and natural gas. Consolidated cash from operations for 1993 primarily reflects Consumers' record-setting electric sales and gas deliveries and reduced after-tax cash shortfalls resulting from Consumers' purchases of power from the MCV Partnership.
During 1992, CMS Energy's cash from operations decreased as compared to 1991 primarily due to higher operational expenditures and reduced electric rates. In 1991, CMS Energy generated cash primarily from its consolidated operating and investing activities, including $859 million of net proceeds from the sale of a majority of the MCV Bonds.
Over the last three years, CMS Energy has used its consolidated cash to fund its extensive utility construction expenditures, to improve the reliability of its utility transmission and distribution systems and to expand its non-utility businesses. It also has used its cash to retire portions of long-term securities and to pay cash dividends.
Financing Activities
In October 1993, CMS Energy issued 4.6 million shares of common stock at a price of $26 5/8. The net proceeds of $119 million were used to reduce existing debt and for general corporate purposes. During 1993, Consumers significantly reduced its future interest charges by retiring approximately $51 million of high-cost outstanding debt and refinancing approximately $573 million of other debt at lower interest rates. In November 1993, NOMECO amended the terms of its loan agreement and increased the amount to $110 million. For further information, see Note 7.
Investing Activities
Capital expenditures (excluding assets placed under capital leases of $58 million), deferred DSM costs and investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries totaled $708 million for 1993 as compared to $525 million in 1992. CMS Energy's expenditures for its utility, independent power production, oil and gas exploration and production, and gas transmission and marketing business segments were $503 million, $110 million, $81 million and $14 million, respectively.
In December 1993, Consumers sold $309 million of MCV Bonds it held and used the net proceeds to temporarily reduce short-term borrowings and ultimately plans to reduce long-term debt and to finance its construction program.
Outlook
CMS Energy estimates that capital expenditures, including DSM, new lease commitments and investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries, will total approximately $2.2 billion over the next three years.
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1994 1995 1996 ---- ---- ---- Electric and gas utility $553 $461 $471 Oil and gas exploration and production 117 90 100 Independent power production 84 99 98 Gas transmission and marketing 38 40 45 ---- ---- ---- $792 $690 $714 ==== ==== ====
CMS Energy is required to redeem or retire approximately $796 million of long-term debt during 1994 through 1996. Cash generated by operations is expected to satisfy a substantial portion of these capital expenditures and debt retirements. Additionally, CMS Energy will evaluate the capital markets in 1994 as a source of financing its subsidiaries' investing activities.
CMS Energy filed a shelf registration statement with the SEC in January 1994 covering the issuance of up to $250 million of unsecured debt securities. The net proceeds will be used to reduce the amount of CMS Energy Notes outstanding and for general corporate purposes. In October 1993, Consumers received MPSC authorization and is proceeding to issue $200 million of preferred stock in 1994.
Consumers has several other available sources of credit including unsecured, committed lines of credit totaling $165 million and a $470 million working capital facility. Consumers has FERC authorization to issue or guarantee up to $900 million in short-term debt through December 31, 1994. Consumers uses short-term borrowings to finance working capital, seasonal fuel inventory, and to pay for capital expenditures between long-term financings. Consumers has an agreement permitting the sales of certain accounts receivable for up to $500 million. As of December 31, 1993 and 1992, receivables sold totaled $285 million and $225 million, respectively. On February 15, 1993, Consumers increased the level of receivables sold to $335 million. In February 1994, Consumers called or redeemed approximately $101 million of first mortgage bonds (see Note 7).
Electric Utility Operations
Comparative Results of Operations
Electric Pretax Operating Income: The improvement in 1993 pretax operating income compared to 1992 reflects an increase of $126 million relating to the resolution of the recoverability of MCV power purchase costs under the PPA and increased electric system sales of $45 million, partially offset by higher costs to improve system reliability. The 1992 decrease of $66 million from the 1991 level primarily resulted from an increased emphasis on system reliability improvements and decreased electric rates resulting from the full-year impact of a mid-1991 rate decrease.
Electric Sales: Electric system sales in 1993 totaled a record 31.7 billion kWh, a 3.8 percent increase from 1992 levels. In 1993, residential and commercial sales increased 3.4 percent and 3.0 percent, respectively, while industrial sales increased 6.5 percent. Growth in the industrial sector was the strongest in the auto-related segments of fabricated and primary metals and transportation equipment. Electric system sales in 1992 totaled 30.5 billion kWh, essentially unchanged from the 1991 levels.
Power Costs: Power costs for 1993 totaled $908 million, a $31 million increase from the corresponding 1992 period. This increase primarily reflects greater power purchases from outside sources to meet increased sales demand and to supplement decreased generation at Palisades due to an extended outage. Power costs for 1992 totaled $877 million, a $17 million decrease as compared to 1991.
Operation and Maintenance: Increases in other operation and maintenance expense for 1993 and 1992 reflected increased expenditures to improve electric system reliability.
Depreciation: The increased depreciation for 1993 reflects additional capital investments in plant. The 1992 increase resulted from higher depreciation rates, increased amortization of abandoned nuclear investment and increased nuclear plant decommissioning expense.
Electric Utility Rates
Power Purchases from the MCV Partnership: Consumers is obligated to purchase the following amounts of contract capacity from the MCV Partnership under the PPA:
1995 and Year 1993 1994 thereafter - ---- ----- ----- ---------- MW 1,023 1,132 1,240
Since 1990, recovering capacity and fixed-energy costs for power purchased from the MCV Partnership has been a significant issue. Effective January 1, 1993, the Settlement Order allowed Consumers to recover from electric retail customers substantially all of the payments for its ongoing purchase of 915 MW of contract capacity from the MCV Partnership, significantly reducing the amount of future underrecoveries for these power costs. ABATE and the Attorney General have filed claims of appeal of the Settlement Order with the Court of Appeals.
Prior to the Settlement Order, Consumers had recorded losses for underrecoveries from 1990 through 1992. In December 1992, Consumers recognized an after-tax loss of $343 million for the present value of estimated future underrecoveries of power costs under the PPA as a result of the Settlement Order, based on management's best estimates regarding the future availability of the MCV Facility, and the effect of the future wholesale power market on the amount, timing and price at which various increments of the capacity above the MPSC-authorized level could be resold. Except for adjustments to the above loss to reflect the after-tax time value of money through accretion expense, no additional losses are expected unless actual future experience materially differs from management's estimates. The after-tax expense for the time value of money for the $343 million loss is estimated to be approximately $24 million in 1994, and various lower levels thereafter, including $22 million in 1995 and $20 million in 1996. Although the settlement losses were recorded in 1992, the after-tax cash underrecoveries associated with the Settlement Order were $59 million in 1993. Consumers believes there is and will be a market for the resale of capacity purchases from the MCV Partnership above the MPSC-authorized level. If Consumers is unable to sell any capacity above the current MPSC-authorized level, future additional after-tax losses and after-tax cash underrecoveries could be incurred. Estimates for the next five years if none of the additional capacity is sold are as follows:
After-tax, In Millions 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Expected cash underrecoveries $56 $65 $62 $61 $ 8
Possible additional under- recoveries and losses (a) $14 $20 $20 $22 $72
(a) If unable to sell any capacity above the MPSC's authorized level.
The PPA, while requiring payment of a fixed energy charge, contains a "regulatory out" provision which permits Consumers to reduce the fixed energy charges payable to the MCV Partnership throughout the entire contract term if Consumers is not able to recover these amounts from its customers. Consumers and the MCV Partnership have commenced arbitration proceedings under the PPA to determine whether Consumers is entitled to exercise its regulatory out regarding fixed energy charges on the portion of available MCV capacity above the current MPSC-authorized levels. An arbitrator acceptable to both parties has been selected. If the arbitrator determines that Consumers cannot exercise its regulatory out, Consumers would be required to make these fixed energy payments to the MCV Partnership. The arbitration proceedings will also determine who is entitled to the fixed energy amounts for which Consumers did not receive full cost recovery during the years prior to settlement. As of December 31, 1993, these amounts total $26 million. Although Consumers intends to aggressively pursue its right to exercise the regulatory out, management cannot predict the outcome of the arbitration proceedings or any possible settlement of the matter. Accordingly, losses were recorded prior to 1993 for all fixed energy amounts at issue in the arbitration. In December 1993, Consumers made an irrevocable offer to pay through September 15, 2007, fixed energy charges to the MCV Partnership on all kWh delivered by the MCV Partnership to Consumers from the contract capacity in excess of 915 MW, which represents a portion of the fixed energy charges in dispute. Consumers made the offer to facilitate the sale of the remaining MCV Bonds in 1993.
The lessors of the MCV Facility have filed a lawsuit in federal district court against CMS Energy, Consumers and CMS Holdings. It alleges breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and negligent or willful misrepresentation relating to the MCV Partnership's failure to object to the Settlement Order in light of Consumers' interpretation of the Settlement Order, which is the subject of an arbitration between the MCV Partnership and Consumers. The action alleges damages in excess of $1 billion and seeks injunctive relief relative to Consumers' payments of the fixed energy charge. CMS Energy and Consumers believe that at all times they and CMS Holdings have conducted themselves properly and that the action is without merit. They also believe that a significant portion of the alleged damages represent fixed energy charges in dispute in the arbitration. CMS Energy and Consumers are unable to predict the outcome of this action. For further information regarding power purchases from the MCV Partnership, see Note 3.
PSCR Matters: Consumers began a planned refueling and maintenance outage at Palisades in June 1993. Following several required, unanticipated repairs that extended the outage, the plant returned to service in early November. Recovery of replacement power costs incurred by Consumers during the outage will be reviewed by the MPSC during the 1993 PSCR reconciliation of actual costs and revenues to determine the prudency of actions taken during the outage and any associated delays. Net replacement power costs were approximately $180,000 per day above the cost of fuel incurred when the plant is operating.
The Energy Act imposes an obligation on the utility industry, including Consumers, to decommission DOE uranium enrichment facilities. Consumers currently estimates its payments for decommissioning those facilities to be $2.4 million per year for 15 years beginning in 1992, escalating based on an inflation factor. Consumers believes these costs are recoverable from its customers under traditional regulatory policies.
Electric Rate Case: Consumers filed a request with the MPSC in May 1993 to increase its electric rates. Subsequently, as a result of changed estimates, Consumers revised its requested electric rate increase to $133 million annually based on a 1994 test year. Consumers also requested an additional annual electric rate increase of $38 million based on a 1995 test year. In March 1994, an ALJ issued a proposal for decision that recommended Consumers' 1994 final annual rate increase total approximately $83 million, and that the incremental requested 1995 increase not be granted at this time. The ALJ's recommendation included a lower return on electric common equity, reflected reduced anticipated debt costs due to the projected availability of more favorable interest rates and proposed a lower equity ratio for Consumers' projected capitalization structure. The ALJ did, however, generally support Consumers' rate design proposal to significantly reduce the level of subsidization of residential customers by commercial and industrial customers and generally supported a performance incentive which Consumers also supported. For further information, see Note 4.
Electric Conservation Efforts
In October 1993, Consumers completed the customer participation portion of several incentive-based DSM programs which were designed to encourage the efficient use of energy, primarily through conservation measures. Based on the MPSC's determination of Consumers' effectiveness in implementing these programs, Consumers' future rate of return on electric common equity may be adjusted either upward by up to one percent or downward by up to two percent, for one year following reconciliation hearings with the MPSC. Consumers believes it will receive an increase on its return on common equity based on having achieved all of the agreed upon objectives (see Note 4).
Electric Capital Expenditures
CMS Energy estimates capital expenditures, including DSM and new lease commitments, related to its electric utility operations of $396 million for 1994, $324 million for 1995 and $332 million for 1996.
Electric Environmental Matters and Health Concerns
The 1990 amendment of the federal Clean Air Act significantly increased the environmental constraints that utilities will operate under in the future. While the Clean Air Act's provisions will require Consumers to make certain capital expenditures in order to comply with the amendments for nitrogen oxide reductions, Consumers' generating units are presently operating at or near the sulfur dioxide emission limits which will be effective in the year 2000. Therefore, management believes that Consumers' annual operating costs will not be materially affected.
In 1990, the State of Michigan passed amendments to the Environmental Response Act, under which Consumers expects that it will ultimately incur costs at a number of sites, even those in which it has a partial or no current ownership interest. It is expected that in most cases, parties other than Consumers with current or former ownership interests may also be considered liable under the law and may be required to share in the costs of any site investigations and remedial actions. CMS Energy and Consumers believe costs incurred for both investigation and any required remedial actions would be recoverable from electric utility customers under established regulatory policies and accordingly are not likely to materially affect their financial positions or results of operations.
Consumers is a so-called "Potentially Responsible Party" at several sites being administered under Superfund. Along with Consumers, there are numerous credit-worthy, potentially responsible parties with substantial assets cooperating with respect to the individual sites. Based on information currently known by management, Consumers and CMS Energy believe that it is unlikely that their liability at any of the known Superfund sites, individually or in total, will have a material adverse effect on their financial positions or results of operations.
Electric Outlook
Consumers expects economic growth, competitive rates and other factors to increase the demand for electricity within its service territory by approximately 1.8 percent per year over the next five years. For the near term, Consumers currently plans a reserve margin of 20 percent and expects to fill the additional capacity required through long- and short-term power purchases. Long-term purchased power will likely be obtained through a competitive bidding solicitation process utilizing the framework established by the MPSC in 1992. Capacity from the MCV Facility above the levels authorized by the MPSC may be offered by Consumers in connection with the solicitation.
A recent NRC review of Consumers' performance at Palisades showed a decline in performance. Management believes that an increased emphasis on internal assessments will improve performance at Palisades. To provide NRC senior management with a more in-depth assessment of plant performance, the NRC has initiated a diagnostic evaluation team inspection at Palisades. The inspection will be a broad-based evaluation of all aspects of nuclear plant operation and management which is expected to commence in March 1994, with results of the evaluation expected to be available in May 1994. The outcome of this evaluation cannot be predicted. Similar reviews conducted at nuclear plants of other utilities in recent years have in some cases resulted in increased regulatory oversight or required actions to improve plant operations, maintenance or condition.
Consumers is currently collecting $45 million annually from electric retail customers for the future decommissioning of its two nuclear plants. Consumers believes these amounts will be adequate to meet current decommissioning cost estimates. For further information regarding nuclear decommissioning, see Note 2.
Consumers' on-site storage pool at Palisades is at capacity, and it is unlikely that the DOE will begin accepting any spent nuclear fuel by the originally scheduled date in 1998. Consumers is using NRC-approved dry casks, which are steel and concrete vaults, for temporary storage. Several appeals relating to NRC approval of the casks are now pending at the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. If Consumers is unable to continue to use the casks as planned, significant costs, including replacement power costs during any resulting plant shutdown, could be incurred.
Consumers has experienced an increase in complaints in 1993 relating primarily to the effect of so-called stray voltage on certain livestock. A complaint seeking certification as a class action suit has been filed against Consumers alleging significant damages, primarily related to certain livestock, which Consumers believes to be without merit (see Note 12).
Some of Consumers' larger industrial customers are exploring the possibility of constructing and operating their own on-site generating facilities. Consumers is actively working with these customers to develop rate and service alternatives that are competitive with self-generation options. Although Consumers' electric rates are competitive with other regional utilities, Consumers has on file with the FERC two open access interconnection tariffs which could have the effect of increasing competition for wholesale customers. As part of its current electric rate case, Consumers has requested that the MPSC reduce the level of rate subsidization of residential customers by commercial and industrial customers so as to further improve rate competitiveness for its largest customers.
The MPSC has completed a hearing on a proposal by ABATE to create an experimental retail wheeling tariff. Certain other parties have proposals in support of retail wheeling under development. In August 1993, an ALJ recommended that the MPSC reject the proposed experiment. An MPSC order is expected early in 1994.
Gas Utility Operations
Comparative Results of Operations
Gas Pretax Operating Income: For 1993, pretax operating income increased $38 million compared to 1992, reflecting higher gas deliveries (both sales and transportation volumes) and more favorable regulatory recovery of gas costs related to transportation. During 1992, gas pretax operating income increased $45 million from the 1991 level, essentially for many of the same reasons as the current period.
Gas Deliveries: Gas sales and gas transported in 1993 totaled 410.6 bcf, a 6.9 percent increase from 1992. In 1992, gas sales and gas transported totaled 384.1 bcf, a 6.1 percent increase from 1991 deliveries.
Gas Utility Rates
Consumers currently plans to file a request in 1994 with the MPSC to increase its gas rates. The request would include, among other things, costs for postretirement benefits computed under SFAS 106, Employers' Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other than Pensions. A final order should be received approximately nine to twelve months after the request is filed.
Certain of Consumers' direct gas suppliers have contract prices tied to the price Consumers pays Trunkline for its gas. The Trunkline contract covers gas deliveries through October 1994 and is at a price reduced in September 1993. Some of Consumers' direct gas suppliers have claimed that the reduced Trunkline gas cost is not a proper reference price under their contracts with Consumers and that their contracts are terminable after a 12-month period. Consumers is disputing these claims.
In 1992, the FERC issued Order 636, which makes a number of significant changes to the structure of the services provided by interstate natural gas pipelines to be implemented by the 1993-94 winter heating season. Consumers is a significant purchaser of gas from an interstate pipeline (Trunkline) and is a major transportation customer of a number of pipelines. Management believes that Consumers will recover any transition costs it may incur and such restructuring will not have a significant impact on its financial position or results of operations.
In July 1993, Michigan Gas Storage submitted a notice of rate change with the FERC to revise its operation and maintenance expenses for 1993 and update plant costs to reflect the addition of approximately $27 million of new plant additions in 1993 and began collecting the revised rates subject to refund and a hearing in February 1994. Hearings or settlement conferences will follow. For further information regarding gas utility rates, see Note 4.
Gas Capital Expenditures
CMS Energy estimates capital expenditures, including new lease commitments, related to its gas utility operations of $99 million for 1994, $88 million for 1995 and $81 million for 1996.
Gas Environmental Matters
Under the Environmental Response Act, Consumers expects that it will ultimately incur costs at a number of sites, including some of the 23 sites that formerly housed manufactured gas plant facilities, even those in which it has a partial or no current ownership interest. It is expected that in most cases, parties other than Consumers with current or former ownership interests may also be considered liable under the law and may be required to share in the costs of any site investigations and remedial actions. There is limited knowledge of manufactured gas plant contamination at these sites at this time. However, Consumers is continuing to monitor this issue.
In addition, at the request of the DNR, Consumers prepared plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies for three of these sites. Work plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies for four other sites have also been prepared. The DNR has approved two of the three plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies submitted and is currently reviewing the one remaining. Consumers currently estimates the total cost of conducting the three studies submitted to the DNR to be less than $1 million.
The timing and extent of any further site investigation and remedial actions will depend, among other things, on requests received from the DNR and on future site usage by Consumers or other owners. Under the current schedule, Consumers anticipates the first remedial investigation/feasibility study would be completed in mid-1994. Consumers believes the results of the remedial investigation/feasibility studies will allow management to estimate a range of remedial cost estimates for the sites under study, which may be substantial. In 1993, the MPSC addressed the question of recovery of investigation and remedial costs for another Michigan gas utility as part of that utility's gas rate case. In that proceeding, the MPSC determined that prudent investigation and remedial costs could be deferred and amortized over 10-year periods and prudent unamortized costs can be included for recovery in the utility's rate cases. CMS Energy and Consumers believe costs incurred for both investigation and any required remedial actions would be recoverable from gas utility customers under established regulatory policies and accordingly are not likely to materially affect their financial positions or results of operations.
Gas Outlook
In 1993, Consumers purchased approximately 85 percent of its required gas supply under long-term contracts, and the balance on the spot market. Trunkline supplied approximately 41 percent of the total requirement. Consumers expects gas supply reliability to be ensured through long-term supply contracts, with purchases in the short-term spot market when economically beneficial. Management believes that Consumers' ability to purchase gas during the off-season and store it in its extensive underground storage facilities will continue to help provide customers with low-cost, competitive gas rates.
Consumers anticipates growth in gas deliveries of approximately 0.6 percent per year over the next five years. Management believes that environmental benefits, along with the federal requirements included in the Energy Act, create an opportunity for growth in the natural gas vehicle industry.
Oil and Gas Exploration and Production
Pretax Operating Income
1993 pretax operating income decreased $4 million from 1992, primarily reflecting lower average market prices for oil and $10 million of international write-offs, partially offset by higher gas and oil sales volumes and higher average market prices for gas. 1992 pretax operating income decreased $7 million from 1991, primarily due to lower average market prices for oil, partially offset by increased oil and gas sales volumes.
Capital Expenditures
During 1993, CMS Energy's oil and gas exploration and production capital expenditures were $81 million. Most expenditures were made to develop existing proven reserves -- oil reserves in Ecuador which will start production in 1994 and Antrim Shale gas in northern Michigan.
CMS Energy currently plans to invest $307 million over the next three years in its oil and gas exploration and production operations. These anticipated capital expenditures primarily reflect continued development of Ecuador oil and Antrim Shale gas and reserve acquisitions. International focus will remain on Latin America and the Pacific Rim region.
Independent Power Production
Pretax Operating Income
1993 pretax operating income increased $21 million, primarily reflecting the addition of new electric generating capacity and improved equity earnings and operating efficiencies. CMS Energy's ownership share of sales and revenues increased 24 percent and 18 percent, respectively, over the prior year.
Capital Expenditures
In 1993, capital expenditures were $110 million, including investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries. These expenditures were primarily used to obtain ownership interests in an additional 309 MW of owned operating capacity or a 40 percent increase from December 31, 1992.
In April 1993, CMS Generation acquired a 50 percent interest in the Lyonsdale cogeneration plant, a 19 MW power plant in upstate New York. CMS Generation has invested $9 million in the project and additional investments relating to this project are expected to be immaterial.
In May 1993, a consortium including CMS Generation purchased an 88 percent share in the 650 MW San Nicolas power plant near Buenos Aires, Argentina. As of December 31, 1993, CMS Generation's share of the consortium is 18.6 percent and it has provided notice to exercise its option to increase its share to 21 percent. The plant sells power under long-term contracts to two utilities and Argentina's electric grid system. CMS Generation has invested $21 million in the partnership through December 31, 1993 and plans to invest approximately $3 million in 1994 in exercising its option.
In June 1993, CMS Generation was involved in the formation of Scudder Latin American Trust for Independent Power as a lead partner. The fund, which has investment commitments of $25 million from each of the four lead partners, will invest in electric generation and infrastructure resulting from the development of new power generating capacity. CMS Generation has contributed $.5 million through December 31, 1993 and estimates contributions of up to $11 million in 1994.
In July 1993, an investment company including CMS Generation S. A. acquired the rights to a 59 percent ownership interest in two hydroelectric power plants on the Limay River in western Argentina. These plants have a total generating capacity of 1,320 MW. The remaining interest in the project is to be held 39 percent by the Argentine provincial government and 2 percent by the plant employees. CMS Generation S.A. has a 25 percent ownership interest in the investment company. The investment company secured a 30-year concession under a government privatization program and in August 1993, began operating these power plants. CMS Generation S.A. entered into letter of credit agreements to support the acquisition. As of December 31, 1993, CMS Energy had approximately $41 million of guarantees relating to this agreement which were reduced to less than $15 million in January 1994. CMS Generation has invested $64 million in equity and loans and plans to invest up to an additional $2 million in 1994.
CMS Generation has a 50 percent ownership interest and has invested, through the Oxford/CMS Development Limited Partnership, $7 million in the Exeter waste tire-fueled/electric generation facility near Sterling, Connecticut. Based on a financial restructuring completed in 1993, CMS Generation may be obligated to invest up to an additional $2 million. The 26.5 MW Exeter facility has a capacity of processing 10 million waste tires per year and sells its capacity and energy to Connecticut Light and Power Company under a long-term agreement.
Effective November 1, 1993, CMS Generation acquired a 50 percent ownership interest in an 18 MW wood waste-fueled electric generation facility located near Chateaugay, New York for approximately $5 million and became the operator March 1, 1994. The facility sells its entire electric output to New York State Electric and Gas Corporation under a long-term power purchase agreement. CMS Generation expects no additional investment relating to this project.
CMS Energy currently plans to invest $281 million relating to its independent power production operations over the next three years, primarily in domestic and international subsidiaries and partnerships. CMS Generation is involved with partnerships that have signed power contracts to construct power plant facilities capable of producing a total of 885 MW of operating capacity in Michigan, Tamil Nadu, India, and two projects in Batangas, Philippines. CMS Generation will also pursue acquisitions in Latin America, southern Asia and the Pacific Rim region.
Gas Transmission and Marketing
Pretax Operating Income
1993 pretax operating income increased $2 million over 1992, reflecting earnings growth from existing and new gas transportation projects and increased natural gas marketed. In 1993, 60 bcf was marketed compared to 45 bcf in 1992.
Capital Expenditures
During 1993, CMS Energy's non-utility gas companies made capital expenditures of $14 million and formed two marketing partnerships which will provide natural gas marketing services throughout the Appalachian region of the United States and in Chicago and northern Illinois.
In November 1993, CMS Gas Transmission acquired an existing $4 million gas gathering system in the Antrim Shale region of Michigan's Lower Peninsula, which was placed into service in December 1993. CMS Gas Transmission began an $11 million expansion of its carbon dioxide processing facility, with completion expected in March 1994. In December 1993, they signed a letter of intent to invest $18 million to acquire 50 percent ownership in an existing 5 bcf high deliverability salt cavern storage facility on the Gulf Coast of Texas.
CMS Energy currently plans to invest $123 million over the next three years relating to its non-utility gas operations. These investments would reflect the significant expansion of certain northern Michigan gas pipeline and carbon dioxide removal plant facilities. It will continue to pursue development of natural gas storage, gas gathering and pipeline operations both domestically and internationally and work toward the development of a Midwest "market center" for natural gas through strategic alliances and asset acquisition and development.
Other
Other Income: The 1993 other income level reflects lower Midland-related losses than experienced in 1992. The 1992 loss included a $343 million charge related to the Settlement Order. The 1991 loss included $294 million related to an MPSC order received in 1991 that allowed Consumers to recover only $760 million of remaining abandoned Midland investment.
Fixed Charges: Fixed charges for 1993 increased $22 million from 1992 and primarily reflect debt outstanding with higher rates of interest in 1993. The significant decrease in fixed charges in 1992 from 1991 primarily reflects Consumers' program aimed at significantly reducing its debt and the refinancing of debt at lower interest rates.
Public Utility Holding Company Act Exemption: CMS Energy is exempt from registration under PUHCA. However, the Attorney General and the MMCG have asked the SEC to revoke CMS Energy's exemption from registration under PUHCA. On April 15, 1992, the MPSC filed a statement with the SEC recommending that CMS Energy's current exemption be revoked and a new exemption be issued conditioned upon certain reporting and operating requirements. If CMS Energy were to lose its current exemption, it would become more heavily regulated by the SEC; Consumers could ultimately be forced to divest either its electric or gas utility business; and CMS Energy would be restricted from conducting businesses that are not functionally related to the conduct of its utility business as determined by the SEC. CMS Energy is opposing this request and believes it will maintain its current exemption from registration under PUHCA.
CMS Energy Corporation Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
1: Corporate Structure
CMS Energy is the parent holding company of Consumers and Enterprises. Consumers, a combination electric and gas utility company serving most of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, is the principal subsidiary of CMS Energy. Consumers' customer base includes a mix of residential, commercial and diversified industrial customers, the largest of which is the automotive industry. Enterprises is engaged in several non-utility energy-related businesses including: 1) oil and gas exploration and production, 2) development and operation of independent power production facilities, 3) gas marketing services to utility, commercial and industrial customers, and 4) transmission and storage of natural gas.
2: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Other Matters
Basis of Presentation
The consolidated financial statements include CMS Energy, Consumers and Enterprises and their wholly owned subsidiaries. CMS Energy eliminates all material transactions between its consolidated companies. CMS Energy uses the equity method of accounting for investments in its companies and partnerships where it has more than a 20 percent but less than a majority ownership interest and includes these results in operating revenue. For the years ended December 31, 1993, 1992 and 1991 equity earnings (losses) were $17 million, $(6) million, and $(8) million, respectively.
Gas Inventory
Consumers uses the weighted average cost method for valuing working gas inventory. Cushion gas, which is gas stored to maintain reservoir pressure for recovery of working gas, is recorded in the appropriate gas utility plant account. Consumers stores gas inventory in its underground storage facilities.
Maintenance, Depreciation and Depletion
Property repairs and minor property replacements are charged to maintenance expense. Depreciable property retired or sold plus cost of removal (net of salvage credits) is charged to accumulated depreciation. Consumers bases depreciation provisions for utility plant on straight-line and units-of-production rates approved by the MPSC. In May 1991, the MPSC approved an increase of approximately $15 million annually in Consumers' electric and common utility plant depreciation rates. The composite depreciation rate for electric utility property was 3.4 percent for 1993 and 1992 and 3.3 percent for 1991. The composite rate for gas utility plant was 4.4 percent for 1993 and 4.3 percent for 1992 and 1991.
NOMECO follows the full-cost method of accounting and, accordingly, capitalizes its exploration and development costs, including the cost of non-productive drilling and surrendered acreage, on a country-by-country basis. The capitalized costs in each cost center are being amortized on an overall units-of-production method based on total estimated proven oil and gas reserves.
The composite rates for Consumers' common property, NOMECO's other property, and other property of CMS Energy and its subsidiaries were 4.5 percent in 1993, 4.7 percent in 1992 and 4.1 percent in 1991.
New Accounting Standards
In November 1992, the FASB issued SFAS 112, Employers' Accounting for Postemployment Benefits, which CMS Energy adopted January 1, 1994. CMS Energy pays for several postemployment benefits, the most significant being workers compensation. Because CMS Energy's postemployment benefit plans do not vest or accumulate, the standard did not materially impact CMS Energy's financial position or results of operations. For new accounting standards related to financial instruments, see Note 8.
Nuclear Fuel, Decommissioning and Other Nuclear Matters
Consumers amortizes nuclear fuel cost to fuel expense based on the quantity of heat produced for electric generation. Interest on leased nuclear fuel is expensed as incurred. Under federal law, the DOE is responsible for permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel at costs to be paid by affected utilities under various payment options. However, in a statement released February 17, 1994, the DOE asserted that it does not have a legal obligation to accept spent nuclear fuel without an operational repository. The DOE is exploring options to offset the costs incurred by nuclear utilities in continuing to store spent nuclear fuel on site. For fuel burned after April 6, 1983, Consumers charges disposal costs to nuclear fuel expense, recovers it through electric rates and remits it to the DOE quarterly. Consumers has elected to defer payment for disposal of spent nuclear fuel burned before April 7, 1983 until the spent fuel is delivered to the DOE. As of December 31, 1993, Consumers has recorded a liability to the DOE of $90 million, including interest, to dispose of spent nuclear fuel burned before April 7, 1983. Consumers has been recovering through electric rates the amount of this liability, excluding a portion of interest. Consumers' liability to the DOE becomes due when the DOE takes possession of Consumers' spent nuclear fuel, which was originally scheduled to occur in 1998.
In April 1993, the NRC approved the design of the dry spent fuel storage casks now being used by Consumers at Palisades. In May 1993, the Attorney General and certain other parties commenced litigation to block Consumers' use of the storage casks, alleging that the NRC had failed to comply adequately with the National Environmental Policy Act. As of mid- February 1994, the courts have declined to prevent such use and have refused to issue temporary restraining orders or stays. Several appeals relating to this matter are now pending at the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Consumers loaded two dry storage casks with spent nuclear fuel in 1993 and expects to load additional casks in 1994 prior to Palisades' 1995 refueling. If Consumers is unable to continue to use the casks as planned, significant costs, including replacement power costs during any resulting plant shutdown, could be incurred.
Consumers currently estimates decommissioning costs (decontamination and dismantlement) of $208 million and $399 million, in 1993 dollars, for the Big Rock Point and Palisades nuclear plants, respectively. At December 31, 1993, Consumers had recorded $171 million of decommissioning costs and classified the obligation as accumulated depreciation. In January 1987, Consumers began collecting estimated costs to decommission its two nuclear plants through a monthly surcharge to electric customers which currently totals $45 million annually. Consumers expects to file updated decommissioning estimates with the MPSC on or before March 31, 1995. Amounts collected from electric retail customers are deposited in trust. Trust earnings are recorded as an investment with a corresponding credit included in accumulated depreciation. The total amount of the trust will be available for decommissioning Big Rock Point and Palisades at the end of their respective license periods in 2000 and 2007. Consumers believes the amounts being collected are adequate to meet its currently estimated decommissioning costs and current NRC requirements.
In November 1993, Palisades returned to service following a planned refueling and maintenance outage that had been extended due to several unanticipated repairs. The results of an NRC review of Consumers' performance at Palisades published shortly thereafter showed a decline in performance ratings for the plant. Management believes that an increased emphasis on internal assessments will improve performance at Palisades. In order to provide NRC senior management with a more in-depth assessment of plant performance, the NRC has initiated a diagnostic evaluation team inspection at Palisades. The inspection will be a broad-based evaluation of all aspects of nuclear plant operation and management. The evaluation is expected to commence in March 1994, with results of the evaluation expected to be available in May 1994. The outcome of this evaluation cannot be predicted. Similar reviews conducted at nuclear plants of other utilities in recent years have in some cases resulted in increased regulatory oversight or required actions to improve plant operations, maintenance or condition.
Plateau Resources Ltd.
In August 1993, Consumers sold its ownership interest in Plateau to U. S. Energy Corp. As a result of the sale, approximately $14 million of Plateau's cash and cash equivalents, other assets and liabilities, including certain future decommissioning, environmental and other contingent liabilities were transferred to U. S. Energy Corp. In view of prior write-offs, this transaction did not result in any material gains or additional losses.
Reclassifications
CMS Energy and the MCV Partnership (see Note 16) have reclassified certain prior year amounts for comparative purposes. These reclassifications did not affect the net losses for the years presented.
Related-Party Transactions
In 1993, 1992, and 1991, Consumers purchased $52 million, $36 million and $26 million, respectively, of electric generating capacity and energy from affiliates of Enterprises. Affiliates of CMS Energy sold, stored and transported natural gas and provided other services to the MCV Partnership totaling approximately $27 million, $21 million and $19 million for 1993, 1992 and 1991, respectively. For additional discussion of related-party transactions with the MCV Partnership and the FMLP, see Notes 3 and 16. Other related-party transactions are immaterial.
Revenue and Fuel Costs
Consumers accrues revenue for electricity and gas used by its customers but not billed at the end of an accounting period. Consumers also accrues or reduces revenue for any underrecovery or overrecovery of electric power supply costs and natural gas costs by establishing a corresponding asset or liability until Consumers bills these unrecovered costs or refunds the excess recoveries to customers after reconciliation hearings conducted before the MPSC.
Utility Regulation
Consumers accounts for the effects of regulation under SFAS 71, Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation. As a result, the actions of regulators affect when revenues, expenses, assets and liabilities are recognized.
Other
For significant accounting policies regarding cash equivalents, see Note 14; for income taxes, see Note 5; and for pensions and other postretirement benefits, see Note 10.
3: The Midland Cogeneration Venture
The MCV Partnership, which leases and operates the MCV Facility, contracted to supply electricity and steam to The Dow Chemical Company and to sell electricity to Consumers for a 35-year period beginning in March 1990. At December 31, 1993, Consumers, through its subsidiaries, held the following assets related to the MCV: 1) CMS Midland owned a 49 percent general partnership interest in the MCV Partnership; and 2) CMS Holdings held through the FMLP a 35 percent lessor interest in the MCV Facility. In late 1993, Consumers sold its remaining $309 million investment in the MCV Bonds.
Power Purchases from the MCV Partnership
Consumers is obligated to purchase the following amounts of contract capacity from the MCV Partnership under the PPA:
1995 and Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 thereafter - ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---------- MW 806 915 1,023 1,132 1,240
During 1992 and 1991, the MPSC only allowed Consumers to recover costs of power purchased from the MCV Partnership based on delivered energy at rates less than Consumers paid for 840 MW in 1992 and 806 MW in 1991. As a result, Consumers recorded after-tax losses of $86 million in 1992 and $124 million in 1991.
On March 31, 1993, the MPSC approved, with modifications, the Revised Settlement Proposal which had been co-sponsored by Consumers, the MPSC staff and 10 small power and cogeneration developers. These parties accepted the Settlement Order and the MCV Partnership confirmed that it did not object to its terms. ABATE and the Attorney General have filed claims of appeal of the Settlement Order with the Court of Appeals.
The Settlement Order determined the cost of power purchased from the MCV Partnership that Consumers can recover from its electric retail customers and will significantly reduce the amount of future underrecoveries for these power costs. Effective January 1, 1993, the Settlement Order allowed Consumers to recover substantially all of the payments for its on- going purchase of 915 MW of contract capacity from the MCV Partnership. Capacity and energy purchases from the MCV Partnership above the 915 MW level can be competitively bid into Consumers' next solicitation for power or, if necessary, utilized for current power needs with a prudency review and a pricing recovery determination in annual PSCR cases. In either instance, the MPSC would determine the levels of recovery from customers for the power purchased. The Settlement Order also provides Consumers the right to remarket all of the remaining capacity to third parties. The PPA requires Consumers to pay a minimum levelized average capacity charge of 3.77 cents per kWh, a fixed energy charge and a variable energy charge based primarily on Consumers' average cost of coal consumed. The Settlement Order provided Consumers two options for the recovery that could be used for capacity charges paid to the MCV Partnership. Under the option selected, Consumers is scheduling deliveries of energy from the MCV Partnership whenever it has energy available up to hourly availability limits, or "caps," for the 915 MW of capacity authorized for recovery in the Settlement Order. Consumers can recover an average 3.62 cents per kWh capacity charge and the prescribed energy charges associated with the scheduled deliveries within the caps, whether or not those deliveries are scheduled on an economic basis. Through December 31, 1997, there is no cap applied during on-peak hours to Consumers' recovery for the purchase of capacity made available within the 915 MW authorized. Recovery for purchases during off-peak hours is capped at 80 percent in 1993, 82 percent in 1994 and 1995, 84 percent in 1996 and 1997, increasing to 88.7 percent in 1998 and thereafter at which time the 88.7 percent cap is applicable during all hours. For all economic energy deliveries above the caps to 915 MW, the option also allows Consumers to recover 1/2 cent per kWh capacity payment in addition to the corresponding energy charge.
In December 1992, Consumers recognized an after-tax loss of $343 million for the present value of estimated future underrecoveries of power costs under the PPA as a result of the Settlement Order. This loss included management's best estimates regarding the future availability of the MCV Facility, and the effect of the future wholesale power market on the amount, timing and price at which various increments of the capacity above the MPSC-authorized level could be resold. Except for adjustments to the above loss to reflect the after-tax time value of money through accretion expense, no additional losses are expected unless actual future experience materially differs from management's estimates. Because the calculation of the 1992 loss depended in part upon estimates of future unregulated sales of energy to third parties, a more conservative or risk-free investment rate of 7 percent was used to calculate $188 million of the total $343 million after-tax loss. The remaining portion of the loss was calculated using an 8.5 percent discount rate reflecting Consumers' incremental borrowing rate as required by SFAS 90, Regulated Enterprises- Accounting for Abandonments and Disallowances of Plant Costs. The after- tax expense for the time value of money for the loss is estimated to be approximately $24 million in 1994, and various lower levels thereafter, including $22 million in 1995 and $20 million in 1996. Although the settlement losses were recorded in 1992, the after-tax cash underrecoveries, including fixed energy charges, associated with the Settlement Order were $59 million in 1993. Consumers believes there is and will be a market for the resale of capacity purchases from the MCV Partnership above the MPSC-authorized level. However, if Consumers is unable to sell any capacity above the current MPSC-authorized level, future additional after-tax losses and after-tax cash underrecoveries could be incurred. Consumers' estimates of its future after-tax cash underrecoveries and possible additional losses for the next five years if none of the additional capacity is sold are as follows:
After-tax, In Millions 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Expected cash underrecoveries $56 $65 $62 $61 $ 8
Possible additional under- recoveries and losses (a) $14 $20 $20 $22 $72
(a) If unable to sell any capacity above the MPSC's authorized level.
The undiscounted, after-tax amount of the $343 million loss was $789 million. At December 31, 1993, the after-tax present value of the Settlement Order liability had been reduced to $307 million, which reflects after-tax cash underrecoveries related to capacity totaling $(54) million, after-tax accretion expense of $23 million and a $(5) million adjustment due to the 1993 corporate tax rate change (see Note 5).
The PPA, while requiring payment of a fixed energy charge, contains a "regulatory out" provision which permits Consumers to reduce the fixed energy charges payable to the MCV Partnership throughout the entire contract term if Consumers is not able to recover these amounts from its customers. In connection with the MPSC's approval of the Revised Settlement Proposal, Consumers and the MCV Partnership have commenced arbitration proceedings under the PPA to determine whether Consumers is entitled to exercise its regulatory out regarding fixed energy charges on the portion of available MCV capacity above the current MPSC-authorized levels. An arbitrator acceptable to both parties has been selected. If the arbitrator determines that Consumers cannot exercise its regulatory out, Consumers would be required to make these fixed energy payments to the MCV Partnership even though Consumers may not be recovering these costs. The arbitration proceedings will also determine who is entitled to the fixed energy amounts for which Consumers did not receive full cost recovery during the years prior to settlement. Although Consumers believes its position on arbitration is sound and intends to aggressively pursue its right to exercise the regulatory out, management cannot predict the outcome of the arbitration proceedings or any possible settlement of the matter. Accordingly, losses were recorded prior to 1993 for all fixed energy amounts at issue in the arbitration. As of December 31, 1993, approximately $20 million has been escrowed by Consumers and is included in Consumers' temporary cash investments. In December 1993, Consumers made an irrevocable offer to pay through September 15, 2007, fixed energy charges to the MCV Partnership on all kWh delivered by the MCV Partnership to Consumers from the contract capacity in excess of 915 MW, which represents a portion of the fixed energy charges in dispute. Consumers made the offer to facilitate the sale of the remaining MCV Bonds in 1993.
The lessors of the MCV Facility have filed a lawsuit in federal district court against CMS Energy, Consumers and CMS Holdings. It alleges breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and negligent or willful misrepresentation relating to the MCV Partnership's failure to object to the Settlement Order in light of Consumers' interpretation of the Settlement Order, which is the subject of an arbitration between the MCV Partnership and Consumers. The action alleges damages in excess of $1 billion and seeks injunctive relief relative to Consumers' payments of the fixed energy charge. CMS Energy and Consumers believe that at all times they and CMS Holdings have conducted themselves properly and that the action is without merit. They also believe that a significant portion of the alleged damages represent fixed energy charges in dispute in the arbitration. CMS Energy and Consumers are unable to predict the outcome of this action.
PSCR Matters: Consistent with the terms of the Settlement Order, Consumers has withdrawn its appeals of various MPSC orders issued in connection with the 1992, 1991 and 1990 PSCR cases. Consumers also agreed not to appeal any MCV-related issues raised in future orders for these plan cases and related reconciliations to the extent those issues are resolved by the Settlement Order. Consumers made refunds, including interest, of $69 million in 1993 and $29 million in 1992 to customers for overrecoveries in connection with the 1991 and 1990 PSCR reconciliation cases, respectively. These amounts were included in losses recorded prior to 1993. In 1992, Consumers recovered MCV power purchase costs consistent with the MPSC's 1992 plan case order, and does not anticipate that any MCV-related refunds will be required.
4: Rate Matters
Electric Rate Case
Consumers filed a request with the MPSC in May 1993 to increase its electric rates. Subsequently, as a result of changed estimates, Consumers revised its requested electric rate increase to $133 million annually based on a 1994 test year. Consumers also requested an additional annual electric rate increase of $38 million based on a 1995 test year. Consumers' request included increased future expenditures primarily related to capital additions, DSM programs, operation and maintenance, higher depreciation and postretirement benefits computed under SFAS 106, Employers' Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other than Pensions. The filing also proposed experimental incentive provisions that would either reward or penalize Consumers, based on its operating performance. In addition, Consumers would share any returns above its MPSC-authorized level with customers in exchange for the ability to earn not lower than one percentage point below its authorized level.
In March 1994, an ALJ issued a proposal for decision that recommended Consumers' 1994 final annual rate increase total approximately $83 million, and that the incremental requested 1995 increase not be granted at this time. The ALJ's recommendation included a lower return on electric common equity, reflected reduced anticipated debt costs due to the projected availability of more favorable interest rates and proposed a lower equity ratio for Consumers' projected capitalization structure. The ALJ did, however, generally support Consumers' rate design proposal to significantly reduce the level of subsidization of residential customers by commercial and industrial customers and generally supported the performance incentive but not the shared return mechanism discussed above.
Abandoned Midland Project: In July 1984, Consumers abandoned construction of its unfinished nuclear power plant located in Midland, Michigan, and subsequently took a series of write-downs. In May 1991, Consumers began collecting $35 million pretax annually for the next 10 years and is amortizing the assets against current income over the recovery period using an interest method. Amortization for 1993, 1992 and 1991 was $28 million, $28 million and $18 million, respectively.
Consumers was not permitted to earn a return on the portion of the abandoned Midland investment for which the MPSC was allowing recovery. Therefore, under SFAS 90, the recorded losses described above included amounts that reduced the recoverable asset to the present value of future recoveries. During the remaining recovery period, part of the prior losses will be reversed to adjust the unrecovered asset to its present value and is reflected as accretion income. An after-tax total of approximately $35 million of the prior losses remains to be included in accretion income through April 2001. Several parties, including the Attorney General, have filed claims of appeal with the Court of Appeals regarding MPSC orders issued in May and July 1991 that specified the recovery of abandoned investment.
Electric DSM: As a result of settlement discussions regarding DSM and an MPSC order in July 1991, Consumers agreed to spend $65 million over two years on DSM programs. Based on the MPSC's determination of Consumers' effectiveness in implementing these programs, Consumers' future rate of return on common equity may be adjusted either upward by up to 1 percent or downward by up to 2 percent. This adjustment, if implemented, would be applied to Consumers' retail electric tariff rates and be in effect for one year following reconciliation hearings with the MPSC that are expected to be initiated in the first quarter of 1994. The estimated revenue effects of the potential adjustment range from an $11 million increase to a $22 million decrease. Consumers believes it will receive an increase on its return on common equity.
On October 1, 1993, Consumers completed the customer participation portion of these programs and as part of its current electric rate case has requested MPSC authorization to continue certain programs in 1994. Consumers has also requested recovery of DSM expenditures which exceeded the $65 million level. Consumers is deferring program costs and amortizing the costs over the period these costs are being recovered from its customers in accordance with an accounting order issued by the MPSC in September 1992. The unamortized balance of deferred costs at December 31, 1993 and 1992 was $71 million and $25 million, respectively.
PSCR Issues
Consumers began a planned refueling and maintenance outage at Palisades in June 1993. Following several required, unanticipated repairs that extended the outage, the plant returned to service in early November. Recovery of replacement power costs incurred by Consumers during the outage will be reviewed by the MPSC during the 1993 PSCR reconciliation of actual costs and revenues to determine the prudency of actions taken during the outage. Any finding of delay due to imprudence could result in disallowances of a portion of replacement power costs. Net replacement power costs were approximately $180,000 per day above the cost of fuel incurred when the plant is operating.
The Energy Act imposes an obligation on the utility industry, including Consumers, to decommission DOE uranium enrichment facilities. Consumers currently estimates its payments for decommissioning those facilities to be $2.4 million per year for 15 years beginning in 1992, escalating based on an inflation factor. Consumers believes these costs are recoverable from its customers under traditional regulatory policies. As of December 31, 1993, Consumers' remaining estimated liability was approximately $34 million. Consumers has a regulatory asset of $34 million for the expected recovery of this amount in electric rates. GCR Issues
In connection with its 1991 GCR reconciliation case, Consumers refunded $36 million, including interest, to its firm sales and transportation rate customers in April 1992. Consumers accrued the full amount for this refund in 1991.
The MPSC issued an order during 1993 that approved an interim settlement agreement for the 12 months ended March 31, 1993. As a result of the settlement, Consumers refunded in August 1993, to its GCR and transportation customers, approximately $22 million, including interest. Consumers previously accrued amounts sufficient for this refund.
The MPSC, in a February 1993 order, provided that the price payable to certain intrastate gas producers by Consumers be reduced prospectively. As a result, Consumers was not allowed to recover approximately $13 million of costs incurred prior to February 8, 1993. In 1991, Consumers accrued a loss sufficient for this issue. Future disallowances are not anticipated, unless the remaining appeals filed by the intrastate producers are successful.
In 1992, the FERC approved a settlement involving Consumers, Trunkline and certain other parties, which resolved numerous claims and proceedings concerning Trunkline liquified natural gas costs. The settlement represents significant gas cost savings for Consumers and its customers in future years. As part of the settlement, Consumers will not incur any transition costs from Trunkline as a result of FERC Order 636. In November 1992, Consumers had recorded a liability and regulatory asset for the principal amount of payments to Trunkline over a five-year period and a regulatory asset. On May 11, 1993, the MPSC approved a separate settlement agreement that provides Consumers with full recovery of these costs over a five-year period. At December 31, 1993, Consumers' remaining liability and regulatory asset was $116 million.
Other
Certain of Consumers' direct gas suppliers have contract prices tied to the price Consumers pays Trunkline for its gas. On September 1, 1993, Consumers commenced gas purchases from Trunkline under a continuation of prior sales agreements. The current contract covers gas deliveries through October 1994 and is at a reduced price compared to prior gas sales. Some of Consumers' direct gas suppliers have claimed that the reduced Trunkline gas cost is not a proper reference price under their contracts with Consumers and that their contracts are terminable after a 12-month period. Consumers is disputing these claims. Additionally, three of these direct gas suppliers of Consumers have made filings with the FERC in Trunkline's Order 636 restructuring case seeking to preclude Trunkline's ability to make the sales to Consumers which commenced on September 1, 1993. Consumers and Trunkline vigorously opposed these filings and in December 1993, the FERC issued an order which, among other things, allowed Trunkline to continue sales of gas to Consumers under tariffs on file with the FERC.
Estimated losses for certain contingencies discussed in this note have been accrued. Resolution of these contingencies is not expected to have a material impact on the financial statements.
5: Income Taxes
CMS Energy and its subsidiaries (including Consumers) file a consolidated federal income tax return. Income taxes are generally allocated to each subsidiary based on each subsidiary's separate taxable income. In 1992, CMS Energy implemented SFAS 109, Accounting for Income Taxes. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are classified as current or noncurrent based on the classification of the related asset or liability, for all temporary differences. Consumers began practicing full deferred tax accounting for temporary differences arising after January 1, 1993 as authorized by a generic MPSC order. The generic order reduces the amount of regulatory assets and liabilities that otherwise could have arisen in future periods by allowing Consumers to reflect the income statement effect in the period temporary differences arise.
CMS Energy uses ITC to reduce current income taxes payable and defers and amortizes ITC over the life of the related property. The AMT requires taxpayers to perform a second separate federal tax calculation based on a flat rate applied to a broader tax base. AMT is the amount by which this "broader-based" tax exceeds regular tax. Any AMT paid generally becomes a tax credit that can be carried forward indefinitely to reduce regular tax liabilities in future periods when regular taxes paid exceed the tax calculated for AMT.
On August 10, 1993, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 increased the statutory federal tax rate from 34 percent to 35 percent effective January 1, 1993. The cumulative effect of this tax rate change has been reflected in CMS Energy's financial statements.
The significant components of income tax expense (benefit) consisted of:
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991(a) - ----------------------- ------- ------ -------- Current federal income taxes $ 19 $ 39 $ 13 Deferred income taxes 67 (177) (143) Deferred income taxes - tax rate change (1) - - Deferred ITC, net (10) (8) 36 ------- ------ ------ $ 75 $(146) $ (94) ======= ====== ======
Operating $ 92 $ 22 $ 25 Other (17) (168) (119) ------- ------ ------ $ 75 $(146) $ (94) ======= ====== ======
(a) The 1991 provision for income taxes was before an extraordinary item that had related deferred income taxes of approximately $7 million.
The principal components of CMS Energy's deferred tax assets (liabilities) recognized in the balance sheet are as follows:
In Millions December 31 1993 1992 - ----------- ------- -------- Property $(580) $ (521) Unconsolidated investments (194) (128) Postretirement benefits (Note 10) (180) (167) Abandoned Midland project (Note 4) (57) (60) Employee benefit obligations (includes postretirement benefits of $182 and $168) (Note 10) 204 189 MCV power purchases - settlement (Note 3) 165 177 AMT carryforward 110 83 ITC carryforward (expires 2005) 48 52 Other (8) 5 ------- -------- $ (492) $ (370) ======== ========
Gross deferred tax liabilities $(1,571) $(1,416) Gross deferred tax assets 1,079 1,046 -------- -------- $ (492) $ (370) ======== ========
The actual income tax expense (benefit) differs from the amount computed by applying the statutory federal tax rate to income before income taxes as follows:
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991 ------- ------- ------- Net income (loss) before preferred dividends and extraordinary item $ 166 $(286) $(252) Income tax expense (benefit) 75 (146) (94) ------- ------- ------- 241 (432) (346) Statutory federal income tax rate x 35% x 34% x 34% -------- ------- ------- Expected income tax expense (benefit) 84 (147) (118) Increase (decrease) in taxes from: Capitalized overheads previously flowed through 5 5 35 Differences in book and tax depreciation not previously deferred 6 9 8 ITC amortization and utilization (12) (11) (9) Other, net (8) (2) (10) ------- ------- ------- $ 75 $ (146) $(94) ======= ======= =======
6: Short-Term Financings
Consumers has authorization from the FERC to issue or guarantee up to $900 million of short-term debt through December 31, 1994. Consumers has a $470 million facility that is used to finance seasonal working capital requirements and unsecured, committed lines of credit aggregating $165 million. As of December 31, 1993, $235 million and $24 million were outstanding at weighted average interest rates of 4.0 percent and 3.9 percent, respectively. Further, Consumers has an established $500 million trade receivables purchase and sale program. As of December 31, 1993 and 1992, receivables sold under the agreement totaled $285 million and $225 million, respectively. On February 15, 1994, Consumers increased the level of receivables sold to $335 million.
7: Capitalization
CMS Energy
Capital Stock: CMS Energy's Articles permit it to issue up to 250 million shares of common stock at $.01 par value and up to 5 million shares of preferred stock at $.01 par value. Under its two and one-half year Secured Credit Facility and Indenture pursuant to which the Notes are issued, CMS Energy is permitted to pay as dividends on its common stock an amount not to exceed the total of its net income and any proceeds received from the issuance or sale of common stock as defined in the Indentures and $40 million, provided there exists no event of default under the terms of the Secured Credit Facility or Indentures. The same formula applies to limits available to repurchase or reacquire CMS Energy stock for either the payment of dividends or repurchase of stock. In October 1993, CMS Energy issued an additional 4.6 million shares of common stock at a price of $26 5/8. The net proceeds of $119 million were used to reduce existing debt and for general corporate purposes.
Long-Term Debt: In October 1992, CMS Energy received proceeds of $130 million and $219 million from the issuance of Series A and Series B Notes, respectively. Interest will accrue and increase the principal to the face value of $172 million for the Series A Notes and $294 million for the Series B Notes through October 1, 1995. After such date, interest will be paid semi-annually commencing April 1, 1996, at a rate of 9.5 percent per annum for the Series A Notes and 9.875 percent per annum for the Series B Notes. In November 1992, CMS Energy entered into a $220 million Secured Credit Facility. As of December 31, 1993, $18 million was outstanding at a weighted average interest rate of 5.7 percent. The Notes and Secured Credit Facility are secured by a pledge of stock of Consumers, Enterprises, and NOMECO. Additionally, under the terms of the Secured Credit Facility, CMS Energy may only have outstanding, at any one time, an aggregate of $130 million of unsecured debt except for debt issued to refinance existing debt. The establishment of the Secured Credit Facility and the proceeds from the Notes, net of underwriting expenses, were used to retire the $410 million one-year secured revolving credit facility.
CMS Energy filed a shelf registration statement with the SEC in January 1994 covering the issuance of up to $250 million of unsecured debt securities. The net proceeds will be used to reduce the amount of CMS Energy Notes outstanding and for general corporate purposes. The unsecured debt securities may be offered from time to time on terms to be determined at the time of the sale.
Consumers
Capital Stock: As of December 31, 1992, Consumers effected a quasi- reorganization, an elective accounting procedure in which Consumers' accumulated deficit of $574 million was eliminated against other paid-in capital. This action had no effect on CMS Energy's consolidated financial statements. As a result of the quasi-reorganization and subsequent accumulated earnings, Consumers paid $133 million in common stock dividends in 1993 and also declared from 1993 earnings a $16 million common stock dividend in January 1994. Consumers has authorization from the MPSC and is proceeding to issue $200 million of preferred stock in 1994.
First Mortgage Bonds: Consumers secures its first mortgage bonds by a mortgage and lien on substantially all of its property. Consumers' ability to issue and sell securities is restricted by certain provisions in its First Mortgage Bond Indenture, Articles and the need for regulatory approvals in compliance with appropriate state and federal law. In September 1993, Consumers issued, with MPSC approval, $300 million of 6 3/8 percent first mortgage bonds, due 2003 and $300 million of 7 3/8 percent first mortgage bonds, due 2023. Consumers used the net proceeds from the bond issuance to refund approximately $515 million of higher interest first mortgage bonds and the balance to reduce short-term borrowings. Unamortized debt costs, premiums and discounts and call premiums on the refunded debt totaling approximately $18 million were deferred under SFAS 71, and are being amortized over the lives of the new debt.
In February 1994, Consumers issued a call for redemption totaling approximately $10 million. Consumers also fully redeemed two issues of first mortgage bonds totaling approximately $91 million. These redemptions completed Consumers' commitment to the MPSC, under the 1993 authorization to issue first mortgage bonds, to refinance certain long- term debt.
Long-Term Bank Debt: Under its long-term credit agreement at December 31, 1993, Consumers was required to make 10 remaining quarterly principal payments of approximately $47 million. As of December 31, 1993, the outstanding balance under this credit agreement totaled $469 million with a weighted average interest rate of 4.0 percent. In January 1993, Consumers entered into an interest rate swap agreement, exchanging variable-rate interest for fixed-rate interest on the latest maturing $250 million of the then remaining $500 million obligation under its long-term credit agreement.
Other: Consumers has a total of $131 million of PCRBs outstanding with a weighted average interest rate of 4.2 percent as of December 31, 1993. Consumers classifies $101 million of PCRBs as long-term because it can refinance these amounts through irrevocable letters of credit expiring after one year.
In June 1993, Consumers entered into loan agreements in connection with the issuance of approximately $28 million of adjustable rate demand limited obligation refunding revenue bonds, due 2010, which are secured by an irrevocable letter of credit expiring in 1996. These bonds bear an initial interest rate of 2.65 percent. Consumers also entered into loan agreements in connection with the issuance of $30 million of 5.8 percent limited obligation refunding revenue bonds, due 2010, secured by a financial guaranty insurance policy and certain first mortgage bonds of Consumers. Proceeds of these issues were used to redeem on August 1, 1993 in advance of their maturities, approximately $58 million of outstanding PCRBs.
NOMECO
As of December 31, 1993, NOMECO had total debt outstanding of $122 million. Senior serial notes amounting to $45 million with a weighted average interest rate of 9.4 percent are outstanding from a private placement. In November 1993, NOMECO amended the terms of its revolving credit agreement and increased the amount to $110 million. At December 31, 1993, $72 million was outstanding at a weighted average interest rate of 4.7 percent. NOMECO also has $5 million outstanding under other credit agreements.
Enterprises
As of December 31, 1993, MOAPA had $22 million of Clark County, Nevada, tax-exempt bonds outstanding with an interest rate of 3.35%. These bonds are backed by a letter of credit guaranteed by CMS Energy. If the letter of credit is not extended past its current expiration date of June 1, 1994, the bonds could be redeemed with the funds held in a trust account. These funds are invested in certificates of deposits and included in other noncurrent assets. The bonds were issued in 1990 for the purpose of providing partial funding for the development of a tires-to-energy solid waste disposal and resource recovery facility. In December 1993, the Nevada Public Service Commission rejected the power purchase agreement between MOAPA and the Nevada Power Company and subsequently rejected MOAPA's motion for rehearing.
8: Financial Instruments
Cash, short-term investments and current liabilities approximate their fair value due to the short-term nature of those instruments. The estimated fair value of long-term investments is based on quoted market prices where available. When specific market prices do not exist for an instrument, the fair value is based on quoted market prices of similar investments or other valuation techniques. All long-term investments in financial instruments approximate fair value. The carrying amount of long-term debt was $2.4 billion and $2.7 billion and the fair value of long-term debt was $2.6 billion and $2.8 million as of December 31, 1993 and 1992, respectively. Although the current fair value of the long-term debt, which is based on calculations made by debt pricing specialists, may be greater than the current carrying amount, settlement of the reported debt is generally not expected until maturity. The fair value of CMS Energy's off-balance sheet financial instruments is based on the amount estimated to terminate or settle the obligation. The fair value of interest rate swap agreements was $6 million and $1 million and guarantees/letters of credit was $96 million and $56 million as of December 31, 1993 and 1992, respectively (see Notes 7 and 12).
On January 1, 1994, CMS Energy adopted SFAS 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, requiring accounting for investments in debt securities to be held to maturity at amortized cost; otherwise debt and marketable equity securities would be recorded at fair value, with any unrealized gains or losses included in earnings if the security is held for trading purposes or as a separate component of shareholders' equity if the security is available for sale. The implementation of this standard did not materially impact CMS Energy's financial position or results of operations.
In May 1993, the FASB issued SFAS 114, Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan, effective in 1995, requiring certain loans that are determined to be impaired be measured based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan's effective interest rate, the loan's observable market price or the fair value of any collateral for a secured loan. CMS Energy does not believe this standard will have a material impact on its financial position or results of operations.
9: Executive Incentive Compensation
Under CMS Energy's Performance Incentive Stock Plan, restricted shares of common stock of CMS Energy, stock options and stock appreciation rights may be granted to key employees based on their contributions to the successful management of CMS Energy and its subsidiaries. The plan reserves for award not more than 2 percent of CMS Energy's common stock outstanding on January 1 each year, less the number of shares of restricted common stock awarded and of common stock subject to options granted under the plan during the immediately preceding four calendar years. Any forfeitures are subject to award under the plan. As of December 31, 1993, awards of up to 447,686 shares of common stock may be issued.
Restricted shares of common stock are outstanding shares with full voting and dividend rights. Performance criteria were added in 1990 based on CMS Energy's total return to shareholders. Shares of restricted common stock cannot be distributed until they are vested and the performance objectives are met. Further, the restricted stock is subject to forfeiture if employment terminates before vesting. If key employees exceed performance objectives, the plan will allow additional awards. Restricted shares vest fully if control of CMS Energy changes, as defined by the plan.
Consumers' Executive Stock Option and Stock Appreciation Rights Plan, an earlier plan approved by shareholders, remains in effect until all authorized options are granted or September 25, 1995. As of December 31, 1993, options for 43,000 shares remained to be granted.
Under both plans, for stock options and stock appreciation rights, the exercise price on each grant date equaled the closing market price on the grant date. Options are exercisable upon grant and expire up to 10 years and one month from date of grant. The status of the restricted stock granted under the Performance Incentive Stock Plan and options granted under both plans follows:
Restricted Stock Options ---------- ---------------------------- Number Number Price of Shares of Shares per Share ----------- --------- --------------- Outstanding at January 1, 1991 212,500 1,162,216 $ 7.13 - $34.25 Granted 97,000 194,000 $ 21.13 - $21.13 Exercised or Issued (34,437) (65,125) $ 7.13 - $16.00 --------- ---------- --------------- Outstanding at December 31, 1991 275,063 1,291,091 $ 7.13 - $34.25 Granted 101,000 215,000 $ 17.13 - $18.00 Exercised or Issued (37,422) (21,000) $ 13.00 - $16.00 Canceled (15,375) (50,000) $ 20.50 - $33.88 --------- ---------- --------------- Outstanding at December 31, 1992 323,266 1,435,091 $ 7.13 - $34.25 Granted 132,000 249,000 $ 25.13 - $26.25 Exercised or Issued (54,938) (152,125) $ 7.13 - $21.13 Canceled (84,141) (33,000) $ 20.50 - $33.88 --------- ---------- ---------------
Outstanding at December 31, 1993 316,187 1,498,966 $ 7.13 - $34.25 ========= ========== ===============
10: Retirement Benefits
Postretirement Benefit Plans Other Than Pensions
CMS Energy and its subsidiaries adopted SFAS 106 effective as of the beginning of 1992. The standard required CMS Energy to change its accounting for the cost of health care and life insurance benefits that are provided to retirees from a pay-as-you-go (cash) method to a full accrual method. CMS Energy's non-utility subsidiaries expensed their accumulated transition obligation liability. The amount of such transition obligation is not material to the presentation of the consolidated financial statements or significant to CMS Energy's total transition obligation. Consumers recorded a liability of $466 million for the accumulated transition obligation and a corresponding regulatory asset for anticipated recovery in utility rates.
Both the MPSC and FERC have generally adopted SFAS 106 costs for ratemaking purposes provided costs recovered through rates are placed in external funds until they are needed to pay benefits. The MPSC's generic order allows utilities three years to seek recovery of costs and provides for recovery from customers of any deferred costs incurred prior to the beginning of rate recovery of such costs. Consumers anticipates recovering its regulatory asset within 20 years. As discussed in Note 4, Consumers has requested recovery of the portion of these costs allocated to the electric business. In late 1994, Consumers plans to request recovery of the gas utility portion of these costs. CMS Energy plans to fund the benefits using external Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Associations. Funding of the health care benefits would begin when Consumers' rate recovery based on SFAS 106 begins. A portion of the life insurance benefits have previously been funded.
As of December 31, 1993, the actuary assumed that retiree health care costs increased 10.5 percent in 1994, then decreased gradually to 5.5 percent in 2000 and thereafter. The health care cost trend rate assumption significantly affects the amounts reported. For example, a 1 percentage point increase in each year would increase the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation as of December 31, 1993 by $75 million and the aggregate of the service and interest cost components of net periodic postretirement benefit costs for 1993 by $9 million.
For the years ended December 31, 1993 and 1992, the weighted average discount rate was 7.25 percent and 8 percent, respectively, and the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets was 8.5 percent. Net periodic postretirement benefit cost for health care benefits and life insurance benefits was $51 million in 1993 and $50 million in 1992. The 1993 and 1992 cost was comprised of $13 million and $11 million for service plus $38 million and $39 million for interest, respectively.
The funded status of the postretirement benefit plans is reconciled with the liability recorded at December 31 as follows:
In Millions 1993 1992 ------- ------- Actuarial present value of estimated benefits Retirees $ 282 $ 265 Eligible for retirement 54 50 Active (upon retirement) 190 177 ------- ------- Accumulated postretirement benefit obligation 526 492 Plan assets (premium deposit fund) at fair value 4 4 ------- ------- Projected postretirement benefit obligation in excess of plan assets (522) (488) Unrecognized prior service cost (39) (39) Unrecognized net loss 41 33 ------- ------- Recorded liability $(520) $(494) ======= =======
CMS Energy's postretirement health care plan is unfunded; the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation for that plan is $514 million and $482 million at December 31, 1993 and 1992, respectively. Consumers' regulatory asset is $510 million and $485 million at December 31, 1993 and 1992, respectively.
Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan
Certain management employees qualify under the SERP. Benefits are based on the employee's service and earnings as defined in the SERP. In 1988, a trust from which SERP benefits are paid was established and funded. Because the SERP is not a qualified plan under the Internal Revenue Code, earnings of the trust are taxable and trust assets are included in Consumers' consolidated assets. As of December 31, 1993 and 1992, trust assets at cost (which approximates market) were $18 million and $16 million, respectively, and were classified as other non-current assets.
Defined Benefit Pension Plan
A trusteed, non-contributory, defined benefit Pension Plan covers substantially all employees. The benefits are based on an employee's years of accredited service and earnings, as defined in the plan, during an employee's five highest years of earnings. Because the plan is fully funded, no contributions were made for plan years 1991 through 1993.
Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991 - ----------------------- ----- ----- ----- Discount rate 7.25% 8.5% 8.5% Rate of compensation increase 4.5% 5.5% 5.5% Expected long-term rate of return on assets 8.75% 8.75% 8.75%
Net Pension Plan and SERP costs consisted of:
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991 - ----------------------- ------ ------ ------ Service cost $ 19 $ 19 $ 18 Interest cost 50 48 48 Actual return on plan assets (92) (36) (88) Net amortization and deferral 34 (20) 29 ------ ------ ------ Net periodic pension cost $ 11 $ 11 $ 7 ====== ====== ======
The funded status of the Pension Plan and SERP reconciled to the pension liability recorded at December 31 was:
In Millions Pension Plan SERP -------------- ------------- 1993 1992 1993 1992 ----- ----- ----- -----
Actuarial present value of estimated benefits Vested $ 471 $ 349 $ 16 $ 11 Non-vested 56 49 - - ----- ----- ----- ----- Accumulated benefit obligation 527 398 16 11 Provision for future pay increases 138 177 8 6 ----- ----- ----- ----- Projected benefit obligation 665 575 24 17 Plan assets (primarily stocks and bonds, including $87 in 1993 and $64 in 1992 in common stock of CMS Energy) at fair value 692 631 - - ----- ----- ----- ----- Projected benefit obligation less than (in excess of) plan assets 27 56 (24) (17) Unrecognized net (gain) loss from experience different than assumed (56) (76) 7 2 Unrecognized prior service cost 45 49 1 1 Unrecognized net transition (asset) obligation (44) (49) 1 1 Adjustment to recognize minimum liability - - (1) - ----- ----- ----- ----- Recorded liability $ (28) $ (20) $ (16) $ (13) ====== ====== ====== =====
Beginning January 1, 1986, the amortization period for the Pension Plan's unrecognized net transition asset is 16 years and 11 years for the SERP's unrecognized net transition obligation. Prior service costs are amortized on a straight-line basis over the average remaining service period of active employees.
In 1991, certain eligible employees accepted early retirement incentives. The incentives consisted of lump-sum cash payments and increased pension payments. The pretax cost of the incentives was $25 million. Also in 1991, portions of the projected benefit obligation were settled which resulted in a pretax gain of $25 million that offset the early retirement costs.
11: Leases
CMS Energy, Consumers, and Enterprises lease various assets, including vehicles, aircraft, construction equipment, computer equipment, nuclear fuel and buildings. Consumers' nuclear fuel capital leasing arrangement was extended an additional year and is now scheduled to expire in November 1995. The maximum amount of nuclear fuel that can be leased increased from $55 million to $70 million. Consumers further increased this amount in early 1994 to $80 million. The lease provides for an additional one-year extension upon mutual agreement by the parties. Upon termination of the lease, the lessor would be entitled to a cash payment equal to its remaining investment, which was $57 million as of December 31, 1993. Consumers is responsible for payment of taxes, maintenance, operating costs, and insurance.
Minimum rental commitments under CMS Energy's non-cancelable leases at December 31, 1993, were:
In Millions Capital Operating Leases Leases ------- --------- 1994 $ 43 $ 9 1995 64 8 1996 16 3 1997 15 3 1998 13 3 1999 and thereafter 26 22 ----- ----- Total minimum lease payments 177 $ 48 ===== Less imputed interest 27 ----- Present value of net minimum lease payments 150 Less current portion 35 ----- Non-current portion (a) $115 =====
(a) In January 1994, Consumers amended its nuclear fuel lease to include fuel previously owned at Big Rock Point. This is estimated to increase the non-current portion of capital leases by approximately $6 million. Consumers recovers these charges from customers and accordingly charges payments for its capital and operating leases to operating expense. Operating lease charges, including charges to clearing and other accounts as of December 31, 1993, 1992 and 1991, were $18 million, $15 million and $15 million, respectively.
Capital lease expenses for the years ended December 31, 1993, 1992 and 1991 were $34 million, $47 million and $51 million, respectively. Included in these amounts for the years ended 1993, 1992 and 1991, are nuclear fuel lease expenses of $13 million, $17 million and $24 million, respectively.
12: Commitments, Contingencies and Other
Ludington Pumped Storage Plant Litigation
In 1986, the Attorney General filed a lawsuit on behalf of the State of Michigan in the Circuit Court of Ingham County, seeking damages from Consumers and Detroit Edison for alleged injuries to fishery resources because of the operation of the Ludington Pumped Storage Plant. The state sought $148 million (including $16 million of interest) for past injuries and $89,000 per day for future injuries, with the latter amount to be adjusted upon installation of "adequate" fish barriers and other changed conditions.
In 1987, the Attorney General filed a second lawsuit alleging that Consumers and Detroit Edison have breached a bottomlands lease agreement with the state and asked that the lease be declared void. This complaint was consolidated with the suit described in the preceding paragraph. In 1990, both of the lawsuits were dismissed on the basis of federal preemption. In 1993, the Court of Appeals overturned the dismissal, as to damages, effectively allowing the state to continue its damages lawsuit against Consumers and Detroit Edison, but generally affirmed the lower court's ruling as to the breach of lease claim. The Court of Appeals' ruling also limited any potential damages to those occurring no earlier than 1983. Consumers, Detroit Edison and the Attorney General have filed an application for leave to appeal with the Michigan Supreme Court. Consumers and Detroit Edison are seeking to have the trial court's dismissal of the damages claim affirmed.
Each year since 1989, Consumers and Detroit Edison have complied with FERC orders by installing a seasonal barrier net from April to October at the Ludington plant site. The FERC is now considering whether the barrier net (along with other actions by Consumers, including contributions to state fish-stocking programs) would be a satisfactory permanent solution.
Environmental Matters
Consumers is a so-called "Potentially Responsible Party" at several sites being administered under Superfund. Along with Consumers, there are numerous credit-worthy, potentially responsible parties with substantial assets cooperating with respect to the individual sites. Based on information currently known by management, Consumers and CMS Energy believe that it is unlikely that their liability at any of the known Superfund sites, individually or in total, will have a material adverse effect on their financial positions or results of operations.
The State of Michigan in 1990 passed amendments to the Environmental Response Act that established a state program similar to the federal Superfund law, though broader in scope. Under this law, Consumers expects that it will ultimately incur costs at a number of sites, including some of the 23 sites that formerly housed manufactured gas plant facilities, even those in which it has a partial or no current ownership interest. It is expected that in most cases, parties other than Consumers with current or former ownership interests may also be considered liable under the law and may be required to share in the costs of any site investigations and remedial actions. There is limited knowledge of manufactured gas plant contamination at these sites at this time. However, Consumers is continuing to monitor this issue.
In addition, at the request of the DNR, Consumers prepared plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies for three of these sites. Work plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies for four other sites have also been prepared. The purpose of a remedial investigation/feasibility study is to define the nature and extent of contamination at a site and to determine which of several possible remedial action alternatives, including no action, may be required under the Environmental Response Act. The DNR has approved two of the three plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies submitted and is currently reviewing the one remaining. The cost to conduct one of the approved studies will be approximately $250,000 based on bids received. Although the actual cost of conducting the remaining two remedial investigation/feasibility studies will not be known until bids are received from contractors, Consumers currently estimates the total cost of conducting the three studies submitted to the DNR to be less than $1 million.
The timing and extent of any further site investigation and remedial actions will depend, among other things, on requests received from the DNR and on future site usage by Consumers or other owners. Under the current schedule, Consumers anticipates the first remedial investigation/feasibility study would be completed in mid-1994. Consumers believes the results of the remedial investigation/feasibility studies will allow management to estimate a range of remedial cost estimates for the sites under study. Based on Consumers' knowledge of other utility remedial actions, remediation costs for Consumers for these sites may be substantial. In 1993, the MPSC addressed the question of recovery of investigation and remedial costs for another Michigan gas utility as part of that utility's gas rate case. In that proceeding, the MPSC determined that prudent investigation and remedial costs could be deferred and amortized over 10-year periods and prudent unamortized costs can be included for recovery in the utility's rate cases. The MPSC stated the length of the period may be reviewed from time to time, but any revisions would be prospective. Consumers and CMS Energy believe costs incurred for both investigation and any required remedial actions would be recoverable from utility customers under established regulatory policies and accordingly are not likely to materially affect their financial positions or results of operations.
Included in the 1990 amendments to the federal Clean Air Act are provisions that limit emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides and require enhanced emissions monitoring. All of Consumers' coal-fueled electric generating units burn low-sulfur coal and are presently operating at or near the sulfur dioxide emission limits which will be effective in 2000. Beginning in 1995, certain coal-fueled generating units will receive emissions allowances (all of Consumers' coal units will receive allowances beginning in 2000). Based on projected emissions from these units, Consumers expects to have excess allowances which may be sold or saved for future use.
The Clean Air Act's provisions require Consumers to make capital expenditures estimated to total $74 million through 1999 for completed, in-process and possible modifications at coal-fired units based on existing and proposed regulations. Management believes that Consumers' annual operating costs will not be materially affected.
The EPA has asked a number of utilities in the Great Lakes area to voluntarily retire certain equipment containing specific levels of polychlorinated biphenyls. Consumers believes that it is largely in compliance with the EPA's petition. Consumers is continuing to study the request and has been granted an extension for responding until March 30, 1994.
Capital Expenditures
CMS Energy estimates capital expenditures, including investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries, DSM and new lease commitments, of $792 million for 1994, $690 million for 1995 and $714 million for 1996.
Public Utility Holding Company Act Exemption
CMS Energy is exempt from registration under PUHCA. However, the Attorney General and the MMCG have asked the SEC to revoke CMS Energy's exemption from registration under PUHCA. In 1992, the MPSC filed a statement with the SEC recommending that CMS Energy's current exemption be revoked and a new exemption be issued conditioned upon certain reporting and operating requirements. If CMS Energy were to lose its current exemption, it would become more heavily regulated by the SEC; Consumers could ultimately be forced to divest either its electric or gas utility business; and CMS Energy would be restricted from conducting businesses that are not functionally related to the conduct of its utility business as determined by the SEC. CMS Energy is opposing this request and believes it will maintain its current exemption from registration under PUHCA.
Other
As of December 31, 1993, CMS Energy and Enterprises have guaranteed up to $90 million in contingent obligations of unconsolidated affiliates of Enterprises' subsidiaries.
NOMECO has hedged its gas supply obligations in the years 2001 through 2006 by purchasing the economic equivalent of 10,000 MMBtu per day at a fixed, escalated price starting at $2.82 per MMBtu in 2001. The settlement periods are each a one-year period ending December 31, 2001 through 2006 on 3.65 MMBtu. If the "floating price," essentially the then current Gulf Coast spot price, for a period is higher than the "fixed price," the seller pays NOMECO the difference, and vice versa. If a party's exposure at any time exceeds $2 million, that party is required to obtain a letter of credit in favor of the other party for the excess over $2 million, to a maximum of $10 million. At December 31, 1993, the seller had arranged a letter of credit in NOMECO's favor for $10 million. NOMECO also periodically enters into oil and gas price hedging arrangements to mitigate its exposure to price fluctuations on the sale of crude oil and natural gas. As of December 31, 1993, the fair value of these hedge arrangements was not material.
Consumers experienced an increase in complaints during 1993 relating to so-called stray voltage. Claimants contend that stray voltage results when small electrical currents present in grounded electric systems are diverted from their intended path. Investigation by Consumers of prior stray voltage complaints disclosed that many factors, including improper wiring and malfunctioning of on-farm equipment, can lead to the stray voltage phenomenon. Consumers maintains a policy of investigating all customer calls regarding stray voltage and working with customers to address their concerns including, when necessary, modifying the configuration of the customer's hook-up to Consumers. A complaint seeking certification as a class action suit was filed against Consumers in a local county circuit court in 1993. The complaint alleges the existence of a purported class that has incurred damages of up to $1 billion, primarily to certain livestock owned by the purported class, as a result of stray voltage from electricity being supplied by Consumers. Consumers believes the allegations to be without merit and intends to vigorously oppose the certification of the class and this suit.
In addition to the matters disclosed in these notes, Consumers and certain other subsidiaries of CMS Energy are parties to certain lawsuits and administrative proceedings before various courts and governmental agencies, arising from the ordinary course of business involving personal injury and property damage, contractual matters, environmental issues, federal and state taxes, rates, licensing and other matters.
The ultimate effect of the proceedings discussed in this note is not expected to have a material impact on CMS Energy's financial position or results of operations.
13: Jointly Owned Utility Facilities
Consumers is responsible for providing its share of financing for jointly owned facilities. The following table indicates the extent of Consumers' investment in jointly owned utility facilities:
In Millions December 31 1993 1992 - ----------- ---- ---- Net investment Ludington - 51% $114 $112 Campbell Unit 3 - 93.3% 349 360 Transmission lines - various 32 33
Accumulated depreciation Ludington $ 74 $ 71 Campbell Unit 3 210 199 Transmission lines 11 10
14: Supplemental Cash Flow Information
For purposes of the Statement of Cash Flows, all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less are considered cash equivalents. Other cash flow activities and non-cash investing and financing activities for the years ended December 31 were:
In Millions 1993 1992 1991 ------ ------ ------ Cash transactions Interest paid (net of amounts capitalized) $193 $203 $325 Income taxes paid (net of refunds) 32 19 21
Non-cash transactions Nuclear fuel placed under capital lease $ 28 $ 30 $ 6 Other assets placed under capital leases 30 39 21 Capital leases refinanced 42 - - Assumption of debt - 15 -
Changes in other assets and liabilities as shown on the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows at December 31 are described below:
In Millions 1993 1992 1991 ------ ------ ------ Sale of receivables, net $ 60 $ 25 $ - Accounts receivable 22 6 118 Accrued revenue (48) 88 7 Accrued refunds (48) (143) 102 Inventories (32) 23 (8) Accounts payable (31) 20 (70) Tax Reform Act refund reserve - - (77) Other current assets and liabilities, net (19) 46 (20) Non-current deferred amounts, net 9 (28) 108 ------ ------ ------ $ (87) $ 37 $ 160 ======= ====== ======
15: Reportable Segments
CMS Energy operates principally in the following five business segments: electric utility, gas utility, oil and gas exploration and production, independent power production, and gas transmission and marketing.
The Consolidated Statements of Income show operating revenue and pretax operating income by business segment. Other segment information follows:
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991 --------- -------- ------ Depreciation, depletion and amortization Electric utility $ 241 $ 230 $ 172 Gas utility 73 76 70 Oil and gas exploration and production 45 38 33 Independent power production 2 2 2 Gas transmission and marketing 1 1 - Other 3 1 6 -------- ------- -------- $ 365 $ 348 $ 283 ======== ======= ========
Identifiable assets Electric utility (a) $ 4,027 $3,812 $3,399 Gas utility 1,443 1,387 1,186 Oil and gas exploration and production 398 364 334 Independent power production 488 333 321 Gas transmission and marketing 75 60 45 Other 533 892 909 --------- ------- ------- $ 6,964 $6,848 $6,194 ========= ======= =======
Capital expenditures (b)(c)(d) Electric utility (e) $ 365 $ 353 $ 213 Gas utility 127 86 61 Oil and gas exploration and production 81 68 71 Independent power production 110 12 18 Gas transmission and marketing 14 6 17 Other 69 69 33 --------- ------- ------- $ 766 $ 594 $ 413 ========= ======= =======
(a) Includes abandoned Midland investment of $162 million, $175 million and $287 million for 1993, 1992 and 1991, respectively.
(b) Includes capital leases for nuclear fuel and other assets (see Note 14).
(c) Includes equity investments in unconsolidated partnerships of $108 million for 1993, $12 million for 1992 and $33 million for 1991.
(d) Certain prior year amounts have been adjusted for comparative purposes.
(e) Includes DSM costs of $52 million for 1993 and $26 million for 1992.
16: Summarized Financial Information of Significant Related Energy Supplier
Under the PPA with the MCV Partnership discussed in Note 3, Consumers' 1993 obligation to purchase electricity from the MCV Partnership was approximately 14 percent of Consumers' owned and contracted capacity. Summarized financial information of the MCV Partnership is shown below:
Statements of Income In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991 - ----------------------- ------ ------ ------ Operating revenue (a) $ 548 $ 488 $ 425 Operating expenses 362 315 278 ------ ------ ------ Operating income 186 173 147 Other expense, net (189) (190) (186) ------ ------ ------ Net loss $ (3) $ (17) $ (39) ====== ====== ======
Balance Sheets In Millions December 31 1993 1992 - ----------- ------ ------ Assets Current assets (a) $ 181 $ 165 Property, plant and equipment, net 2,073 2,124 Other assets 146 147 ------ ------ $2,400 $2,436 ====== ======
Liabilities and Partners' Equity Current liabilities $ 198 $ 189 Long-term debt and other non-current liabilities (b) 2,147 2,189 Partners' equity (c) 55 58 ------ ------ $2,400 $2,436 ====== ======
(a) Revenue from Consumers totaled $505 million, $444 million and $384 million for 1993, 1992 and 1991, respectively. As of December 31, 1993, 1992 and 1991, $44 million, $38 million and $33 million, respectively, were receivable from Consumers.
(b) FMLP is a beneficiary of an owner trust that is the lessor in a long-term direct finance lease with the lessee, MCV Partnership. CMS Holdings holds a 46.4 percent ownership interest in FMLP (see Note 3). At December 31, 1993 and 1992, lease obligations of $1.7 billion were owed to the owner trust of which FMLP is the sole beneficiary. CMS Holdings' share of the interest and principal portion for the 1993 lease payments was $63 million and $16 million, respectively, and for the 1992 lease payments was $65 million and $12 million, respectively. The lease payments service $1.2 billion and $1.3 billion in non-recourse debt outstanding as of December 31, 1993 and 1992, respectively, of the owner-trust whose beneficiary is FMLP. FMLP's debt is secured by the MCV Partnership's lease obligations, assets, and operating revenues. For 1993 and 1992, the owner-trust whose beneficiary is FMLP made debt payments of $172 million and $166 million, respectively, which included $10 million and $8 million principal and $25 million and $26 million interest, respectively, on the MCV Bonds held by MEC Development Corporation during part of 1991 and by Consumers through December 1993.
(c) CMS Midland's recorded investment in the MCV Partnership includes capitalized interest, which is being amortized to expense over the life of its investment in the MCV Partnership.
Arthur Andersen & Co.
Report of Independent Public Accountants
To CMS Energy Corporation:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and consolidated statements of long-term debt and preferred stock of CMS ENERGY CORPORATION (a Michigan corporation) and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1993 and 1992, and the related consolidated statements of income, common stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1993. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall consolidated financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of CMS Energy Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1993 and 1992, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1993 in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.
As discussed in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements, effective January 1, 1992, the Company changed its method of accounting for income taxes. Additionally, as discussed in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements, effective January 1, 1992, the Company changed its method of accounting for postretirement benefits other than pensions.
ARTHUR ANDERSEN & Co.
Detroit, Michigan, January 28, 1994.
(This page intentionally left blank)
Consumers Power Company
1993 Financial Statements
(This page intentionally left blank)
Consumers Power Company Management's Discussion and Analysis
Consumers is a combination electric and gas utility company serving most of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, and is the principal subsidiary of CMS Energy, an energy holding company. Consumers' customer base includes a mix of residential, commercial and diversified industrial customers, the largest of which is the automotive industry.
Consolidated 1993 Earnings
Consolidated net income after dividends on preferred stock totaled $187 million in 1993, compared to net losses of $255 million in 1992 and $260 million in 1991. The increased net income reflects the Settlement Order related to power purchases from the MCV Partnership. Earnings also reflect record setting electric sales and gas deliveries.
Cash Position, Financing and Investing
Consumers' operating cash requirements are met by its operating and financing activities. In 1993 and 1992, Consumers' cash from operations mainly resulted from its sale and transportation of natural gas and its sale and transmission of electricity. Cash from operations for 1993 primarily reflects record-setting electric sales and gas deliveries and reduced after-tax cash shortfalls resulting from Consumers' purchases of power from the MCV Partnership.
During 1992, Consumers' cash from operations increased as compared to 1991 primarily due to lower interest charges resulting from reduced levels of debt, partially offset by higher operating expenditures and reduced electric rates. In 1991, Consumers generated cash primarily from its consolidated operating and investing activities, including $859 million of net proceeds from the sale of a majority of the MCV Bonds.
Over the last three years, Consumers has used its cash primarily to fund its extensive construction expenditures and to improve the reliability of its transmission and distribution systems. Consumers has also used its cash to retire portions of long-term debt and to pay cash dividends.
Financing Activities
As a result of the 1992 quasi-reorganization (see Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements), and subsequent accumulated earnings, Consumers paid $133 million in common stock dividends during 1993 and declared a $16 million common stock dividend in January 1994 from 1993 earnings.
During 1993, Consumers significantly reduced its future interest charges by retiring approximately $51 million of high-cost outstanding debt and refinancing approximately $573 million of other debt at lower interest rates. For further information, see Note 7.
Investing Activities
Capital expenditures (excluding assets placed under capital leases of $58 million) and deferred demand-side management costs totaled $503 million in 1993 as compared to $437 million in 1992. These amounts primarily represent capital investments in Consumers' electric and gas utility segments. In December 1993, Consumers sold $309 million of MCV Bonds it held and used the net proceeds to temporarily reduce short-term borrowings and ultimately plans to reduce long-term debt and to finance its construction program.
Outlook
Consumers estimates that capital expenditures, including demand-side management and new lease commitments, related to its electric and gas utility operations will total approximately $1.5 billion over the next three years. In Millions Years Ended December 31 1994 1995 1996 ---- ---- ----
Consumers Construction (including DSM) $474 $425 $391 Nuclear fuel lease 46 4 45 Capital leases other than nuclear fuel 27 27 28 Michigan Gas Storage 6 5 7 ---- ---- ---- $553 $461 $471 ==== ==== ====
Consumers is required to redeem or retire approximately $741 million of long-term debt during 1994 through 1996. Cash generated by operations is expected to satisfy a substantial portion of these capital expenditures and debt retirements.
Consumers has several other available sources of credit including unsecured, committed lines of credit totaling $165 million and a $470 million working capital facility. Consumers has FERC authorization to issue or guarantee up to $900 million in short-term debt through December 31, 1994. Consumers uses short-term borrowings to finance working capital, seasonal fuel inventory and to pay for capital expenditures between long-term financings. Consumers has an agreement permitting the sales of certain accounts receivable for up to $500 million. As of December 31, 1993 and 1992, receivables sold totaled $285 million and $225 million, respectively. On February 15, 1994, Consumers increased the level of receivables sold to $335 million.
In October 1993, Consumers received MPSC authorization and is proceeding to issue $200 million of preferred stock in 1994. In February 1994, Consumers called or redeemed approximately $101 million of first mortgage bonds.
At December 31, 1993, Consumers' capital structure consisted of approximately 32 percent common equity, 4 percent preferred stock, and 64 percent long- and short-term debt (including capital leases and notes payable). Consumers' long term goal is to achieve and maintain a capital structure consisting of approximately 37 percent common equity, 8 percent preferred stock and 55 percent debt. Management expects to achieve this structure through debt reductions, accumulated earnings, the issuance of new preferred stock and equity investments from CMS Energy.
Electric Utility Operations
Comparative Results of Operations
Electric Pretax Operating Income: The improvement in 1993 pretax operating income compared to 1992 reflects an increase of $126 million relating to the resolution of the recoverability of MCV power purchase costs under the PPA and increased electric system sales of $45 million, partially offset by higher costs to improve system reliability. The 1992 decrease of $66 million from the 1991 level primarily resulted from an increased emphasis on system reliability improvements and decreased electric rates resulting from the full-year impact of a mid-1991 rate decrease.
In Millions 1993 1992 Over Over (Under) (Under) 1992 1991 ------ ------
Sales growth $ 34 $ 11 Weather 11 (16) Resolution of MCV power cost issues 126 - Other regulatory issues 5 (13) O&M, general taxes and depreciation (a) (44) (48) ----- ----- Total change $132 $(66) ===== =====
(a) Largely caused by Consumers' system reliability improvement program.
Electric Sales: Electric system sales in 1993 totaled a record 31.7 billion kWh, a 3.8 percent increase from 1992 levels. In 1993, residential and commercial sales increased 3.4 percent and 3.0 percent, respectively, while industrial sales increased 6.5 percent. Growth in the industrial sector was the strongest in the auto-related segments of fabricated and primary metals and transportation equipment. Electric system sales in 1992 totaled 30.5 billion kWh, essentially unchanged from the 1991 levels.
Electric Sales Millions of kWh 1993 1992 1991 ------ ------ ------
Residential 10,066 9,733 9,997 Commercial 8,909 8,652 8,692 Industrial 11,541 10,831 10,692 Sales for resale 1,142 1,292 1,311 ------ ------ ------ System sales (a) 31,658 30,508 30,692 ====== ====== ======
Total customers (000) 1,526 1,506 1,492 ====== ====== ======
(a) Excludes intersystem exchanges of power with other utilities through joint dispatching for the economic benefit of customers. The level of intersystem sales has been essentially unchanged during each of the last three years.
Power Costs: Power costs for 1993 totaled $908 million, a $31 million increase from the corresponding 1992 period. This increase primarily reflects greater power purchases from outside sources to meet increased sales demand and to supplement decreased generation at Palisades due to an extended outage. Power costs for 1992 totaled $877 million, a $17 million decrease as compared to 1991.
Operation and Maintenance: Increases in other operation and maintenance expense for 1993 and 1992 reflected increased expenditures to improve electric system reliability.
Depreciation: The increased depreciation for 1993 reflects additional capital investments in plant. The 1992 increase resulted from higher depreciation rates, increased amortization of abandoned nuclear investment and increased nuclear plant decommissioning expense.
Electric Utility Rates
Power Purchases from the MCV Partnership: Consumers is obligated to purchase the following amounts of contract capacity from the MCV Partnership under the PPA:
1995 and Year 1993 1994 thereafter - ---- ----- ----- ---------- MW 1,023 1,132 1,240
Since 1990, recovering capacity and fixed-energy costs for power purchased from the MCV Partnership has been a significant issue. Effective January 1, 1993, the Settlement Order allowed Consumers to recover from electric retail customers substantially all of the payments for its ongoing purchase of 915 MW of contract capacity from the MCV Partnership, significantly reducing the amount of future underrecoveries for these power costs. ABATE and the Attorney General have filed claims of appeal of the Settlement Order with the Court of Appeals.
Prior to the Settlement Order, Consumers had recorded losses for underrecoveries from 1990 through 1992. In December 1992, Consumers recognized an after-tax loss of $343 million for the present value of estimated future underrecoveries of power costs under the PPA as a result of the Settlement Order, based on management's best estimates regarding the future availability of the MCV Facility, and the effect of the future wholesale power market on the amount, timing and price at which various increments of the capacity above the MPSC-authorized level could be resold. Except for adjustments to the above loss to reflect the after-tax time value of money through accretion expense, no additional losses are expected unless actual future experience materially differs from management's estimates. The after-tax expense for the time value of money for the $343 million loss is estimated to be approximately $24 million in 1994, and various lower levels thereafter, including $22 million in 1995 and $20 million in 1996. Although the settlement losses were recorded in 1992, the after-tax cash underrecoveries associated with the Settlement Order were $59 million in 1993. Consumers believes there is and will be a market for the resale of capacity purchases from the MCV Partnership above the MPSC-authorized level. If Consumers is unable to sell any capacity above the current MPSC-authorized level, future additional after-tax losses and after-tax cash underrecoveries could be incurred. Estimates for the next five years if none of the additional capacity is sold are as follows:
After-tax, In Millions 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Expected cash underrecoveries $56 $65 $62 $61 $ 8
Possible additional under- recoveries and losses (a) $14 $20 $20 $22 $72
(a) If unable to sell any capacity above the MPSC's authorized level
The PPA, while requiring payment of a fixed energy charge, contains a "regulatory out" provision which permits Consumers to reduce the fixed energy charges payable to the MCV Partnership throughout the entire contract term if Consumers is not able to recover these amounts from its customers. Consumers and the MCV Partnership have commenced arbitration proceedings under the PPA to determine whether Consumers is entitled to exercise its regulatory out regarding fixed energy charges on the portion of available MCV capacity above the current MPSC-authorized levels. An arbitrator acceptable to both parties has been selected. If the arbitrator determines that Consumers cannot exercise its regulatory out, Consumers would be required to make these fixed energy payments to the MCV Partnership. The arbitration proceedings will also determine who is entitled to the fixed energy amounts for which Consumers did not receive full cost recovery during the years prior to settlement. As of December 31, 1993, these amounts total $26 million. Although Consumers intends to aggressively pursue its right to exercise the regulatory out, management cannot predict the outcome of the arbitration proceedings or any possible settlement of the matter. Accordingly, losses were recorded prior to 1993 for all fixed energy amounts at issue in the arbitration. In December 1993, Consumers made an irrevocable offer to pay through September 15, 2007, fixed energy charges to the MCV Partnership on all kWh delivered by the MCV Partnership to Consumers from the contract capacity in excess of 915 MW, which represents a portion of the fixed energy charges in dispute. Consumers made the offer to facilitate the sale of the remaining MCV Bonds in 1993.
The lessors of the MCV Facility have filed a lawsuit in federal district court against CMS Energy, Consumers and CMS Holdings. It alleges breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and negligent or willful misrepresentation relating to the MCV Partnership's failure to object to the Settlement Order in light of Consumers' interpretation of the Settlement Order, which is the subject of an arbitration between the MCV Partnership and Consumers. The action alleges damages in excess of $1 billion and seeks injunctive relief relative to Consumers' payments of the fixed energy charge. CMS Energy and Consumers believe that at all times they and CMS Holdings have conducted themselves properly and that the action is without merit. They also believe that a significant portion of the alleged damages represent fixed energy charges in dispute in the arbitration. CMS Energy and Consumers are unable to predict the outcome of this action. For further information regarding power purchases from the MCV Partnership, see Note 3.
PSCR Matters: Consumers began a planned refueling and maintenance outage at Palisades in June 1993. Following several required, unanticipated repairs that extended the outage, the plant returned to service in early November. Recovery of replacement power costs incurred by Consumers during the outage will be reviewed by the MPSC during the 1993 PSCR reconciliation of actual costs and revenues to determine the prudency of actions taken during the outage and any associated delays. Net replacement power costs were approximately $180,000 per day above the cost of fuel incurred when the plant is operating.
The Energy Act imposes an obligation on the utility industry, including Consumers, to decommission DOE uranium enrichment facilities. Consumers currently estimates its payments for decommissioning those facilities to be $2.4 million per year for 15 years beginning in 1992, escalating based on an inflation factor. Consumers believes these costs are recoverable from its customers under traditional regulatory policies.
Electric Rate Case: Consumers filed a request with the MPSC in May 1993 to increase its electric rates. Subsequently, as a result of changed estimates, Consumers revised its requested electric rate increase to $133 million annually based on a 1994 test year. Consumers also requested an additional annual electric rate increase of $38 million based on a 1995 test year. In March 1994, an ALJ issued a proposal for decision that recommended Consumers' 1994 final annual rate increase total approximately $83 million, and that the incremental requested 1995 increase not be granted at this time. The ALJ's recommendation included a lower return on electric common equity, reflected reduced anticipated debt costs due to the projected availability of more favorable interest rates and proposed a lower equity ratio for Consumers' projected capitalization structure. The ALJ did, however, generally support Consumers' rate design proposal to significantly reduce the level of subsidization of residential customers by commercial and industrial customers and generally supported a performance incentive which Consumers also supported. For further information, see Note 4.
Electric Conservation Efforts
In October 1993, Consumers completed the customer participation portion of several incentive-based demand-side management programs which were designed to encourage the efficient use of energy, primarily through conservation measures. Based on the MPSC's determination of Consumers' effectiveness in implementing these programs, Consumers' future rate of return on electric common equity may be adjusted either upward by up to 1 percent or downward by up to 2 percent, for one year following reconciliation hearings with the MPSC. Consumers believes it will receive an increase on its return on common equity based on having achieved all of the agreed upon objectives. For further information, see Note 4.
Electric Capital Expenditures
Consumers estimates capital expenditures, including demand-side management and new lease commitments, related to its electric utility operations of $396 million for 1994, $324 million for 1995 and $332 million for 1996.
Electric Environmental Matters and Health Concerns
The 1990 amendment of the federal Clean Air Act significantly increased the environmental constraints that utilities will operate under in the future. While the Clean Air Act's provisions will require Consumers to make certain capital expenditures in order to comply with the amendments for nitrogen oxide reductions, Consumers' generating units are presently operating at or near the sulfur dioxide emission limits which will be effective in the year 2000. Therefore, management believes that Consumers' annual operating costs will not be materially affected.
In 1990, the State of Michigan passed amendments to the Environmental Response Act, under which Consumers expects that it will ultimately incur costs at a number of sites, even those in which it has a partial or no current ownership interest. It is expected that in most cases, parties other than Consumers with current or former ownership interests may also be considered liable under the law and may be required to share in the costs of any site investigations and remedial actions. Consumers believes costs incurred for both investigation and any required remedial actions would be recoverable from its electric customers under established regulatory policies and accordingly are not likely to materially affect its financial position or results of operations.
Consumers is a so-called "Potentially Responsible Party" at several sites being administered under Superfund. Along with Consumers, there are numerous credit-worthy, potentially responsible parties with substantial assets cooperating with respect to the individual sites. Based on information currently known by management, Consumers believes that it is unlikely that its liability at any of the known Superfund sites, individually or in total, will have a material adverse effect on its financial position or results of operations.
Electric Outlook
Consumers expects economic growth, competitive rates and other factors to increase the demand for electricity within its service territory by approximately 1.8 percent per year over the next five years. For the near term, Consumers currently plans a reserve margin of 20 percent and expects to fill the additional capacity required through long- and short-term power purchases. Long-term purchased power will likely be obtained through a competitive bidding solicitation process utilizing the framework established by the MPSC in 1992. Capacity from the MCV Facility above the levels authorized by the MPSC may be offered by Consumers in connection with the solicitation.
A recent NRC review of Consumers' performance at Palisades showed a decline in performance. Management believes that an increased emphasis on internal assessments will improve performance at Palisades. To provide NRC senior management with a more in-depth assessment of plant performance, the NRC has initiated a diagnostic evaluation team inspection at Palisades. The inspection will be a broad-based evaluation of all aspects of nuclear plant operation and management which is expected to commence in March 1994, with results of the evaluation expected to be available in May 1994. The outcome of this evaluation cannot be predicted. Similar reviews conducted at nuclear plants of other utilities in recent years have in some cases resulted in increased regulatory oversight or required actions to improve plant operations, maintenance or condition.
Consumers is currently collecting $45 million annually from electric retail customers for the future decommissioning of its two nuclear plants. Consumers believes these amounts will be adequate to meet current decommissioning cost estimates. For further information regarding nuclear decommissioning, see Note 2.
Consumers' on-site storage pool at Palisades is at capacity, and it is unlikely that the DOE will begin accepting any spent nuclear fuel by the originally scheduled date in 1998. Consumers is using NRC-approved dry casks, which are steel and concrete vaults, for temporary storage. Several appeals relating to NRC approval of the casks are now pending at the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. If Consumers is unable to continue to use the casks as planned, significant costs, including replacement power costs during any resulting plant shutdown, could be incurred.
Consumers has experienced an increase in complaints in 1993 relating primarily to the effect of so-called stray voltage on certain livestock. A complaint seeking certification as a class action suit has been filed against Consumers alleging significant damages, primarily related to certain livestock, which Consumers believes to be without merit (see Note 12).
Some of Consumers' larger industrial customers are exploring the possibility of constructing and operating their own on-site generating facilities. Consumers is actively working with these customers to develop rate and service alternatives that are competitive with self-generation options. Although Consumers' electric rates are competitive with other regional utilities, Consumers has on file with the FERC two open access interconnection tariffs which could have the effect of increasing competition for wholesale customers. As part of its current electric rate case, Consumers has requested that the MPSC reduce the level of rate subsidization of residential customers by commercial and industrial customers so as to further improve rate competitiveness for its largest customers.
The MPSC has completed a hearing on a proposal by ABATE to create an experimental retail wheeling tariff. Certain other parties have proposals in support of retail wheeling under development. In August 1993, an ALJ recommended that the MPSC reject the proposed experiment. An MPSC order is expected early in 1994.
Gas Utility Operations
Comparative Results of Operations
Gas Pretax Operating Income: For 1993, pretax operating income increased $37 million compared to 1992, reflecting higher gas deliveries (both sales and transportation volumes) and more favorable regulatory recovery of gas costs related to transportation. During 1992, gas pretax operating income increased $45 million from the 1991 level, essentially for many of the same reasons as the current period.
In Millions 1993 1992 Over Over (Under) (Under) 1992 1991 ------ ------
Sales growth $ 7 $ 14 Weather 10 6 Regulatory recovery of gas cost 12 48 O&M, general taxes and depreciation 8 (23) ------ ------ Total change $ 37 $ 45 ====== ======
Gas Deliveries: Gas sales and gas transported in 1993 totaled 410.6 bcf, a 6.9 percent increase from 1992. In 1992, gas sales and gas transported totaled 384.1 bcf, a 6.1 percent increase from 1991 deliveries.
Gas Deliveries Bcf 1993 1992 1991 ----- ----- -----
Residential 174.9 166.7 157.2 Commercial 55.9 53.4 50.2 Industrial 13.9 13.5 14.5 Other .2 .2 .2 ----- ----- ----- Gas sales 244.9 233.8 222.1 Transportation deliveries 70.5 66.4 61.5 Transportation for MCV 73.4 63.5 55.0 Off-system transportation service 21.8 20.4 23.4 ----- ----- ----- Total deliveries 410.6 384.1 362.0 ===== ===== =====
Total customers (000) 1,423 1,402 1,382 ===== ===== =====
Gas Utility Rates
Consumers currently plans to file a request in 1994 with the MPSC to increase its gas rates. The request would include, among other things, costs for postretirement benefits computed under SFAS 106, Employers' Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other than Pensions. A final order should be received approximately nine to twelve months after the request is filed.
Certain of Consumers' direct gas suppliers have contract prices tied to the price Consumers pays Trunkline for its gas. The Trunkline contract covers gas deliveries through October 1994 and is at a price reduced in September 1993. Some of Consumers' direct gas suppliers have claimed that the reduced Trunkline gas cost is not a proper reference price under their contracts with Consumers and that their contracts are terminable after a 12-month period. Consumers is disputing these claims.
In 1992, the FERC issued Order 636, which makes a number of significant changes to the structure of the services provided by interstate natural gas pipelines to be implemented by the 1993-94 winter heating season. Consumers is a significant purchaser of gas from an interstate pipeline (Trunkline) and is a major transportation customer of a number of pipelines. Management believes that Consumers will recover any transition costs it may incur and such restructuring will not have a significant impact on its financial position or results of operations.
In July 1993, Michigan Gas Storage submitted a notice of rate change with the FERC to revise its operation and maintenance expenses for 1993 and update plant costs to reflect the addition of approximately $27 million of new plant additions in 1993 and began collecting the revised rates subject to refund and a hearing in February 1994. Hearings or settlement conferences will follow. For further information regarding gas utility rates, see Note 4.
Gas Capital Expenditures
Consumers estimates capital expenditures, including new lease commitments, related to its gas utility operations of $99 million for 1994, $88 million for 1995 and $81 million for 1996.
Gas Environmental Matters
Under the Environmental Response Act, Consumers expects that it will ultimately incur costs at a number of sites, including some of the 23 sites that formerly housed manufactured gas plant facilities, even those in which it has a partial or no current ownership interest. It is expected that in most cases, parties other than Consumers with current or former ownership interests may also be considered liable under the law and may be required to share in the costs of any site investigations and remedial actions. There is limited knowledge of manufactured gas plant contamination at these sites at this time. However, Consumers is continuing to monitor this issue.
In addition, at the request of the DNR, Consumers prepared plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies for three of these sites. Work plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies for four other sites have also been prepared. The DNR has approved two of the three plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies submitted and is currently reviewing the one remaining. Consumers currently estimates the total cost of conducting the three studies submitted to the DNR to be less than $1 million.
The timing and extent of any further site investigation and remedial actions will depend, among other things, on requests received from the DNR and on future site usage by Consumers or other owners. Under the current schedule, Consumers anticipates the first remedial investigation/feasibility study would be completed in mid-1994. Consumers believes the results of the remedial investigation/feasibility studies will allow management to estimate a range of remedial cost estimates for the sites under study, which may be substantial. In 1993, the MPSC addressed the question of recovery of investigation and remedial costs for another Michigan gas utility as part of that utility's gas rate case. In that proceeding, the MPSC determined that prudent investigation and remedial costs could be deferred and amortized over 10-year periods and prudent unamortized costs can be included for recovery in the utility's rate cases. Consumers believes costs incurred for both investigation and any required remedial actions would be recoverable from gas utility customers under established regulatory policies and accordingly are not likely to materially affect its financial position or results of operations.
Gas Outlook
In 1993, Consumers purchased approximately 85 percent of its required gas supply under long-term contracts, and the balance on the spot market. Trunkline supplied approximately 41 percent of the total requirement. Consumers expects gas supply reliability to be ensured through long-term supply contracts, with purchases in the short-term spot market when economically beneficial. Management believes that Consumers' ability to purchase gas during the off-season and store it in its extensive underground storage facilities will continue to help provide customers with low-cost, competitive gas rates.
Consumers anticipates growth in gas deliveries of approximately 0.6 percent per year over the next five years. Management believes that environmental benefits, along with the federal requirements included in the Energy Act, create an opportunity for growth in the natural gas vehicle industry.
Other
Other Income: The 1993 other income level reflects lower Midland-related losses than experienced in 1992. The 1992 loss included a $343 million charge related to the Settlement Order. The 1991 loss included $294 million, related to an MPSC order received in 1991 that allowed Consumers to recover only $760 million of remaining abandoned Midland investment, and a $92 million loss related to the cancellation of the CMS Debentures.
Public Utility Holding Company Act Exemption: CMS Energy is exempt from registration under PUHCA. However, the Attorney General and the MMCG have asked the SEC to revoke CMS Energy's exemption from registration under PUHCA. On April 15, 1992, the MPSC filed a statement with the SEC recommending that CMS Energy's current exemption be revoked and a new exemption be issued conditioned upon certain reporting and operating requirements. If CMS Energy were to lose its current exemption, it would become more heavily regulated by the SEC; Consumers could ultimately be forced to divest either its electric or gas utility business; and CMS Energy would be restricted from conducting businesses that are not functionally related to the conduct of its utility business as determined by the SEC. CMS Energy is opposing this request and believes it will maintain its current exemption from registration under PUHCA.
Consumers Power Company Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
1: Corporate Structure
Consumers is a combination electric and gas utility company serving most of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, and is the principal subsidiary of CMS Energy, an energy holding company. Consumers' customer base includes a mix of residential, commercial and diversified industrial customers, the largest of which is the automotive industry.
2: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Other Matters
Basis of Presentation
The consolidated financial statements include Consumers and its wholly owned subsidiaries. Consumers eliminates all material transactions between its consolidated companies. Consumers uses the equity method of accounting for investments in its companies and partnerships where it has more than a 20 percent but less than a majority ownership interest.
Gas Inventory
Consumers uses the weighted average cost method for valuing working gas inventory. Cushion gas, which is gas stored to maintain reservoir pressure for recovery of working gas, is recorded in the appropriate gas utility plant account. Consumers stores gas inventory in its underground storage facilities.
Maintenance, Depreciation and Depletion
Property repairs and minor property replacements are charged to maintenance expense. Depreciable property retired or sold plus cost of removal (net of salvage credits) is charged to accumulated depreciation. Consumers bases depreciation provisions for utility plant on straight-line and units-of-production rates approved by the MPSC. In May 1991, the MPSC approved an increase of approximately $15 million annually in Consumers' electric and common utility plant depreciation rates. The composite depreciation rate for electric utility property was 3.4 percent for 1993 and 1992 and 3.3 percent for 1991. The composite rate for gas utility plant was 4.4 percent for 1993 and 4.3 percent for 1992 and 1991. The composite rate for other plant and property was 4.7 percent for 1993, 5.8 percent for 1992 and 3.7 percent for 1991.
New Accounting Standards
In November 1992, the FASB issued SFAS 112, Employers' Accounting for Postemployment Benefits, which Consumers adopted January 1, 1994. Consumers pays for several postemployment benefits, the most significant being workers compensation. Because Consumers' postemployment benefit plans do not vest or accumulate, the standard did not materially impact Consumers' financial position or results of operations. For new accounting standards related to financial instruments, see Note 8.
Nuclear Fuel, Decommissioning and Other Nuclear Matters
Consumers amortizes nuclear fuel cost to fuel expense based on the quantity of heat produced for electric generation. Interest on leased nuclear fuel is expensed as incurred. Under federal law, the DOE is responsible for permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel at costs to be paid by affected utilities under various payment options. However, in a statement released February 17, 1994, the DOE asserted that it does not have a legal obligation to accept spent nuclear fuel without an operational repository. The DOE is exploring options to offset the costs incurred by nuclear utilities in continuing to store spent nuclear fuel on site. For fuel burned after April 6, 1983, Consumers charges disposal costs to nuclear fuel expense, recovers it through electric rates and remits it to the DOE quarterly. Consumers has elected to defer payment for disposal of spent nuclear fuel burned before April 7, 1983 until the spent fuel is delivered to the DOE. As of December 31, 1993, Consumers has recorded a liability to the DOE of $90 million, including interest, to dispose of spent nuclear fuel burned before April 7, 1983. Consumers has been recovering through electric rates the amount of this liability, excluding a portion of interest. Consumers' liability to the DOE becomes due when the DOE takes possession of Consumers' spent nuclear fuel, which was originally scheduled to occur in 1998.
In April 1993, the NRC approved the design of the dry spent fuel storage casks now being used by Consumers at Palisades. In May 1993, the Attorney General and certain other parties commenced litigation to block Consumers' use of the storage casks, alleging that the NRC had failed to comply adequately with the National Environmental Policy Act. As of mid-February 1994, the courts have declined to prevent such use and have refused to issue temporary restraining orders or stays. Several appeals relating to this matter are now pending at the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Consumers loaded two dry storage casks with spent nuclear fuel in 1993 and expects to load additional casks in 1994 prior to Palisades' 1995 refueling. If Consumers is unable to continue to use the casks as planned, significant costs, including replacement power costs during any resulting plant shutdown, could be incurred.
Consumers currently estimates decommissioning costs (decontamination and dismantlement) of $208 million and $399 million, in 1993 dollars, for the Big Rock Point and Palisades nuclear plants, respectively. At December 31, 1993, Consumers had recorded $171 million of decommissioning costs and classified the obligation as accumulated depreciation. In January 1987, Consumers began collecting estimated costs to decommission its two nuclear plants through a monthly surcharge to electric customers which currently totals $45 million annually. Consumers expects to file updated decommissioning estimates with the MPSC on or before March 31, 1995. Amounts collected from electric retail customers are deposited in trust. Trust earnings are recorded as an investment with a corresponding credit included in accumulated depreciation. The total amount of the trust will be available for decommissioning Big Rock Point and Palisades at the end of their respective license periods in 2000 and 2007. Consumers believes the amounts being collected are adequate to meet its currently estimated decommissioning costs and current NRC requirements.
In November 1993, Palisades returned to service following a planned refueling and maintenance outage that had been extended due to several unanticipated repairs. The results of an NRC review of Consumers' performance at Palisades published shortly thereafter showed a decline in performance ratings for the plant. Management believes that an increased emphasis on internal assessments will improve performance at Palisades. In order to provide NRC senior management with a more in-depth assessment of plant performance, the NRC has initiated a diagnostic evaluation team inspection at Palisades. The inspection will be a broad-based evaluation of all aspects of nuclear plant operation and management. The evaluation is expected to commence in March 1994, with results of the evaluation expected to be available in May 1994. The outcome of this evaluation cannot be predicted. Similar reviews conducted at nuclear plants of other utilities in recent years have in some cases resulted in increased regulatory oversight or required actions to improve plant operations, maintenance or condition.
Plateau Resources Ltd.
In August 1993, Consumers sold its ownership interest in Plateau to U. S. Energy Corp. As a result of the sale, approximately $14 million of Plateau's cash and cash equivalents, other assets and liabilities, including certain future decommissioning, environmental and other contingent liabilities were transferred to U. S. Energy Corp. In view of prior write-offs, this transaction did not result in any material gains or additional losses.
Reclassifications
Consumers and the MCV Partnership (see Note 17) have reclassified certain prior year amounts for comparative purposes. These reclassifications did not affect the net losses for the years presented.
Revenue and Fuel Costs
Consumers accrues revenue for electricity and gas used by its customers but not billed at the end of an accounting period. Consumers also accrues or reduces revenue for any underrecovery or overrecovery of electric power supply costs and natural gas costs by establishing a corresponding asset or liability until Consumers bills these unrecovered costs or refunds the excess recoveries to customers after reconciliation hearings conducted before the MPSC.
Utility Regulation
Consumers accounts for the effects of regulation under SFAS 71, Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation. As a result, the actions of regulators affect when revenues, expenses, assets and liabilities are recognized.
Other
For significant accounting policies regarding cash equivalents, see Note 14; for income taxes, see Note 5; and for pensions and other postretirement benefits, see Note 10.
3: The Midland Cogeneration Venture
The MCV Partnership, which leases and operates the MCV Facility, contracted to supply electricity and steam to The Dow Chemical Company and to sell electricity to Consumers for a 35-year period beginning in March 1990. At December 31, 1993, Consumers, through its subsidiaries, held the following assets related to the MCV: 1) CMS Midland owned a 49 percent general partnership interest in the MCV Partnership; and 2) CMS Holdings held through the FMLP a 35 percent lessor interest in the MCV Facility. In late 1993, Consumers sold its remaining $309 million investment in the MCV Bonds.
Power Purchases from the MCV Partnership
Consumers is obligated to purchase the following amounts of contract capacity from the MCV Partnership under the PPA:
1995 and Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 thereafter - ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---------- MW 806 915 1,023 1,132 1,240
During 1992 and 1991, the MPSC only allowed Consumers to recover costs of power purchased from the MCV Partnership based on delivered energy at rates less than Consumers paid for 840 MW in 1992 and 806 MW in 1991. As a result, Consumers recorded after-tax losses of $86 million in 1992 and $124 million in 1991.
On March 31, 1993, the MPSC approved, with modifications, the Revised Settlement Proposal which had been co-sponsored by Consumers, the MPSC staff and 10 small power and cogeneration developers. These parties accepted the Settlement Order and the MCV Partnership confirmed that it did not object to its terms. ABATE and the Attorney General have filed claims of appeal of the Settlement Order with the Court of Appeals.
The Settlement Order determined the cost of power purchased from the MCV Partnership that Consumers can recover from its electric retail customers and will significantly reduce the amount of future underrecoveries for these power costs. Effective January 1, 1993, the Settlement Order allowed Consumers to recover substantially all of the payments for its ongoing purchase of 915 MW of contract capacity from the MCV Partnership. Capacity and energy purchases from the MCV Partnership above the 915 MW level can be competitively bid into Consumers' next solicitation for power or, if necessary, utilized for current power needs with a prudency review and a pricing recovery determination in annual PSCR cases. In either instance, the MPSC would determine the levels of recovery from customers for the power purchased. The Settlement Order also provides Consumers the right to remarket all of the remaining capacity to third parties.
The PPA requires Consumers to pay a minimum levelized average capacity charge of 3.77 cents per kWh, a fixed energy charge and a variable energy charge based primarily on Consumers' average cost of coal consumed. The Settlement Order provided Consumers two options for the recovery that could be used for capacity charges paid to the MCV Partnership. Under the option selected, Consumers is scheduling deliveries of energy from the MCV Partnership whenever it has energy available up to hourly availability limits, or "caps," for the 915 MW of capacity authorized for recovery in the Settlement Order. Consumers can recover an average 3.62 cents per kWh capacity charge and the prescribed energy charges associated with the scheduled deliveries within the caps, whether or not those deliveries are scheduled on an economic basis. Through December 31, 1997, there is no cap applied during on-peak hours to Consumers' recovery for the purchase of capacity made available within the 915 MW authorized. Recovery for purchases during off-peak hours is capped at 80 percent in 1993, 82 percent in 1994 and 1995, 84 percent in 1996 and 1997, increasing to 88.7 percent in 1998 and thereafter at which time the 88.7 percent cap is applicable during all hours. For all economic energy deliveries above the caps to 915 MW, the option also allows Consumers to recover 1/2 cent per kWh capacity payment in addition to the corresponding energy charge.
In December 1992, Consumers recognized an after-tax loss of $343 million for the present value of estimated future underrecoveries of power costs under the PPA as a result of the Settlement Order. This loss included management's best estimates regarding the future availability of the MCV Facility, and the effect of the future wholesale power market on the amount, timing and price at which various increments of the capacity above the MPSC-authorized level could be resold. Except for adjustments to the above loss to reflect the after-tax time value of money through accretion expense, no additional losses are expected unless actual future experience materially differs from management's estimates. Because the calculation of the 1992 loss depended in part upon estimates of future unregulated sales of energy to third parties, a more conservative or risk-free investment rate of 7 percent was used to calculate $188 million of the total $343 million after-tax loss. The remaining portion of the loss was calculated using an 8.5 percent discount rate reflecting Consumers' incremental borrowing rate as required by SFAS 90, Regulated Enterprises- Accounting for Abandonments and Disallowances of Plant Costs. The after- tax expense for the time value of money for the loss is estimated to be approximately $24 million in 1994, and various lower levels thereafter, including $22 million in 1995 and $20 million in 1996. Although the settlement losses were recorded in 1992, the after-tax cash underrecoveries, including fixed energy charges, associated with the Settlement Order were $59 million in 1993. Consumers believes there is and will be a market for the resale of capacity purchases from the MCV Partnership above the MPSC-authorized level. However, if Consumers is unable to sell any capacity above the current MPSC-authorized level, future additional after-tax losses and after-tax cash underrecoveries could be incurred. Consumers' estimates of its future after-tax cash underrecoveries and possible additional losses for the next five years if none of the additional capacity is sold are as follows:
After-tax, In Millions 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Expected cash underrecoveries $56 $65 $62 $61 $ 8
Possible additional under- recoveries and losses (a) $14 $20 $20 $22 $72
(a) If unable to sell any capacity above the MPSC's authorized level
The undiscounted, after-tax amount of the $343 million loss was $789 million. At December 31, 1993, the after-tax present value of the Settlement Order liability had been reduced to $307 million, which reflects after-tax cash underrecoveries related to capacity totaling $(54) million, after-tax accretion expense of $23 million and a $(5) million adjustment due to the 1993 corporate tax rate change (see Note 5).
The PPA, while requiring payment of a fixed energy charge, contains a "regulatory out" provision which permits Consumers to reduce the fixed energy charges payable to the MCV Partnership throughout the entire contract term if Consumers is not able to recover these amounts from its customers. In connection with the MPSC's approval of the Revised Settlement Proposal, Consumers and the MCV Partnership have commenced arbitration proceedings under the PPA to determine whether Consumers is entitled to exercise its regulatory out regarding fixed energy charges on the portion of available MCV capacity above the current MPSC-authorized levels. An arbitrator acceptable to both parties has been selected. If the arbitrator determines that Consumers cannot exercise its regulatory out, Consumers would be required to make these fixed energy payments to the MCV Partnership even though Consumers may not be recovering these costs. The arbitration proceedings will also determine who is entitled to the fixed energy amounts for which Consumers did not receive full cost recovery during the years prior to settlement. Although Consumers believes its position on arbitration is sound and intends to aggressively pursue its right to exercise the regulatory out, management cannot predict the outcome of the arbitration proceedings or any possible settlement of the matter. Accordingly, losses were recorded prior to 1993 for all fixed energy amounts at issue in the arbitration. As of December 31, 1993, approximately $20 million has been escrowed by Consumers and is included in Consumers' temporary cash investments. In December 1993, Consumers made an irrevocable offer to pay through September 15, 2007, fixed energy charges to the MCV Partnership on all kWh delivered by the MCV Partnership to Consumers from the contract capacity in excess of 915 MW, which represents a portion of the fixed energy charges in dispute. Consumers made the offer to facilitate the sale of the remaining MCV Bonds in 1993.
The lessors of the MCV Facility have filed a lawsuit in federal district court against CMS Energy, Consumers and CMS Holdings. It alleges breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and negligent or willful misrepresentation relating to the MCV Partnership's failure to object to the Settlement Order in light of Consumers' interpretation of the Settlement Order, which is the subject of an arbitration between the MCV Partnership and Consumers. The action alleges damages in excess of $1 billion and seeks injunctive relief relative to Consumers' payments of the fixed energy charge. CMS Energy and Consumers believe that at all times they and CMS Holdings have conducted themselves properly and that the action is without merit. They also believe that a significant portion of the alleged damages represent fixed energy charges in dispute in the arbitration. CMS Energy and Consumers are unable to predict the outcome of this action.
PSCR Matters: Consistent with the terms of the Settlement Order, Consumers has withdrawn its appeals of various MPSC orders issued in connection with the 1992, 1991 and 1990 PSCR cases. Consumers also agreed not to appeal any MCV-related issues raised in future orders for these plan cases and related reconciliations to the extent those issues are resolved by the Settlement Order. Consumers made refunds, including interest, of $69 million in 1993 and $29 million in 1992 to customers for overrecoveries in connection with the 1991 and 1990 PSCR reconciliation cases, respectively. These amounts were included in losses recorded prior to 1993. In 1992, Consumers recovered MCV power purchase costs consistent with the MPSC's 1992 plan case order, and does not anticipate that any MCV-related refunds will be required.
4: Rate Matters
Electric Rate Case
Consumers filed a request with the MPSC in May 1993 to increase its electric rates. Subsequently, as a result of changed estimates, Consumers revised its requested electric rate increase to $133 million annually based on a 1994 test year. Consumers also requested an additional annual electric rate increase of $38 million based on a 1995 test year. Consumers' request included increased future expenditures primarily related to capital additions, demand-side management programs, operation and maintenance, higher depreciation and postretirement benefits computed under SFAS 106, Employers' Accounting for Postretirement Benefits Other than Pensions. The filing also proposed experimental incentive provisions that would either reward or penalize Consumers, based on its operating performance. In addition, Consumers would share any returns above its MPSC-authorized level with customers in exchange for the ability to earn not lower than one percentage point below its authorized level.
In March 1994, an ALJ issued a proposal for decision that recommended Consumers' 1994 final annual rate increase total approximately $83 million, and that the incremental requested 1995 increase not be granted at this time. The ALJ's recommendation included a lower return on electric common equity, reflected reduced anticipated debt costs due to the projected availability of more favorable interest rates and proposed a lower equity ratio for Consumers' projected capitalization structure. The ALJ did, however, generally support Consumers' rate design proposal to significantly reduce the level of subsidization of residential customers by commercial and industrial customers and generally supported the performance incentive but not the shared return mechanism discussed above.
Abandoned Midland Project: In July 1984, Consumers abandoned construction of its unfinished nuclear power plant located in Midland, Michigan, and subsequently took a series of write-downs. In May 1991, Consumers began collecting $35 million pretax annually for the next 10 years and is amortizing the assets against current income over the recovery period using an interest method. Amortization for 1993, 1992 and 1991 was $28 million, $28 million and $18 million, respectively.
Consumers was not permitted to earn a return on the portion of the abandoned Midland investment for which the MPSC was allowing recovery. Therefore, under SFAS 90, the recorded losses described above included amounts that reduced the recoverable asset to the present value of future recoveries. During the remaining recovery period, part of the prior losses will be reversed to adjust the unrecovered asset to its present value. and is reflected as accretion income. An after-tax total of approximately $35 million of the prior losses remains to be included in accretion income through April 2001. Several parties, including the Attorney General, have filed claims of appeal with the Court of Appeals regarding MPSC orders issued in May and July 1991 that specified the recovery of abandoned investment.
Electric Demand-side Management: As a result of settlement discussions regarding demand-side management and an MPSC order in July 1991, Consumers agreed to spend $65 million over two years on demand-side management programs. Based on the MPSC's determination of Consumers' effectiveness in implementing these programs, Consumers' future rate of return on common equity may be adjusted either upward by up to 1 percent or downward by up to 2 percent. This adjustment, if implemented, would be applied to Consumers' retail electric tariff rates and be in effect for one year following reconciliation hearings with the MPSC that are expected to be initiated in the first quarter of 1994. The estimated revenue effects of the potential adjustment range from an $11 million increase to a $22 million decrease. Consumers believes it will receive an increase on its return on common equity based on having achieved all of the agreed upon objectives.
On October 1, 1993, Consumers completed the customer participation portion of these programs and as part of its current electric rate case has requested MPSC authorization to continue certain programs in 1994. Consumers has also requested recovery of demand-side management expenditures which exceeded the $65 million level. Consumers is deferring program costs and amortizing the costs over the period these costs are being recovered from its customers in accordance with an accounting order issued by the MPSC in September 1992. The unamortized balance of deferred costs at December 31, 1993 and 1992 was $71 million and $25 million, respectively.
PSCR Issues
Consumers began a planned refueling and maintenance outage at Palisades in June 1993. Following several required, unanticipated repairs that extended the outage, the plant returned to service in early November. Recovery of replacement power costs incurred by Consumers during the outage will be reviewed by the MPSC during the 1993 PSCR reconciliation of actual costs and revenues to determine the prudency of actions taken during the outage. Any finding of delay due to imprudence could result in disallowances of a portion of replacement power costs. Net replacement power costs were approximately $180,000 per day above the cost of fuel incurred when the plant is operating.
The Energy Act imposes an obligation on the utility industry, including Consumers, to decommission DOE uranium enrichment facilities. Consumers currently estimates its payments for decommissioning those facilities to be $2.4 million per year for 15 years beginning in 1992, escalating based on an inflation factor. Consumers believes these costs are recoverable from its customers under traditional regulatory policies. As of December 31, 1993, Consumers' remaining estimated liability was approximately $34 million. Consumers has a regulatory asset of $34 million for the expected recovery of this amount in electric rates. GCR Issues
In connection with its 1991 GCR reconciliation case, Consumers refunded $36 million, including interest, to its firm sales and transportation rate customers in April 1992. Consumers accrued the full amount for this refund in 1991.
The MPSC issued an order during 1993 that approved an interim settlement agreement for the 12 months ended March 31, 1993. As a result of the settlement, Consumers refunded in August 1993, to its GCR and transportation customers, approximately $22 million, including interest. Consumers previously accrued amounts sufficient for this refund.
The MPSC, in a February 1993 order, provided that the price payable to certain intrastate gas producers by Consumers be reduced prospectively. As a result, Consumers was not allowed to recover approximately $13 million of costs incurred prior to February 8, 1993. In 1991, Consumers accrued a loss sufficient for this issue. Future disallowances are not anticipated, unless the remaining appeals filed by the intrastate producers are successful.
In 1992, the FERC approved a settlement involving Consumers, Trunkline and certain other parties, which resolved numerous claims and proceedings concerning Trunkline liquified natural gas costs. The settlement represents significant gas cost savings for Consumers and its customers in future years. As part of the settlement, Consumers will not incur any transition costs from Trunkline as a result of FERC Order 636. In November 1992, Consumers had recorded a liability and regulatory asset for the principal amount of payments to Trunkline over a five-year period and a regulatory asset. On May 11, 1993, the MPSC approved a separate settlement agreement that provides Consumers with full recovery of these costs over a five-year period. At December 31, 1993, Consumers' remaining liability and regulatory asset was $116 million.
Other
Certain of Consumers' direct gas suppliers have contract prices tied to the price Consumers pays Trunkline for its gas. On September 1, 1993, Consumers commenced gas purchases from Trunkline under a continuation of prior sales agreements. The current contract covers gas deliveries through October 1994 and is at a reduced price compared to prior gas sales. Some of Consumers' direct gas suppliers have claimed that the reduced Trunkline gas cost is not a proper reference price under their contracts with Consumers and that their contracts are terminable after a 12-month period. Consumers is disputing these claims. Additionally, three of these direct gas suppliers of Consumers have made filings with the FERC in Trunkline's Order 636 restructuring case seeking to preclude Trunkline's ability to make the sales to Consumers which commenced on September 1, 1993. Consumers and Trunkline vigorously opposed these filings and in December 1993, the FERC issued an order which, among other things, allowed Trunkline to continue sales of gas to Consumers under tariffs on file with the FERC.
Estimated losses for certain contingencies discussed in this note have been accrued. Resolution of these contingencies is not expected to have a material impact on the financial statements.
5: Income Taxes
Consumers and its subsidiaries file a consolidated federal income tax return with CMS Energy. Income taxes are generally allocated to each company based on each company's separate taxable income. Consumers' accrued federal income tax benefits from CMS Energy were $49 million and $3 million as of December 31, 1993 and 1992, respectively. In 1992, Consumers implemented SFAS 109, Accounting for Income Taxes. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are classified as current or noncurrent based on the classification of the related asset or liability, for all temporary differences. Consumers began practicing full deferred tax accounting for temporary differences arising after January 1, 1993, as authorized by a generic MPSC order. The generic order reduces the amount of regulatory assets and liabilities that otherwise could have arisen in future periods by allowing Consumers to reflect the income statement effect in the period temporary differences arise.
Consumers uses ITC to reduce current income taxes payable and defers and amortizes ITC over the life of the related property. The AMT requires taxpayers to perform a second separate federal tax calculation based on a flat rate applied to a broader tax base. AMT is the amount by which this "broader-based" tax exceeds regular tax. Any AMT paid generally becomes a tax credit that can be carried forward indefinitely to reduce regular tax liabilities in future periods when regular taxes paid exceed the tax calculated for AMT.
On August 10, 1993, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 increased the statutory federal tax rate from 34 percent to 35 percent effective January 1, 1993. The cumulative effect of this tax rate change has been reflected in Consumers' financial statements.
The significant components of income tax expense (benefit) consisted of:
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991(a) - ----------------------- ------- ------ -------- Current federal income taxes $ 41 $ 52 $ 58 Deferred income taxes 61 (172) (166) Deferred income taxes - tax rate change (2) - - Deferred ITC, net (9) (7) 33 ------- ------ ------ $ 91 $(127) $(75) ======= ====== ======
Operating $ 116 $ 51 $ 48 Other (25) (178) (123) ------- ------ ------ $ 91 $(127) $(75) ======= ====== ======
(a) The 1991 provision for income taxes was before an extraordinary item that had related deferred income taxes of approximately $7 million.
The principal components of Consumers' deferred tax assets (liabilities) recognized in the balance sheet are as follows:
In Millions December 31 1993 1992 - ----------- ------- -------- Property $ (518) $ (458) Unconsolidated investments (184) (129) Postretirement benefits (Note 10) (178) (165) Abandoned Midland project (Note 4) (57) (60) Employee benefit obligations (includes postretirement benefits of $178 and $165) (Note 10) 200 186 MCV power purchases - settlement (Note 3) 165 177 AMT carryforward 64 51 ITC carryforward (expires 2005) 48 49 Other (8) (4) ------- -------- $ (468) $ (353) ======= ========
Gross deferred tax liabilities $(1,319) $(1,228) Gross deferred tax assets 851 875 -------- -------- $ (468) $ (353) ======== ========
The actual income tax expense (benefit) differs from the amount computed by applying the statutory federal tax rate to income before income taxes as follows:
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991 ------- ------- ------- Net income (loss) before extraordinary item $ 198 $(244) $(235) Income tax expense (benefit) 91 (127) (75) ------- ------- ------- 289 (371) (310) Statutory federal income tax rate x 35% x 34% x 34% -------- ------- ------- Expected income tax expense (benefit) 101 (126) (105) Increase (decrease) in taxes from: Capitalized overheads previously flowed through 5 5 35 Differences in book and tax depreciation not previously deferred 6 9 8 ITC amortization and utilization (10) (10) (7) Affiliated companies' dividends (6) (5) (5) Other, net (5) - (1) ------- ------- ------- $ 91 $(127) $ (75) ======= ======= =======
6: Short-Term Financings
Consumers has authorization from the FERC to issue or guarantee up to $900 million of short-term debt through December 31, 1994. Consumers has a $470 million facility that is used to finance seasonal working capital requirements and unsecured, committed lines of credit aggregating $165 million. As of December 31, 1993, $235 million and $24 million were outstanding at weighted average interest rates of 4.0 percent and 3.9 percent, respectively. Further, Consumers has an established $500 million trade receivables purchase and sale program. As of December 31, 1993 and 1992, receivables sold under the agreement totaled $285 million and $225 million, respectively. On February 15, 1994, Consumers increased the level of receivables sold to $335 million.
7: Capitalization
Capital Stock
As of December 31, 1992, Consumers effected a quasi-reorganization, an elective accounting procedure in which Consumers' accumulated deficit of $574 million was eliminated against other paid-in capital. The fair values of Consumers' assets and liabilities at the date of the quasi- reorganization were determined by management to approximate their carrying values and no material adjustments to the historical bases were made. This action was approved by Consumers' Board of Directors and did not require shareholder approval. As a result of the quasi-reorganization and subsequent accumulated earnings, Consumers paid $133 million in common stock dividends in 1993 and also declared from 1993 earnings a $16 million common stock dividend in January 1994. Consumers has authorization from the MPSC and is proceeding to issue $200 million of preferred stock in 1994.
First Mortgage Bonds
Consumers secures its first mortgage bonds by a mortgage and lien on substantially all of its property. Consumers' ability to issue and sell securities is restricted by certain provisions in its First Mortgage Bond Indenture, Articles and the need for regulatory approvals in compliance with appropriate state and federal law. In September 1993, Consumers issued, with MPSC approval, $300 million of 6 3/8 percent first mortgage bonds, due 2003 and $300 million of 7 3/8 percent first mortgage bonds, due 2023. Consumers used the net proceeds from the bond issuance to refund approximately $515 million of higher interest first mortgage bonds and the balance to reduce short-term borrowings. Unamortized debt costs, premiums and discounts and call premiums on the refunded debt totaling approximately $18 million were deferred under SFAS 71, and are being amortized over the lives of the new debt.
In February 1994, Consumers issued a call for redemption totaling approximately $10 million. Consumers also fully redeemed two issues of first mortgage bonds totaling approximately $91 million. These redemptions completed Consumers' commitment to the MPSC, under the 1993 authorization to issue first mortgage bonds, to refinance certain long- term debt.
Long-Term Bank Debt
Under its long-term credit agreement at December 31, 1993, Consumers was required to make 10 remaining quarterly principal payments of approximately $47 million. As of December 31, 1993, the outstanding balance under this credit agreement totaled $469 million with a weighted average interest rate of 4.0 percent. In January 1993, Consumers entered into an interest rate swap agreement, exchanging variable-rate interest for fixed-rate interest on the latest maturing $250 million of the then remaining $500 million obligation under its long-term credit agreement.
Other
Consumers has a total of $131 million of PCRBs outstanding with a weighted average interest rate of 4.2 percent as of December 31, 1993. Consumers classifies $101 million of PCRBs as long-term because it can refinance these amounts through irrevocable letters of credit expiring after one year.
In June 1993, Consumers entered into loan agreements in connection with the issuance of approximately $28 million of adjustable rate demand limited obligation refunding revenue bonds, due 2010, which are secured by an irrevocable letter of credit expiring in 1996. These bonds bear an initial interest rate of 2.65 percent. Consumers also entered into loan agreements in connection with the issuance of $30 million of 5.8 percent limited obligation refunding revenue bonds, due 2010, secured by a financial guaranty insurance policy and certain first mortgage bonds of Consumers. Proceeds of these issues were used to redeem on August 1, 1993 in advance of their maturities, approximately $58 million of outstanding PCRBs.
8: Financial Instruments
Cash, short-term investments and current liabilities approximate their fair value due to the short-term nature of those instruments. The estimated fair value of long-term investments is based on quoted market prices where available. When specific market prices do not exist for an instrument, the fair value is based on quoted market prices of similar investments or other valuation techniques. All long-term investments in financial instruments, except as shown below, approximate fair value. Although the current fair value of the long-term debt, which is based on calculations made by debt pricing specialists, may be greater than the current carrying amount, settlement of the reported debt is generally not expected until maturity. The estimated fair values of Consumers' financial instruments are as follows:
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 - ----------------------- ----------------- ----------------- Carrying Fair Carrying Fair Amount Value Amount Value
Investment in stock of affiliates $ 291 $ 323 $ 291 $ 303 Long-term debt 1,839 1,984 2,079 2,123
The fair value of Consumers' off-balance sheet financial instruments is based on the amount estimated to terminate or settle the obligation:
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 ---------- ---------- Fair Value Fair Value
Interest rate swaps (Note 7) $ 5 $ - Guarantees 7 7
On January 1, 1994, Consumers adopted SFAS 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, requiring accounting for investments in debt securities to be held to maturity at amortized cost; otherwise debt and marketable equity securities would be recorded at fair value, with any unrealized gains or losses included in earnings if the security is held for trading purposes or as a separate component of shareholders' equity if the security is available for sale. The implementation resulted in an increase in assets of $30 million in January 1994 with a corresponding increase in stockholders' equity of $20 million, net of tax.
In May 1993, the FASB issued SFAS 114, Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan, effective in 1995, requiring certain loans that are determined to be impaired be measured based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan's effective interest rate, the loan's observable market price or the fair value of any collateral for a secured loan. Consumers does not believe this standard will have a material impact on its financial position or results of operations.
9: Executive Incentive Compensation
Consumers participates in CMS Energy's Performance Incentive Stock Plan. Under the plan, restricted shares of common stock of CMS Energy, stock options and stock appreciation rights may be granted to key employees based on their contributions to the successful management of CMS Energy and its subsidiaries. The plan reserves for award not more than 2 percent of CMS Energy's common stock outstanding on January 1 each year, less the number of shares of restricted common stock awarded and of common stock subject to options granted under the plan during the immediately preceding four calendar years. Any forfeitures are subject to award under the plan. As of December 31, 1993, awards of up to 447,686 shares of common stock may be issued.
Restricted shares of common stock are outstanding shares with full voting and dividend rights. Performance criteria were added in 1990 based on CMS Energy's total return to shareholders. Shares of restricted common stock cannot be distributed until they are vested and the performance objectives are met. Further, the restricted stock is subject to forfeiture if employment terminates before vesting. If key employees exceed performance objectives, the plan will allow additional awards. Restricted shares vest fully if control of CMS Energy changes, as defined by the plan.
Consumers' Executive Stock Option and Stock Appreciation Rights Plan, an earlier plan approved by shareholders, remains in effect until all authorized options are granted or September 25, 1995. As of December 31, 1993, options for 43,000 shares remained to be granted.
Under both plans, for stock options and stock appreciation rights, the exercise price on each grant date equaled the closing market price on the grant date. Options are exercisable upon grant and expire up to 10 years and one month from date of grant. The status of the restricted stock granted under the Performance Incentive Stock Plan and options granted under both plans follows. The number of shares presented also includes shares for employees of CMS Energy and non-utility affiliates.
Restricted Stock Options ---------- ---------------------------- Number Number Price of Shares of Shares per Share ----------- --------- --------------- Outstanding at January 1, 1991 212,500 1,162,216 $ 7.13 - $34.25 Granted 97,000 194,000 $ 21.13 - $21.13 Exercised or Issued (34,437) (65,125) $ 7.13 - $16.00 --------- ---------- --------------- Outstanding at December 31, 1991 275,063 1,291,091 $ 7.13 - $34.25 Granted 101,000 215,000 $ 17.13 - $18.00 Exercised or Issued (37,422) (21,000) $ 13.00 - $16.00 Canceled (15,375) (50,000) $ 20.50 - $33.88 --------- ---------- --------------- Outstanding at December 31, 1992 323,266 1,435,091 $ 7.13 - $34.25 Granted 132,000 249,000 $ 25.13 - $26.25 Exercised or Issued (54,938) (152,125) $ 7.13 - $21.13 Canceled (84,141) (33,000) $ 20.50 - $33.88 --------- ---------- ---------------
Outstanding at December 31, 1993 316,187 1,498,966 $ 7.13 - $34.25 ========= ========== ===============
10: Retirement Benefits
Postretirement Benefit Plans Other Than Pensions
Consumers adopted SFAS 106 effective as of the beginning of 1992. The standard required Consumers to change its accounting for the cost of health care and life insurance benefits that are provided to retirees from a pay-as-you-go (cash) method to a full accrual method. Accordingly, Consumers recorded a liability of $466 million for the accumulated transition obligation and a corresponding regulatory asset for anticipated recovery in utility rates.
Both the MPSC and FERC have generally adopted SFAS 106 costs for ratemaking purposes provided costs recovered through rates are placed in external funds until they are needed to pay benefits. The MPSC's generic order allows utilities three years to seek recovery of costs and provides for recovery from customers of any deferred costs incurred prior to the beginning of rate recovery of such costs. Consumers anticipates recovering its regulatory asset within 20 years. As discussed in Note 4, Consumers has requested recovery of the portion of these costs allocated to the electric business. In late 1994, Consumers plans to request recovery of the gas utility portion of these costs. Consumers plans to fund the benefits using external Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Associations. Funding of the health care benefits would begin when Consumers' rate recovery based on SFAS 106 begins. A portion of the life insurance benefits have previously been funded.
As of December 31, 1993, the actuary assumed that retiree health care costs increased 10.5 percent in 1994 then decreased gradually to 5.5 percent in 2000 and thereafter. The health care cost trend rate assumption significantly affects the amounts reported. For example, a 1 percentage point increase in each year would increase the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation as of December 31, 1993 by $75 million and the aggregate of the service and interest cost components of net periodic postretirement benefit costs for 1993 by $9 million.
For the years ended December 31, 1993 and 1992, the weighted average discount rate was 7.25 percent and 8 percent, respectively, and the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets was 8.5 percent. Net periodic postretirement benefit cost for health care benefits and life insurance benefits was $51 million in 1993 and $49 million in 1992. The 1993 and 1992 cost was comprised of $13 million and $10 million for service plus $38 million and $39 million for interest, respectively.
The funded status of the postretirement benefit plans is reconciled with the liability recorded at December 31 as follows:
In Millions 1993 1992 ------- ------- Actuarial present value of estimated benefits Retirees $ 281 $ 264 Eligible for retirement 54 50 Active (upon retirement) 187 175 ------- ------- Accumulated postretirement benefit obligation 522 489 Plan assets (premium deposit fund) at fair value 4 4 ------- ------- Projected postretirement benefit obligation in excess of plan assets (518) (485) Unrecognized net loss from experience different than assumed 8 - ------- ------- Recorded liability and regulatory asset $ (510) $ (485) ======= =======
Consumers' postretirement health care plan is unfunded; the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation for that plan is $510 million and $478 million at December 31, 1993 and 1992, respectively.
Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan
Certain management employees qualify under the SERP. Benefits are based on the employee's service and earnings as defined in the SERP. In 1988, a trust from which SERP benefits are paid was established and funded. Because the SERP is not a qualified plan under the Internal Revenue Code, earnings of the trust are taxable and trust assets are included in Consumers' consolidated assets. As of December 31, 1993 and 1992, trust assets at cost (which approximates market) were $16 million and $14 million, respectively, and were classified as other non-current assets.
Defined Benefit Pension Plan
A trusteed, non-contributory, defined benefit Pension Plan covers substantially all employees. The benefits are based on an employee's years of accredited service and earnings, as defined in the plan, during an employee's five highest years of earnings. Because the plan is fully funded, no contributions were made for plan years 1991 through 1993. Amounts presented for the Pension Plan include amounts for CMS Energy and non-utility affiliates, which are not distinguishable from nor are they significant when compared with the plan's total amounts.
Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991 - ----------------------- ----- ----- ----- Discount rate 7.25% 8.5% 8.5% Rate of compensation increase 4.5% 5.5% 5.5% Expected long-term rate of return on assets 8.75% 8.75% 8.75%
Net Pension Plan and SERP costs consisted of:
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991 ----- ----- ----- Service cost $ 19 $ 19 $ 18 Interest cost 49 47 48 Actual return on plan assets (92) (36) (88) Net amortization and deferral 34 (20) 28 ----- ----- ----- Net periodic pension cost $ 10 $ 10 $ 6 ===== ===== =====
The funded status of the Pension Plan and SERP reconciled to the pension liability recorded at December 31 was:
In Millions Pension Plan SERP ------------- ------------- 1993 1992 1993 1992 ----- ----- ----- ----- Actuarial present value of estimated benefits Vested $ 471 $ 349 $ 12 $ 10 Non-vested 56 49 - - ------ ------ ----- ----- Accumulated benefit obligation 527 398 12 10 Provision for future pay increases 138 177 5 5 ------ ------ ----- ----- Projected benefit obligation 665 575 17 15 Plan assets (primarily stocks and bonds,including $87 in 1993 and $64 in 1992 in common stock of CMS Energy) at fair value 692 631 - - ------ ------ ----- ----- Projected benefit obligation less than (in excess of) plan assets 27 56 (17) (15) Unrecognized net (gain) loss from experience different than assumed (56) (76) 5 2 Unrecognized prior service cost 45 49 - 1 Unrecognized net transition (asset) obligation (44) (49) 1 1 ------ ------ ------ ----- Recorded liability $ (28) $ (20) $ (11) $(11) ====== ====== ====== =====
Beginning January 1, 1986, the amortization period for the Pension Plan's unrecognized net transition asset is 16 years and 11 years for the SERP's unrecognized net transition obligation. Prior service costs are amortized on a straight-line basis over the average remaining service period of active employees.
In 1991, certain eligible employees accepted early retirement incentives. The incentives consisted of lump-sum cash payments and increased pension payments. The pretax cost of the incentives was $25 million. Also in 1991, portions of the projected benefit obligation were settled which resulted in a pretax gain of $25 million that offset the early retirement costs.
11: Leases
Consumers leases various assets, including vehicles, aircraft, construction equipment, computer equipment, nuclear fuel and buildings. Consumers' nuclear fuel capital leasing arrangement was extended an additional year and is now scheduled to expire in November 1995. The maximum amount of nuclear fuel that can be leased increased from $55 million to $70 million. Consumers further increased this amount in early 1994 to $80 million. The lease provides for an additional one-year extension upon mutual agreement by the parties. Upon termination of the lease, the lessor would be entitled to a cash payment equal to its remaining investment, which was $57 million as of December 31, 1993. Consumers is responsible for payment of taxes, maintenance, operating costs, and insurance.
Minimum rental commitments under Consumers' non-cancelable leases at December 31, 1993, were:
In Millions Capital Operating Leases Leases ------- --------- 1994 $ 40 $ 7 1995 57 6 1996 16 2 1997 15 2 1998 13 2 1999 and thereafter 26 21 ----- ----- Total minimum lease payments 167 $ 40 ===== Less imputed interest 27 -----
Present value of net minimum lease payments 140 Less current portion 34 -----
Non-current portion (a) $106 =====
(a) In January 1994, Consumers amended its nuclear fuel lease to include fuel previously owned at Big Rock Point. This is estimated to increase the non-current portion of capital leases by approximately $6 million.
Consumers recovers these charges from customers and accordingly charges payments for its capital and operating leases to operating expense. Operating lease charges, including charges to clearing and other accounts as of December 31, 1993, 1992 and 1991, were $8 million, $12 million and $12 million, respectively.
Capital lease expenses for the years ended December 31, 1993, 1992 and 1991 were $32 million, $44 million and $48 million, respectively. Included in these amounts for the years ended 1993, 1992 and 1991, are nuclear fuel lease expenses of $13 million, $17 million and $24 million, respectively.
12: Commitments and Contingencies
Ludington Pumped Storage Plant Litigation
In 1986, the Attorney General filed a lawsuit on behalf of the State of Michigan in the Circuit Court of Ingham County, seeking damages from Consumers and Detroit Edison for alleged injuries to fishery resources because of the operation of the Ludington Pumped Storage Plant. The state sought $148 million (including $16 million of interest) for past injuries and $89,000 per day for future injuries, with the latter amount to be adjusted upon installation of "adequate" fish barriers and other changed conditions.
In 1987, the Attorney General filed a second lawsuit alleging that Consumers and Detroit Edison have breached a bottomlands lease agreement with the state and asked that the lease be declared void. This complaint was consolidated with the suit described in the preceding paragraph. In 1990, both of the lawsuits were dismissed on the basis of federal preemption. In 1993, the Court of Appeals overturned the dismissal, as to damages, effectively allowing the state to continue its damages lawsuit against Consumers and Detroit Edison, but generally affirmed the lower court's ruling as to the breach of lease claim. The Court of Appeals' ruling also limited any potential damages to those occurring no earlier than 1983. Consumers, Detroit Edison and the Attorney General have filed an application for leave to appeal with the Michigan Supreme Court. Consumers and Detroit Edison are seeking to have the trial court's dismissal of the damages claim affirmed.
Each year since 1989, Consumers and Detroit Edison have complied with FERC orders by installing a seasonal barrier net from April to October at the Ludington plant site. The FERC is now considering whether the barrier net (along with other actions by Consumers, including contributions to state fish-stocking programs) would be a satisfactory permanent solution.
Environmental Matters
Consumers is a so-called "Potentially Responsible Party" at several sites being administered under Superfund. Along with Consumers, there are numerous credit-worthy, potentially responsible parties with substantial assets cooperating with respect to the individual sites. Based on information currently known by management, Consumers believes that it is unlikely that its liability at any of the known Superfund sites, individually or in total, will have a material adverse effect on its financial position or results of operations.
The State of Michigan in 1990 passed amendments to the Environmental Response Act that established a state program similar to the federal Superfund law, though broader in scope. Under this law, Consumers expects that it will ultimately incur costs at a number of sites, including some of the 23 sites that formerly housed manufactured gas plant facilities, even those in which it has a partial or no current ownership interest. It is expected that in most cases, parties other than Consumers with current or former ownership interests may also be considered liable under the law and may be required to share in the costs of any site investigations and remedial actions. There is limited knowledge of manufactured gas plant contamination at these sites at this time. However, Consumers is continuing to monitor this issue.
In addition, at the request of the DNR, Consumers prepared plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies for three of these sites. Work plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies for four other sites have also been prepared. The purpose of a remedial investigation/feasibility study is to define the nature and extent of contamination at a site and to determine which of several possible remedial action alternatives, including no action, may be required under the Environmental Response Act. The DNR has approved two of the three plans for remedial investigation/feasibility studies submitted and is currently reviewing the one remaining. The cost to conduct one of the approved studies will be approximately $250,000 based on bids received. Although the actual cost of conducting the remaining two remedial investigation/feasibility studies will not be known until bids are received from contractors, Consumers currently estimates the total cost of conducting the three studies submitted to the DNR to be less than $1 million.
The timing and extent of any further site investigation and remedial actions will depend, among other things, on requests received from the DNR and on future site usage by Consumers or other owners. Under the current schedule, Consumers anticipates the first remedial investigation/feasibility study would be completed in mid-1994. Consumers believes the results of the remedial investigation/feasibility studies will allow management to estimate a range of remedial cost estimates for the sites under study. Based on Consumers' knowledge of other utility remedial actions, remediation costs for Consumers for these sites may be substantial. In 1993, the MPSC addressed the question of recovery of investigation and remedial costs for another Michigan gas utility as part of that utility's gas rate case. In that proceeding, the MPSC determined that prudent investigation and remedial costs could be deferred and amortized over 10-year periods and prudent unamortized costs can be included for recovery in the utility's rate cases. The MPSC stated the length of the period may be reviewed from time to time, but any revisions would be prospective. Consumers believes costs incurred for both investigation and any required remedial actions would be recoverable from its customers under established regulatory policies and accordingly are not likely to materially affect its financial position or results of operations.
Included in the 1990 amendments to the federal Clean Air Act are provisions that limit emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides and require enhanced emissions monitoring. All of Consumers' coal-fueled electric generating units burn low-sulfur coal and are presently operating at or near the sulfur dioxide emission limits which will be effective in 2000. Beginning in 1995, certain coal-fueled generating units will receive emissions allowances (all of Consumers' coal units will receive allowances beginning in 2000). Based on projected emissions from these units, Consumers expects to have excess allowances which may be sold or saved for future use.
The Clean Air Act's provisions require Consumers to make capital expenditures estimated to total $74 million through 1999 for completed, in-process and possible modifications at coal-fired units based on existing and proposed regulations. Management believes that Consumers' annual operating costs will not be materially affected.
The EPA has asked a number of utilities in the Great Lakes area to voluntarily retire certain equipment containing specific levels of polychlorinated biphenyls. Consumers believes that it is largely in compliance with the EPA's petition. Consumers is continuing to study the request and has been granted an extension for responding until March 30, 1994.
Capital Expenditures
Consumers estimates capital expenditures, including demand-side management and new lease commitments, of $553 million for 1994, $461 million for 1995 and $471 million for 1996.
Public Utility Holding Company Act Exemption
CMS Energy is exempt from registration under PUHCA. However, the Attorney General and the MMCG have asked the SEC to revoke CMS Energy's exemption from registration under PUHCA. In 1992, the MPSC filed a statement with the SEC recommending that CMS Energy's current exemption be revoked and a new exemption be issued conditioned upon certain reporting and operating requirements. If CMS Energy were to lose its current exemption, it would become more heavily regulated by the SEC; Consumers could ultimately be forced to divest either its electric or gas utility business; and CMS Energy would be restricted from conducting businesses that are not functionally related to the conduct of its utility business as determined by the SEC. CMS Energy is opposing this request and believes it will maintain its current exemption from registration under PUHCA.
Other
Consumers experienced an increase in complaints during 1993 relating to so-called stray voltage. Claimants contend that stray voltage results when small electrical currents present in grounded electric systems are diverted from their intended path. Investigation by Consumers of prior stray voltage complaints disclosed that many factors, including improper wiring and malfunctioning of on-farm equipment, can lead to the stray voltage phenomenon. Consumers maintains a policy of investigating all customer calls regarding stray voltage and working with customers to address their concerns including, when necessary, modifying the configuration of the customer's hook-up to Consumers. A complaint seeking certification as a class action suit was filed against Consumers in a local county circuit court in 1993. The complaint alleges the existence of a purported class that has incurred damages of up to $1 billion, primarily to certain livestock owned by the purported class, as a result of stray voltage from electricity being supplied by Consumers. Consumers believes the allegations to be without merit and intends to vigorously oppose the certification of the class and this suit.
In addition to the matters disclosed in these notes, Consumers and certain of its subsidiaries are parties to certain lawsuits and administrative proceedings before various courts and governmental agencies, arising from the ordinary course of business involving personal injury and property damage, contractual matters, environmental issues, federal and state taxes, rates, licensing and other matters.
The ultimate effect of the proceedings discussed in this note is not expected to have a material impact on Consumers' financial position or results of operations.
13: Jointly Owned Utility Facilities
Consumers is responsible for providing its share of financing for the jointly owned facilities. The following table indicates the extent of Consumers' investment in jointly owned utility facilities:
In Millions December 31 1993 1992 - ----------- ---- ---- Net investment Ludington - 51% $114 $112 Campbell Unit 3 - 93.3% 349 360 Transmission lines - various 32 33
Accumulated depreciation Ludington $ 74 $ 71 Campbell Unit 3 210 199 Transmission lines 11 10
14: Supplemental Cash Flow Information
For purposes of the Statement of Cash Flows, all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less are considered cash equivalents. Other cash flow activities and non-cash investing and financing activities for the years ended December 31 were:
In Millions 1993 1992 1991 ------ ------ ------ Cash transactions Interest paid (net of amounts capitalized) $177 $176 $308 Income taxes paid (net of refunds) 90 6 30
Non-cash transactions Nuclear fuel placed under capital lease $ 28 $ 30 $ 6 Other assets placed under capital leases 30 39 21 Capital leases refinanced 42 - - Assumption of debt - 15 - Return of Midland related assets (Note 16) - - (92) Increased value of investment in Enterprises' preferred stock (Note 16) - - 100
Changes in other assets and liabilities as shown on the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows at December 31 are described below:
In Millions 1993 1992 1991 ------ ------ ------ Sale of receivables, net $ 60 $ 25 $ - Accounts receivable 19 30 66 Accrued revenue (48) 91 7 Inventories (32) 24 (8) Accounts payable (25) 21 (83) Accrued refunds (48) (143) 102 Tax Reform Act refund reserve - - (77) Other current assets and liabilities, net (59) 38 (56) Non-current deferred amounts, net 8 (36) 170 ------ ------ ----- $(125) $ 50 $ 121 ======= ====== ======
15: Reportable Segments
The Consolidated Statements of Income show operating revenue and pretax operating income by segments. These amounts include earnings (losses) from investments accounted for by the equity method of $6 million, $(10) million and $(2) million for 1993, 1992 and 1991, respectively. Other segment information follows:
In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991 - ----------------------- ------ ------ ------ Depreciation, depletion and amortization Electric $ 241 $ 230 $ 172 Gas 73 76 70 Other 2 1 - ------ ------ ------ $ 316 $ 307 $ 242 ====== ====== ======
Identifiable assets Electric (a) $4,027 $3,812 $3,399 Gas 1,443 1,387 1,186 Other (b) 1,081 1,397 1,401 ------ ------ ------ $6,551 $6,596 $5,986 ====== ====== ======
Capital expenditures (c) Electric (d) $ 365 $ 353 $ 213 Gas 127 86 61 Other 69 67 32 ------ ------ ------ $ 561 $ 506 $ 306 ====== ====== ======
(a) Includes abandoned Midland investment of $162 million, $175 million and $287 million for 1993, 1992 and 1991, respectively.
(b) Reclassified 1992 and 1991 to include independent power production, which is no longer significant enough for Consumers to report separately. Also, other was reduced by the sale of $309 million of MCV Bonds (see Note 3).
(c) Includes capital leases for nuclear fuel and other assets (see Note 14).
(d) Includes DSM costs of $52 million for 1993 and $26 million for 1992.
16: Related-Party Transactions
Consumers has an investment of $250 million in 10 shares of the preferred stock of Enterprises, an affiliate company of Consumers. Prior to a 1991 amendment to Enterprises' Articles, it was to have redeemed on July 1, 1991 and in each of the next four years, two shares of its preferred stock held by Consumers at a redemption price equal to $25 million per share. Because of the amendment, the dividend rate increased and the first mandatory redemption date became August 1, 1997. The asset value and other paid-in capital of Consumers were increased $100 million as a result of the amendment. In addition, Consumers has an investment in approximately 3 million shares of CMS Energy common stock totaling $42 million at December 31, 1993. As a result of these two investments, Consumers received dividends on affiliates' common and preferred stock totaling $16 million in 1993 and 1992 and $13 million in 1991.
In March 1990, Consumers' subsidiary, MGL and Consumers' parent, CMS Energy, entered into an agreement where MGL exchanged its investment in several subsidiaries that held Midland-related assets for CMS Debentures issued by CMS Energy. Consumers recorded the earnings on the CMS Debentures as income from contractual arrangements. In December 1991, the subsidiaries were returned to Consumers and the CMS Debentures were cancelled to comply with various regulatory and court orders. On July 27, 1991, Consumers stopped recording income on the CMS Debentures when it became probable the return would be required. The return resulted in a net after-tax loss of approximately $92 million because the book value of the subsidiaries was less than the CMS Debentures' book value.
Consumers purchases a portion of its gas from an affiliate, NOMECO. The amounts of purchases for the years ended 1993, 1992 and 1991 were $3 million, $3 million and $20 million, respectively. In 1993, 1992 and 1991, Consumers purchased $52 million, $36 million and $26 million, respectively, of electric generating capacity and energy from affiliates of Enterprises. Consumers and its subsidiaries sold, stored and transported natural gas and provided other services to the MCV Partnership totaling approximately $14 million for 1993, 1992 and 1991, respectively. For additional discussion of related-party transactions with the MCV Partnership and the FMLP, see Notes 3 and 17. Other related-party transactions are immaterial.
17: Summarized Financial Information of Significant Related Energy Supplier
Under the PPA with the MCV Partnership discussed in Note 3, Consumers' 1993 obligation to purchase electricity from the MCV Partnership was approximately 14 percent of Consumers' owned and contracted capacity. Summarized financial information of the MCV Partnership is shown below:
Statements of Income In Millions Years Ended December 31 1993 1992 1991 - ----------------------- ------ ------ ------ Operating revenue (a) $ 548 $ 488 $ 425 Operating expenses 362 315 278 ------ ------ ------ Operating income 186 173 147 Other expense, net (189) (190) (186) ------ ------ ------ Net loss $ (3) $ (17) $ (39) ====== ====== ======
Balance Sheets In Millions December 31 1993 1992 - ----------- ------ ------ Assets Current assets (a) $ 181 $ 165 Property, plant and equipment, net 2,073 2,124 Other assets 146 147 ------ ------ $2,400 $2,436 ====== ======
Liabilities and Partners' Equity Current liabilities $ 198 $ 189 Long-term debt and other non-current liabilities (b) 2,147 2,189 Partners' equity (c) 55 58 ------ ------ $2,400 $2,436 ====== ======
(a) Revenue from Consumers totaled $505 million, $444 million and $384 million for 1993, 1992 and 1991, respectively. As of December 31, 1993, 1992 and 1991, $44 million, $38 million and $33 million, respectively, were receivable from Consumers.
(b) FMLP is a beneficiary of an owner trust that is the lessor in a long-term direct finance lease with the lessee, MCV Partnership. CMS Holdings holds a 46.4 percent ownership interest in FMLP (see Note 3). At December 31, 1993 and 1992, lease obligations of $1.7 billion were owed to the owner trust of which FMLP is the sole beneficiary. CMS Holdings' share of the interest and principal portion for the 1993 lease payments was $63 million and $16 million, respectively, and for the 1992 lease payments was $65 million and $12 million, respectively. The lease payments service $1.2 billion and $1.3 billion in non-recourse debt outstanding as of December 31, 1993 and 1992, respectively, of the owner-trust whose beneficiary is FMLP. FMLP's debt is secured by the MCV Partnership's lease obligations, assets, and operating revenues. For 1993 and 1992, the owner-trust whose beneficiary is FMLP made debt payments of $172 million and $166 million, respectively, which included $10 million and $8 million principal and $25 million and $26 million interest, respectively, on the MCV Bonds held by MEC Development Corporation during part of 1991 and by Consumers through December 1993.
(c) CMS Midland's recorded investment in the MCV Partnership includes capitalized interest, which is being amortized to expense over the life of its investment in the MCV Partnership.
Arthur Andersen & Co.
Report of Independent Public Accountants
To Consumers Power Company:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and consolidated statements of long-term debt and preferred stock of CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY (a Michigan corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of CMS Energy Corporation) and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1993 and 1992, and the related consolidated statements of income, common stockholder's equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1993. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall consolidated financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Consumers Power Company and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1993 and 1992, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1993 in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.
As discussed in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements, effective January 1, 1992, the Company changed its method of accounting for income taxes. As discussed in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements, effective January 1, 1992, the Company changed its method of accounting for postretirement benefits other than pensions. Additionally, as discussed in Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company effected a quasi-reorganization on December 31, 1992.
ARTHUR ANDERSEN & Co.
Detroit, Michigan, January 28, 1994.
ITEM 9.

ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
CMS Energy
None for CMS Energy.
Consumers
None for Consumers. PART III (ITEMS 10., 11., 12. and 13.) CMS Energy
CMS Energy's definitive Proxy Statement, except for the organization and compensation committee report contained therein, is incorporated by reference herein. See also Item 1. BUSINESS for information pursuant to Item 10.



Item 10.
Consumers
Consumers' definitive Proxy Statement, except for the organization and compensation committee report contained therein, is incorporated by reference herein. See also Item 1. BUSINESS for information pursuant to Item 10.
PART IV ITEM 14. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K.
(a)(1) Financial Statements and Reports of Independent Public Accountants for CMS Energy and Consumers are listed in Item 8 in the Index to Financial Statements, and are incorporated by reference herein.
(a)(2) Financial Statement Schedules and Reports of Independent Public Accountants for CMS Energy and Consumers are listed after the Exhibits in the Index to Financial Statement Schedules, and are incorporated by reference herein.
(a)(3) Exhibits for CMS Energy and Consumers are listed after Item (c) below and are incorporated by reference herein.
(b) Reports on Form 8-K for CMS Energy and Consumers.
CMS Energy
Current reports dated September 29, 1993, as amended by Form 8-K/A, Amendment No. 1, dated October 22, 1993, and dated December 10, 1993 covering matters reported pursuant to Item 5. Other Events. and Item 7. Financial Statements and Exhibits., and current reports dated December 28, 1993 and March 4, 1994 covering matters reported pursuant to Item 5. Other Events.
Consumers
Current reports dated September 21, 1993 and December 10, 1993 covering matters reported pursuant to Item 5. Other Events. and Item 7. Financial Statements and Exhibits., and dated December 28, 1993 and March 4, 1994 covering matters reported pursuant to Item 5. Other Events.
(c) Exhibits, including those incorporated by reference (see also Exhibit volume).
The following exhibits are applicable to CMS Energy and Consumers except where otherwise indicated "CMS ONLY":
CMS Energy and Consumers Exhibit Numbers - ---------------
(1)-(2) - Not applicable.
(3)(a) (CMS ONLY) - Articles of Incorporation of CMS Energy Corporation, as Amended. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form S-8 dated June 30, 1989, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (4).)
(3)(b) (CMS ONLY) - Copy of the By-Laws of CMS Energy Corporation.
(3)(c) - Restated Articles of Incorporation of Consumers Power Company.
(3)(d) - Copy of By-Laws of Consumers Power Company.
(4)(a) - Composite Working Copy of Indenture dated as of September 1, 1945, between Consumers Power Company and Chemical Bank (successor to Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company), as Trustee, including therein indentures supplemental thereto through the Forty-third Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 1, 1979. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Registration No 2-65973 as Exhibit (b)(1)-4.)
Indentures Supplemental thereto:
Consumers Power Company Sup Ind/Dated as of File Reference Exhibit ------------------- ---------------- -------
44th 11/15/79 Reg No 2-65973 (b)(1)-7 45th 01/15/80 Reg No 2-68900 (b)(1)-5 46th 01/15/80 Reg No 2-69704 (4)(b) 47th 06/15/80 Form 10-K for year end Dec 31, 1980, File No 1-5611 (4)(b) 48th 03/15/81 Reg No 2-73741 (4)(b) 49th 11/01/81 Reg No 2-75542 (4)(b) 50th 03/01/82 Form 10-K for year end Dec 31, 1981, File No 1-5611 (4)(b) 51st 08/10/82 Reg No 2-78842 (4)(f) 52nd 08/31/82 Reg No 2-79390 (4)(f) 53rd 12/01/82 Reg No 2-81077 (4)(f) 54th 05/01/83 Reg No 2-84172 (4)(e) 55th 09/15/83 Reg No 2-86751 (4)(e) 56th 10/15/83 Reg No 2-87735 (4)(e) 57th 03/01/84 Reg No 2-89215 (4)(e) 58th 07/16/84 Form 10-Q for quarter ended June 30, 1984, File No 1-5611 (4)(f) 59th 10/01/84 Reg No 2-93438 (4)(c) 60th 06/01/85 Form 10-Q for quarter ended June 30, 1985, File No 1-5611 (4)(f) 61st 10/15/86 Reg No 33-9732 (4)(e) 63rd 04/15/87 Form 10-Q for quarter ended June 30, 1987 File No 1-5611 (4)(f) 64th 06/15/87 Form 10-Q for quarter ended June 30, 1987 File No 1-5611 (4)(g) 65th 02/15/88 Form 8-K dated Feb 18, 1988 File No 1-5611 (4) 66th 04/15/88 Form 10-Q for quarter ended March 31, 1988 File No 1-5611 (4)(d) 67th 11/15/89 Reg No 33-31866 (4)(d) 68th 06/15/93 Reg No 33-41126 (4)(c) 69th 09/15/93 Form 8-K dated September 21, 1993 File No 1-5611 (4)
(4)(b) (CMS ONLY) - Indenture between CMS Energy Corporation and NBD Bank, National Association, as Trustee. (Designated in CMS Energy's Form S-3 Registration Statement filed May 1, 1992, File No. 33-47629, as Exhibit (4)(a).)
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of October 1, 1992 between CMS Energy Corporation and NBD Bank, National Association, as Trustee. (Designated in CMS Energy's Form 8-K dated October 1, 1992, File No. 1-9513, as Exhibit (4).)
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of October 1, 1992 between CMS Energy Corporation and NBD Bank, National Association, as Trustee. (Designated in CMS Energy's Form 8-K dated October 1, 1992, File No. 1-9513, as Exhibit (4).)
(5)-(9) - Not applicable.
(10)(a) - Credit Agreement dated as of May 1, 1989 among Consumers Power Company, the Co-Managers, as defined therein, the Banks, as defined therein, the Lenders, as defined therein, and Citibank, NA, as Agent, and the Exhibits thereto. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1989, File No 1-5611, as Exhibit (19).)
Letter amendment dated as of December 11, 1991. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit (3)(d).)
(10)(b) (CMS ONLY) - Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of November 30, 1992 as Amended and Restated as of October 15, 1993, among CMS Energy Corporation, the Banks, the Co-Agents, the Documentation Agent and the Operational Agent, all as defined therein, and the Exhibits thereto.
(10)(c) - Employment Agreement dated as of August 1, 1990 among Consumers Power Company, CMS Energy Corporation and William T. McCormick, Jr. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(c).)
(10)(d) - Employment contract effective as of March 1, 1987 among CMS Energy Corporation, Consumers Power Company and S. Kinnie Smith, Jr. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1987, File No 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(g).)
(10)(e) - Employment Agreement effective as of June 15, 1988 among Consumers Power Company, CMS Energy Corporation and Victor J. Fryling. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1988, File No 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(i).)
(10)(f) - Employment Agreement dated May 26, 1989 between Consumers Power Company and Michael G. Morris. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(f).)
(10)(g) - Employment Agreement dated May 26, 1989 between Consumers Power Company and David A. Mikelonis. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit 10(h).)
(10)(h) - Employment Agreement dated May 26, 1989 among Consumers Power Company, CMS Energy Corporation and John W. Clark. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(f).)
(10)(i) - Employment Agreement dated March 25, 1992 between Consumers Power Company and Alan M. Wright. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1992, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit 10(j).)
(10)(j) - Employment Agreement dated March 25, 1992 between Consumers Power Company and Paul A. Elbert. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1992, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit 10(k).)
(10)(k) - Consumers Power Company's Executive Stock Option and Stock Appreciation Rights Plan effective December 1, 1989. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(g).)
(10)(l) - CMS Energy Corporation's Performance Incentive Stock Plan effective as of December 1, 1989. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(h).)
(10)(m) - CMS Deferred Salary Savings Plan effective January 1, 1994.
(10)(n) - Consumers Power Company's Annual Executive Incentive Compensation Plan effective February 1993, as amended March 1994.
(10)(o) - Consumers Power Company's Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan effective November 1, 1990.
(10)(p) - Senior Trust Indenture, Leasehold Mortgage and Security Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 between The Connecticut National Bank and United States Trust Company of New York. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 4.1.)
Indenture Supplemental thereto:
Supplement No. 1 dated as of June 1, 1990. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 4.2.)
(10)(q) - Collateral Trust Indenture dated as of June 1, 1990 among Midland Funding Corporation I, Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership and United States Trust Company of New York, Trustee. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (28)(b).)
Indenture Supplemental thereto:
Supplement No 1 dated as of June 1, 1990. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 4.4.)
(10)(r) - Amended and Restated Investor Partner Tax Indemnification Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 among Investor Partners, CMS Midland Holdings Corporation as Indemnitor and CMS Energy Corporation as Guarantor. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(v).)
(10)(s) - Environmental Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 made by CMS Energy Corporation to The Connecticut National Bank and Others. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(y) and Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1991, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (19)(d).)**
(10)(t) - Indemnity Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 made by CMS Energy Corporation to Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(z).)**
(10)(u) - Environmental Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 made by CMS Energy Corporation to United States Trust Company of New York, Meridian Trust Company, each Subordinated Collateral Trust Trustee and Holders from time to time of Senior Bonds and Subordinated Bonds and Participants from time to time in Senior Bonds and Subordinated Bonds. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(aa).)**
(10)(v) - Amended and Restated Participation Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 among Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership, Owner Participant, The Connecticut National Bank, United States Trust Company, Meridian Trust Company, Midland Funding Corporation I, Midland Funding Corporation II, MEC Development Corporation and Institutional Senior Bond Purchasers. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 4.13.)
Amendment No 1 dated as of July 1, 1991. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(w).)
(10)(w) - Power Purchase Agreement dated as of July 17, 1986 between Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership and Consumers Power Company. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 10.4.)
Amendments thereto:
Amendment No 1 dated September 10, 1987. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 10.5.)
Amendment No 2 dated March 18, 1988. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 10.6.)
Amendment No 3 dated August 28, 1989. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 10.7.)
Amendment No 4A dated May 25, 1989. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 10.8.)
(10)(x) - Request for Approval of Settlement Proposal to Resolve MCV Cost Recovery Issues and Court Remand, filed with the Michigan Public Service Commission on July 7, 1992, MPSC Case No. U- 10127. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's and Consumers Power Company's Forms 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991 as amended by Form 8 dated July 15, 1992 as Exhibit (28).)
(10)(y) - Settlement Proposal Filed on July 7, 1992 as Revised on September 8, 1992 by Filing with the Michigan Public Service Commission. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's and Consumers Power Company's Forms 8-K dated September 8, 1992 as Exhibit (28).)
(10)(z) - Michigan Public Service Commission Order Dated March 31, 1993, Approving with Modifications the Settlement Proposal Filed on July 7, 1992, as Revised on September 8, 1992. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's and Consumers Power Company's Forms 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1992 as Exhibit (10)(cc).
(10)(aa) - Unwind Agreement dated as of December 10, 1991 by and among CMS Energy Corporation, Midland Group, Ltd., Consumers Power Company, CMS Midland, Inc., MEC Development Corp. and CMS Midland Holdings Company. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(y).)
(10)(bb) - Stipulated AGE Release Amount Payment Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990, among CMS Energy Corporation, Consumers Power Company and The Dow Chemical Company. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(z).)
(10)(cc) - Parent Guaranty dated as of June 14, 1990 from CMS Energy Corporation to MCV, each of the Owner Trustees, the Indenture Trustees, the Owner Participants and the Initial Purchasers of Senior Bonds in the MCV Sale Leaseback transaction, and MEC Development. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(aa).)**
(11)-(12) - Not applicable.
(13) - Not Applicable.
(14)-(20) - Not applicable.
(21)(a) (CMS ONLY) - Subsidiaries of CMS Energy Corporation.
(21)(b) - Subsidiaries of Consumers Power Company.
(22) - Not applicable.
(23) - Consents of experts and counsel.
(24) - Powers of Attorney.
(25)-(28) - Not applicable.
*Five copies of this exhibit have been signed by, or on behalf of, each of five Owner Participants. With regard to each of the agreements, each copy is substantially identical in all material respects except as to the parties thereto. Therefore, pursuant to Instruction 2, Item 601(a) of Regulation S-K, CMS Energy Corporation and Consumers Power Company are filing a copy of only one such document.
** Obligations of only CMS Holdings and CMS Midland, second tier subsidiaries of Consumers, and of CMS Energy but not of Consumers.
Exhibits listed above which have heretofore been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to various acts administered by the Commission, and which were designated as noted above, are hereby incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof with the same effect as if filed herewith.
Index to Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule Page
V Property, Plant and Equipment 1993, 1992 and 1991: CMS Energy Corporation 154 Consumers Power Company 157
VI Accumulated Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization of Property, Plant and Equipment 1993, 1992 and 1991: CMS Energy Corporation 160 Consumers Power Company 163
VIII Valuation and Qualifying Accounts and Reserves 1993, 1992 and 1991: CMS Energy Corporation 166 Consumers Power Company 167
IX Short-Term Borrowings 1993, 1992 and 1991: CMS Energy Corporation 168 Consumers Power Company 169
X Supplementary Income Statement Information 1993, 1992 and 1991: CMS Energy Corporation 170 Consumers Power Company 171
Report of Independent Public Accountants CMS Energy Corporation 172 Consumers Power Company 173
Schedules other than those listed above are omitted because they are either not required, not applicable or the required information is shown in the financial statements or notes thereto.
Columns omitted from schedules filed have been omitted because the information is not applicable.
Arthur Andersen & Co.
Report of Independent Public Accountants
To CMS Energy Corporation:
We have audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the consolidated financial statements included in CMS Energy Corporation's 1993 Annual Report to shareholders incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K, and have issued our report thereon dated January 28, 1994. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on those basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole. The schedules listed in Item 14(a) are the responsibility of the Company's management and are presented for purposes of complying with the Securities and Exchange Commission's rules and are not part of the basic consolidated financial statements. These schedules have been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic consolidated financial statements and, in our opinion, fairly state in all material respects the financial data required to be set forth therein in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole.
ARTHUR ANDERSEN & Co.
Detroit, Michigan, January 28, 1994.
Arthur Andersen & Co.
Report of Independent Public Accountants
To Consumers Power Company:
We have audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the consolidated financial statements included in Consumers Power Company's 1993 Annual Report to shareholders incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K, and have issued our report thereon dated January 28, 1994. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on those basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole. The schedules listed in Item 14(a) are the responsibility of the Company's management and are presented for the purpose of complying with the Securities and Exchange Commission's rules and are not part of the basic consolidated financial statements. These schedules have been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic consolidated financial statements and, in our opinion, fairly state in all material respects the financial data required to be set forth therein in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole.
ARTHUR ANDERSEN & Co.
Detroit, Michigan, January 28, 1994.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, CMS Energy Corporation has duly caused this Annual Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, on the 18th day of March 1994.
CMS ENERGY CORPORATION
By William T. McCormick, Jr. ---------------------------- William T. McCormick, Jr. Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Annual Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of CMS Energy Corporation and in the capacities and on the 18th day of March 1994.
Signature Title - -------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
(i) Principal executive officer: Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer William T. McCormick, Jr. and Director - ------------------------------------- William T. McCormick, Jr.
(ii) Principal financial officer:
Senior Vice President and A M Wright Chief Financial Officer - ------------------------------------- Alan M. Wright
(iii) Controller or principal accounting officer:
Vice President, Controller P. D. Hopper and Chief Accounting Officer - ------------------------------------- Preston D. Hopper
(iv) A majority of the Directors including those named above:
Director - ------------------------------------- James J. Duderstadt
Signature Title - ------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Victor J. Fryling Director - ------------------------------------- Victor J. Fryling
Earl D. Holton* Director - ------------------------------------- Earl D. Holton
Lois A. Lund* Director - ------------------------------------- Lois A. Lund
Frank H. Merlotti* Director - ------------------------------------- Frank H. Merlotti
W. U. Parfet* Director - ------------------------------------- William U. Parfet
Percy A. Pierre* Director - ------------------------------------- Percy A. Pierre
T. F. Russell* Director - ------------------------------------- Thomas F. Russell
S. Kinnie Smith, Jr.* Director - ------------------------------------- S. Kinnie Smith, Jr.
Director - ------------------------------------- Robert D. Tuttle
Kenneth Whipple* Director - ------------------------------------- Kenneth Whipple
John B. Yasinsky* Director - ------------------------------------- John B. Yasinsky
* By Thomas A. McNish ------------------------------- Thomas A. McNish, Attorney-in-Fact
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Consumers Power Company has duly caused this Annual Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, on the 18th day of March 1994.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
By William T. McCormick, Jr. --------------------------------- William T. McCormick, Jr. Chairman of the Board
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Annual Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of Consumers Power Company and in the capacities and on the 18th day of March 1994.
Signature Title - ------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
(i) Principal executive officer:
President and Michael G. Morris Chief Executive Officer - ------------------------------------- Michael G. Morris
(ii) Principal financial officer:
Senior Vice President and A M Wright Chief Financial Officer - ------------------------------------- Alan M. Wright
(iii) Controller or principal accounting officer:
Vice President and Dennis DaPra Controller - ------------------------------------- Dennis DaPra
(iv) A majority of the Directors including those named above:
Director - ------------------------------------- James J. Duderstadt
Signature Title - ------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Victor J. Fryling Director - ------------------------------------- Victor J. Fryling
Earl D. Holton* Director - ------------------------------------- Earl D. Holton
Lois A. Lund* Director - ------------------------------------- Lois A. Lund
William T. McCormick, Jr. Director - ------------------------------------- William T. McCormick, Jr.
Frank H. Merlotti* Director - ------------------------------------- Frank H. Merlotti
W. U. Parfet* Director - ------------------------------------- William U. Parfet
Percy A. Pierre* Director - ------------------------------------- Percy A. Pierre
T. F. Russell* Director - ------------------------------------- Thomas F. Russell
S. Kinnie Smith, Jr.* Director - ------------------------------------- S. Kinnie Smith, Jr.
Director - ------------------------------------- Robert D. Tuttle
Kenneth Whipple* Director - ------------------------------------- Kenneth Whipple
John B. Yasinsky* Director - ------------------------------------- John B. Yasinsky
*By Thomas A. McNish -------------------------------- Thomas A. McNish, Attorney-in-Fact




ITEM 14. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K.
(a)(1) Financial Statements and Reports of Independent Public Accountants for CMS Energy and Consumers are listed in Item 8 in the Index to Financial Statements, and are incorporated by reference herein.
(a)(2) Financial Statement Schedules and Reports of Independent Public Accountants for CMS Energy and Consumers are listed after the Exhibits in the Index to Financial Statement Schedules, and are incorporated by reference herein.
(a)(3) Exhibits for CMS Energy and Consumers are listed after Item (c) below and are incorporated by reference herein.
(b) Reports on Form 8-K for CMS Energy and Consumers.
CMS Energy
Current reports dated September 29, 1993, as amended by Form 8-K/A, Amendment No. 1, dated October 22, 1993, and dated December 10, 1993 covering matters reported pursuant to Item 5. Other Events. and Item 7. Financial Statements and Exhibits., and current reports dated December 28, 1993 and March 4, 1994 covering matters reported pursuant to Item 5. Other Events.
Consumers
Current reports dated September 21, 1993 and December 10, 1993 covering matters reported pursuant to Item 5. Other Events. and Item 7. Financial Statements and Exhibits., and dated December 28, 1993 and March 4, 1994 covering matters reported pursuant to Item 5. Other Events.
(c) Exhibits, including those incorporated by reference (see also Exhibit volume).
The following exhibits are applicable to CMS Energy and Consumers except where otherwise indicated "CMS ONLY":
CMS Energy and Consumers Exhibit Numbers - ---------------
(1)-(2) - Not applicable.
(3)(a) (CMS ONLY) - Articles of Incorporation of CMS Energy Corporation, as Amended. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form S-8 dated June 30, 1989, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (4).)
(3)(b) (CMS ONLY) - Copy of the By-Laws of CMS Energy Corporation.
(3)(c) - Restated Articles of Incorporation of Consumers Power Company.
(3)(d) - Copy of By-Laws of Consumers Power Company.
(4)(a) - Composite Working Copy of Indenture dated as of September 1, 1945, between Consumers Power Company and Chemical Bank (successor to Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company), as Trustee, including therein indentures supplemental thereto through the Forty-third Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 1, 1979. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Registration No 2-65973 as Exhibit (b)(1)-4.)
Indentures Supplemental thereto:
Consumers Power Company Sup Ind/Dated as of File Reference Exhibit ------------------- ---------------- -------
44th 11/15/79 Reg No 2-65973 (b)(1)-7 45th 01/15/80 Reg No 2-68900 (b)(1)-5 46th 01/15/80 Reg No 2-69704 (4)(b) 47th 06/15/80 Form 10-K for year end Dec 31, 1980, File No 1-5611 (4)(b) 48th 03/15/81 Reg No 2-73741 (4)(b) 49th 11/01/81 Reg No 2-75542 (4)(b) 50th 03/01/82 Form 10-K for year end Dec 31, 1981, File No 1-5611 (4)(b) 51st 08/10/82 Reg No 2-78842 (4)(f) 52nd 08/31/82 Reg No 2-79390 (4)(f) 53rd 12/01/82 Reg No 2-81077 (4)(f) 54th 05/01/83 Reg No 2-84172 (4)(e) 55th 09/15/83 Reg No 2-86751 (4)(e) 56th 10/15/83 Reg No 2-87735 (4)(e) 57th 03/01/84 Reg No 2-89215 (4)(e) 58th 07/16/84 Form 10-Q for quarter ended June 30, 1984, File No 1-5611 (4)(f) 59th 10/01/84 Reg No 2-93438 (4)(c) 60th 06/01/85 Form 10-Q for quarter ended June 30, 1985, File No 1-5611 (4)(f) 61st 10/15/86 Reg No 33-9732 (4)(e) 63rd 04/15/87 Form 10-Q for quarter ended June 30, 1987 File No 1-5611 (4)(f) 64th 06/15/87 Form 10-Q for quarter ended June 30, 1987 File No 1-5611 (4)(g) 65th 02/15/88 Form 8-K dated Feb 18, 1988 File No 1-5611 (4) 66th 04/15/88 Form 10-Q for quarter ended March 31, 1988 File No 1-5611 (4)(d) 67th 11/15/89 Reg No 33-31866 (4)(d) 68th 06/15/93 Reg No 33-41126 (4)(c) 69th 09/15/93 Form 8-K dated September 21, 1993 File No 1-5611 (4)
(4)(b) (CMS ONLY) - Indenture between CMS Energy Corporation and NBD Bank, National Association, as Trustee. (Designated in CMS Energy's Form S-3 Registration Statement filed May 1, 1992, File No. 33-47629, as Exhibit (4)(a).)
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of October 1, 1992 between CMS Energy Corporation and NBD Bank, National Association, as Trustee. (Designated in CMS Energy's Form 8-K dated October 1, 1992, File No. 1-9513, as Exhibit (4).)
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of October 1, 1992 between CMS Energy Corporation and NBD Bank, National Association, as Trustee. (Designated in CMS Energy's Form 8-K dated October 1, 1992, File No. 1-9513, as Exhibit (4).)
(5)-(9) - Not applicable.
(10)(a) - Credit Agreement dated as of May 1, 1989 among Consumers Power Company, the Co-Managers, as defined therein, the Banks, as defined therein, the Lenders, as defined therein, and Citibank, NA, as Agent, and the Exhibits thereto. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1989, File No 1-5611, as Exhibit (19).)
Letter amendment dated as of December 11, 1991. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit (3)(d).)
(10)(b) (CMS ONLY) - Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of November 30, 1992 as Amended and Restated as of October 15, 1993, among CMS Energy Corporation, the Banks, the Co-Agents, the Documentation Agent and the Operational Agent, all as defined therein, and the Exhibits thereto.
(10)(c) - Employment Agreement dated as of August 1, 1990 among Consumers Power Company, CMS Energy Corporation and William T. McCormick, Jr. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(c).)
(10)(d) - Employment contract effective as of March 1, 1987 among CMS Energy Corporation, Consumers Power Company and S. Kinnie Smith, Jr. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1987, File No 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(g).)
(10)(e) - Employment Agreement effective as of June 15, 1988 among Consumers Power Company, CMS Energy Corporation and Victor J. Fryling. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1988, File No 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(i).)
(10)(f) - Employment Agreement dated May 26, 1989 between Consumers Power Company and Michael G. Morris. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(f).)
(10)(g) - Employment Agreement dated May 26, 1989 between Consumers Power Company and David A. Mikelonis. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit 10(h).)
(10)(h) - Employment Agreement dated May 26, 1989 among Consumers Power Company, CMS Energy Corporation and John W. Clark. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(f).)
(10)(i) - Employment Agreement dated March 25, 1992 between Consumers Power Company and Alan M. Wright. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1992, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit 10(j).)
(10)(j) - Employment Agreement dated March 25, 1992 between Consumers Power Company and Paul A. Elbert. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1992, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit 10(k).)
(10)(k) - Consumers Power Company's Executive Stock Option and Stock Appreciation Rights Plan effective December 1, 1989. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(g).)
(10)(l) - CMS Energy Corporation's Performance Incentive Stock Plan effective as of December 1, 1989. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(h).)
(10)(m) - CMS Deferred Salary Savings Plan effective January 1, 1994.
(10)(n) - Consumers Power Company's Annual Executive Incentive Compensation Plan effective February 1993, as amended March 1994.
(10)(o) - Consumers Power Company's Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan effective November 1, 1990.
(10)(p) - Senior Trust Indenture, Leasehold Mortgage and Security Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 between The Connecticut National Bank and United States Trust Company of New York. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 4.1.)
Indenture Supplemental thereto:
Supplement No. 1 dated as of June 1, 1990. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 4.2.)
(10)(q) - Collateral Trust Indenture dated as of June 1, 1990 among Midland Funding Corporation I, Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership and United States Trust Company of New York, Trustee. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (28)(b).)
Indenture Supplemental thereto:
Supplement No 1 dated as of June 1, 1990. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 4.4.)
(10)(r) - Amended and Restated Investor Partner Tax Indemnification Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 among Investor Partners, CMS Midland Holdings Corporation as Indemnitor and CMS Energy Corporation as Guarantor. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(v).)
(10)(s) - Environmental Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 made by CMS Energy Corporation to The Connecticut National Bank and Others. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(y) and Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1991, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (19)(d).)**
(10)(t) - Indemnity Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 made by CMS Energy Corporation to Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(z).)**
(10)(u) - Environmental Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 made by CMS Energy Corporation to United States Trust Company of New York, Meridian Trust Company, each Subordinated Collateral Trust Trustee and Holders from time to time of Senior Bonds and Subordinated Bonds and Participants from time to time in Senior Bonds and Subordinated Bonds. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1990, File No 1-9513, as Exhibit (10)(aa).)**
(10)(v) - Amended and Restated Participation Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990 among Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership, Owner Participant, The Connecticut National Bank, United States Trust Company, Meridian Trust Company, Midland Funding Corporation I, Midland Funding Corporation II, MEC Development Corporation and Institutional Senior Bond Purchasers. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 4.13.)
Amendment No 1 dated as of July 1, 1991. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(w).)
(10)(w) - Power Purchase Agreement dated as of July 17, 1986 between Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership and Consumers Power Company. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 10.4.)
Amendments thereto:
Amendment No 1 dated September 10, 1987. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 10.5.)
Amendment No 2 dated March 18, 1988. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 10.6.)
Amendment No 3 dated August 28, 1989. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 10.7.)
Amendment No 4A dated May 25, 1989. (Designated in Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership's Form S-1 filed November 23, 1990, File No 33-37977, as Exhibit 10.8.)
(10)(x) - Request for Approval of Settlement Proposal to Resolve MCV Cost Recovery Issues and Court Remand, filed with the Michigan Public Service Commission on July 7, 1992, MPSC Case No. U- 10127. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's and Consumers Power Company's Forms 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991 as amended by Form 8 dated July 15, 1992 as Exhibit (28).)
(10)(y) - Settlement Proposal Filed on July 7, 1992 as Revised on September 8, 1992 by Filing with the Michigan Public Service Commission. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's and Consumers Power Company's Forms 8-K dated September 8, 1992 as Exhibit (28).)
(10)(z) - Michigan Public Service Commission Order Dated March 31, 1993, Approving with Modifications the Settlement Proposal Filed on July 7, 1992, as Revised on September 8, 1992. (Designated in CMS Energy Corporation's and Consumers Power Company's Forms 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1992 as Exhibit (10)(cc).
(10)(aa) - Unwind Agreement dated as of December 10, 1991 by and among CMS Energy Corporation, Midland Group, Ltd., Consumers Power Company, CMS Midland, Inc., MEC Development Corp. and CMS Midland Holdings Company. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(y).)
(10)(bb) - Stipulated AGE Release Amount Payment Agreement dated as of June 1, 1990, among CMS Energy Corporation, Consumers Power Company and The Dow Chemical Company. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(z).)
(10)(cc) - Parent Guaranty dated as of June 14, 1990 from CMS Energy Corporation to MCV, each of the Owner Trustees, the Indenture Trustees, the Owner Participants and the Initial Purchasers of Senior Bonds in the MCV Sale Leaseback transaction, and MEC Development. (Designated in Consumers Power Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991, File No. 1-5611, as Exhibit (10)(aa).)**
(11)-(12) - Not applicable.
(13) - Not Applicable.
(14)-(20) - Not applicable.
(21)(a) (CMS ONLY) - Subsidiaries of CMS Energy Corporation.
(21)(b) - Subsidiaries of Consumers Power Company.
(22) - Not applicable.
(23) - Consents of experts and counsel.
(24) - Powers of Attorney.
(25)-(28) - Not applicable.
*Five copies of this exhibit have been signed by, or on behalf of, each of five Owner Participants. With regard to each of the agreements, each copy is substantially identical in all material respects except as to the parties thereto. Therefore, pursuant to Instruction 2, Item 601(a) of Regulation S-K, CMS Energy Corporation and Consumers Power Company are filing a copy of only one such document.
** Obligations of only CMS Holdings and CMS Midland, second tier subsidiaries of Consumers, and of CMS Energy but not of Consumers.
Exhibits listed above which have heretofore been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to various acts administered by the Commission, and which were designated as noted above, are hereby incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof with the same effect as if filed herewith.
Index to Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule Page
V Property, Plant and Equipment 1993, 1992 and 1991: CMS Energy Corporation 154 Consumers Power Company 157
VI Accumulated Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization of Property, Plant and Equipment 1993, 1992 and 1991: CMS Energy Corporation 160 Consumers Power Company 163
VIII Valuation and Qualifying Accounts and Reserves 1993, 1992 and 1991: CMS Energy Corporation 166 Consumers Power Company 167
IX Short-Term Borrowings 1993, 1992 and 1991: CMS Energy Corporation 168 Consumers Power Company 169
X Supplementary Income Statement Information 1993, 1992 and 1991: CMS Energy Corporation 170 Consumers Power Company 171
Report of Independent Public Accountants CMS Energy Corporation 172 Consumers Power Company 173
Schedules other than those listed above are omitted because they are either not required, not applicable or the required information is shown in the financial statements or notes thereto.
Columns omitted from schedules filed have been omitted because the information is not applicable.
Arthur Andersen & Co.
Report of Independent Public Accountants
To CMS Energy Corporation:
We have audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the consolidated financial statements included in CMS Energy Corporation's 1993 Annual Report to shareholders incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K, and have issued our report thereon dated January 28, 1994. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on those basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole. The schedules listed in Item 14(a) are the responsibility of the Company's management and are presented for purposes of complying with the Securities and Exchange Commission's rules and are not part of the basic consolidated financial statements. These schedules have been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic consolidated financial statements and, in our opinion, fairly state in all material respects the financial data required to be set forth therein in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole.
ARTHUR ANDERSEN & Co.
Detroit, Michigan, January 28, 1994.
Arthur Andersen & Co.
Report of Independent Public Accountants
To Consumers Power Company:
We have audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the consolidated financial statements included in Consumers Power Company's 1993 Annual Report to shareholders incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K, and have issued our report thereon dated January 28, 1994. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on those basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole. The schedules listed in Item 14(a) are the responsibility of the Company's management and are presented for the purpose of complying with the Securities and Exchange Commission's rules and are not part of the basic consolidated financial statements. These schedules have been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic consolidated financial statements and, in our opinion, fairly state in all material respects the financial data required to be set forth therein in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole.
ARTHUR ANDERSEN & Co.
Detroit, Michigan, January 28, 1994.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, CMS Energy Corporation has duly caused this Annual Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, on the 18th day of March 1994.
CMS ENERGY CORPORATION
By William T. McCormick, Jr. ---------------------------- William T. McCormick, Jr. Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Annual Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of CMS Energy Corporation and in the capacities and on the 18th day of March 1994.
Signature Title - -------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
(i) Principal executive officer: Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer William T. McCormick, Jr. and Director - ------------------------------------- William T. McCormick, Jr.
(ii) Principal financial officer:
Senior Vice President and A M Wright Chief Financial Officer - ------------------------------------- Alan M. Wright
(iii) Controller or principal accounting officer:
Vice President, Controller P. D. Hopper and Chief Accounting Officer - ------------------------------------- Preston D. Hopper
(iv) A majority of the Directors including those named above:
Director - ------------------------------------- James J. Duderstadt
Signature Title - ------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Victor J. Fryling Director - ------------------------------------- Victor J. Fryling
Earl D. Holton* Director - ------------------------------------- Earl D. Holton
Lois A. Lund* Director - ------------------------------------- Lois A. Lund
Frank H. Merlotti* Director - ------------------------------------- Frank H. Merlotti
W. U. Parfet* Director - ------------------------------------- William U. Parfet
Percy A. Pierre* Director - ------------------------------------- Percy A. Pierre
T. F. Russell* Director - ------------------------------------- Thomas F. Russell
S. Kinnie Smith, Jr.* Director - ------------------------------------- S. Kinnie Smith, Jr.
Director - ------------------------------------- Robert D. Tuttle
Kenneth Whipple* Director - ------------------------------------- Kenneth Whipple
John B. Yasinsky* Director - ------------------------------------- John B. Yasinsky
* By Thomas A. McNish ------------------------------- Thomas A. McNish, Attorney-in-Fact
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Consumers Power Company has duly caused this Annual Report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, on the 18th day of March 1994.
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY
By William T. McCormick, Jr. --------------------------------- William T. McCormick, Jr. Chairman of the Board
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this Annual Report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of Consumers Power Company and in the capacities and on the 18th day of March 1994.
Signature Title - ------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
(i) Principal executive officer:
President and Michael G. Morris Chief Executive Officer - ------------------------------------- Michael G. Morris
(ii) Principal financial officer:
Senior Vice President and A M Wright Chief Financial Officer - ------------------------------------- Alan M. Wright
(iii) Controller or principal accounting officer:
Vice President and Dennis DaPra Controller - ------------------------------------- Dennis DaPra
(iv) A majority of the Directors including those named above:
Director - ------------------------------------- James J. Duderstadt
Signature Title - ------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
Victor J. Fryling Director - ------------------------------------- Victor J. Fryling
Earl D. Holton* Director - ------------------------------------- Earl D. Holton
Lois A. Lund* Director - ------------------------------------- Lois A. Lund
William T. McCormick, Jr. Director - ------------------------------------- William T. McCormick, Jr.
Frank H. Merlotti* Director - ------------------------------------- Frank H. Merlotti
W. U. Parfet* Director - ------------------------------------- William U. Parfet
Percy A. Pierre* Director - ------------------------------------- Percy A. Pierre
T. F. Russell* Director - ------------------------------------- Thomas F. Russell
S. Kinnie Smith, Jr.* Director - ------------------------------------- S. Kinnie Smith, Jr.
Director - ------------------------------------- Robert D. Tuttle
Kenneth Whipple* Director - ------------------------------------- Kenneth Whipple
John B. Yasinsky* Director - ------------------------------------- John B. Yasinsky
*By Thomas A. McNish -------------------------------- Thomas A. McNish, Attorney-in-Fact