Quarterly review : selected financial and operational data

              "Quarterly Review"
Selected Financial and Operational Data:
Re:
Electric Companies
● Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
● Duke Energy Progress, Inc.,
d/b/a Duke Energy Progress
● Virginia Electric and Power Company,
d/b/a Dominion North Carolina Power
Natural Gas Local Distribution Companies
● Piedmont Natural Gas Company, Inc.
● Public Service Company of North Carolina, Inc.,
d/b/a PSNC Energy
■ Quarter Ending September 30, 2013 ■
Prepared by:
North Carolina Utilities Commission
Operations Division
430 N. Salisbury Street Mailing Address:
Raleigh, NC 27603 4325 Mail Service Center
919-733-3979 www.ncuc.net Raleigh, NC 27699-4325
iii
Table of Contents
Part Page
I Introduction 1
II Review of Key Financial Ratios: 9
◘ Summary Statement of Key Financial Ratios For Five Selected
Companies For The Twelve Months Ended September 30, 2013 ─
Returns on Common Equity, Overall Rates of Return, Common
Equity Capitalization Ratios, and Debt Ratios ─ And Certain Rate
Case Data 10
◘ Statement of Authorized Returns on Common Equity and Overall
Rates of Return Granted By Various Public Utility Regulatory
Agencies As Reported By Public Utilities Reports, Volume
Nos. 297-306, from June 2012 Through August 2013 12
III Overviews of Selected Financial and Operational Data By Utility: 14
◘ Electric Companies:
▪ Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC 15
▪ Duke Energy Progress, Inc., d/b/a
Duke Energy Progress 16
▪ Virginia Electric and Power Company, d/b/a
Dominion North Carolina Power 17
◘ Natural Gas Local Distribution Companies:
▪ Piedmont Natural Gas Company, Inc. 18
▪ Public Service Company of North Carolina, Inc., d/b/a
PSNC Energy 19
IV Telecommunications Companies – Annual Report Filings 20
V Appendix A – Electronic Distribution List
Part I
Introduction
◘ The purpose, structure, focus, and an abbreviated synopsis of the nature
of the contents of this report is presented here.
2
The Quarterly Review has been designed and is structured so as to provide, in a clear
and concise format, relevant and useful financial and operational information pertaining to
five major investor-owned public utilities regulated by the North Carolina Utilities
Commission (Commission): three electric companies and two natural gas local distribution
companies. The primary focus of this report is one of a jurisdictional financial nature.
However, albeit limited, certain jurisdictional operational information is also included.
To a vast extent the information presented herein is organized into individual company
overviews and covers a period of five years. From a general viewpoint, the individual company
overviews provide information that users of this report will find helpful from the standpoint of
gaining insight into each company's jurisdictional financial standing and in acquiring a sense
of the magnitude of each company's overall jurisdictional economic dimension.
Significant changes have taken place with regard to the annual reporting requirements
for the price plan regulated telephone companies which have impacted the conformity and
comparability of the financial and operational information provided by such companies for
the 12-month reporting period ending December 31, 2011 and beyond. Specifically, on
June 30, 2011, in Docket No. P-100, Sub 72b, the Commission issued an Order ruling on a
petition filed by the North Carolina Telecommunications Industry Association, Inc. on
March 16, 2011, requesting modification or elimination of certain reporting requirements
relating to incumbent local exchange companies (ILECs) and/or competing local providers.
The June 30, 2011 Order, among other things, revised Commission Rule R1-32 by adding a
new Subsection (e1). Such revision allows ILECs, that are price plan regulated under
G.S. 62-133.5(a), and any carrier electing regulation under G.S. 62-133.5(h) or (m) to satisfy all
of their annual reporting obligations by one of the two following ways: (1) by providing a link
to their annual filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), if they are
publicly traded entities, or (2) by filing copies of their audited financial statements with the
Commission, if they are not publicly traded entities. The foregoing would be in lieu of filing
annual reports regarding the North Carolina Operations on forms furnished or approved by
the Commission. Price plan regulated telephone companies are to either provide their annual
reports to the Commission or otherwise satisfy their annual reporting obligations under
Commission Rule R1-32, Subsection (e1) as soon as possible after the close of the calendar
year, but in no event later than the 30th day of April of each year for the preceding calendar
year.
Seven of the eight ILECs for which the Commission last reported financial information
for the 12-month period ending December 31, 2010, have since chosen to meet their annual
reporting obligation by providing links to their annual filings with the SEC. As a result of
such significant changes in the annual reporting requirements, financial information related to
the telecommunications companies is no longer being provided in this report. However, for the
following ILECs: (1) BellSouth Telecommunications, LLC, d/b/a AT&T North Carolina
(AT&T North Carolina); (2) Carolina Telephone and Telegraph Company LLC, d/b/a
3
CenturyLink (Carolina); (3) Central Telephone Company, d/b/a CenturyLink (Central);
(4) Mebtel, Inc., d/b/a CenturyLink (Mebtel); (5) Frontier Communications of the Carolinas
Inc. (Frontier); (6) Verizon South Inc. (Verizon South); (7) Windstream Concord Telephone,
Inc. (Concord); (8) Windstream Lexcom Communications, Inc. (Lexcom); and (9) Windstream
North Carolina, LLC (Windstream NC) the url addresses/links to their 2012 annual filings
with the SEC are provided in the report in Part IV.
With respect to other changes related to matters concerning the price plan regulated
telephone companies, on June 30, 2009, House Bill 1180 (HB1180) became law as set forth in
Session Law 2009-238. Said law, entitled “An Act Establishing the Consumer Choice and
Investment Act of 2009,” created a new category of price plan operation whereby any local
exchange carrier or competing local provider may choose to adopt by simply “filing notice of
its intent to do so with the Commission,” with such election being effective immediately upon
filing. Subsection (h) price plans1 provide for extensive deregulation of an electing
telecommunications company’s “terms, conditions, rates, or availability” relating to its retail
services. A local exchange company electing Subsection (h) is required to continue to offer
stand-alone basic residential lines to all customers who subscribe to that service at rates that
can be increased annually by no more than the percentage increase over the prior year in the
Gross Domestic Product Price Index (GDP-PI). While such deregulation is very extensive by
historical standards, it is not a complete deregulation of carriers electing Subsection (h).2
Currently, there are 10 incumbent local exchange carriers operating under
Subsection (h) price plans as a result of their notices of election filed pursuant to
G.S. 62-133.5(h): (1) Verizon South3 (notice filed on July 21, 2010 to become effective
immediately, in Docket No. P-19, Sub 277M); (2) Frontier (notice filed January 30, 2012 to
become effective immediately, in Docket No. P-1488, Sub 1A); (3) Carolina (notice filed
March 8, 2012 to become effective April 1, 2012, in Docket No. P-7, Sub 825M); (4) Central
(notice filed March 8, 2012 to become effective April 1, 2012, in Docket No. P-10, Sub 479N);
(5) Mebtel (notice filed March 8, 2012 to become effective April 1, 2012, in Docket No. P-35,
Sub 96I); (6) Concord (notice filed July 26, 2012 to become effective immediately, in Docket
No. P-16, Sub 181L); (7) Lexcom (notice filed July 26, 2012 to become effective immediately, in
Docket No. P-31, Sub 145C); (8) Windstream NC (notice filed July 26, 2012 to become effective
immediately, in Docket No. P-118, Sub 86L); (9) North State Telephone Company, d/b/a North
State Communications (North State) (notice filed November 30, 2012 to become effective
immediately, in Docket No. P-42, Sub 137F); and (10) Ellerbe Telephone Company (Ellerbe)
(notice filed December 30, 2013 to become effective January 1, 2014, in Docket No. P-21,
1 In general, the Commission refers to the new price plan category which resulted from the passage of HB1180 as
“Subsection (h) price plans”.
2 See Docket No. P-100, Sub 165 for additional information regarding the implications of the enactment of
HB1180 and the implementation of Subsection (h) price plans.
3 Such election relates to Verizon South’s only exchange, the Knotts Island exchange.
4
Sub 75). As a result of such elections, these 10 ILECs are no longer required to provide an
annual report to the Commission as directed by Commission Rule R1-32, commencing with the
calendar year in which such election becomes effective (2010: Verizon South; 2012: Frontier,
Carolina, Central, Mebtel, Concord, Lexcom, Windstream NC, and North State; and 2014:
Ellerbe). Alternatively, as required by the Commission’s March 30, 2010 Order in Docket
No. P-100, Sub 165, these ILECs will provide the Commission, on an annual basis, a link to
their financial filings with the SEC.
Furthermore, on April 26, 2011, Senate Bill 343 (SB 343) became law as set forth in
Session Law 2011-52. Said law, entitled “An Act Establishing the Communications Reform
and Investment Act of 2011,” created a new category of price plan operation outlined in
G.S. 62-133.5(m)4 whereby any local exchange company that forgoes receipt of any funding
from a state universal service fund or alternative funding mechanism and whose territory is
open to competition from competing local providers may choose to adopt a Subsection (m)
price plan5 by simply “filing notice of its intent to do so with the Commission,” with such
election being effective immediately upon filing. Subsection (m) price plans provide, among
other things, that “the Commission shall not impose any requirements related to the terms,
conditions, rates, or availability of any of the local exchange company’s retail services.”6
Currently, AT&T North Carolina7 is the only incumbent local exchange carrier
operating under a Subsection (m) price plan. On October 14, 2011, in Docket No. P-55,
Sub 1013M, AT&T North Carolina filed its notice of election of a Subsection (m) price plan.
Prior to such election, AT&T North Carolina was operating under a Subsection (h) price
plan.8 As set forth by the Commission’s November 22, 2011 Order in Docket No. P-100,
Sub 165A, AT&T North Carolina will continue to provide the Commission, on an annual basis,
a link to its financial filings with the SEC.
4 The enabling legislation was initially specified in G.S. 62-133.5(l); however such reference has been renumbered
and codified in the General Statutes of North Carolina as G.S. 62-133.5(m). Consequently, on April 27, 2012, the
Commission issued an Errata Order to correct the reference of Subsection (l) in prior Commission orders to
Subsection (m) for consistency with the codification in the General Statutes.
5 In general, the Commission refers to the new price plan category which resulted from the passage of SB 343 as
“Subsection (m) price plans”.
6 Such retail services include stand-alone basic residential lines. See Docket No. P-100, Sub 165A for additional
information regarding the implications of the enactment of SB 343 and the implementation of Subsection (m)
price plans.
7 Effective July 1, 2011, BellSouthTelecommunications, Inc., d/b/a AT&T North Carolina changed its legal
classification from a corporation to an LLC and began transacting business as BellSouth Telecommunications,
LLC d/b/a AT&T North Carolina.
8 On October 5, 2009, in Docket No. P-55, Sub 1013M, AT&T North Carolina filed its notice of election of a
Subsection (h) price plan.
5
This report has been prepared solely for the use of the Commission. The responsibility
for developing and preparing the report is that of the Commission's Operations Division. The
preponderance of the information and data included in and/or on which the report is based
has been provided by the companies. Such data has not been audited or otherwise verified.
Therefore, the Operations Division, although it believes the aforesaid data to be true and
correct in each and every respect, cannot and does not offer any attestation in that regard.
A Specific Objective
A specific objective of this reporting process is to present to the Commission, on an
ongoing basis, meaningful information regarding the financial viability of the subject
companies, including the reasonableness of the overall levels of rates and charges currently
being charged by jurisdictional utilities, whose rates are cost based, for their sales of services.
Cost based regulation is synonymous with rate base, rate of return regulation.
Under rate base, rate of return regulation, the cost of service of a public utility is
defined as the sum total of reasonable operating expenses, depreciation, taxes, and a
reasonable return on the net valuation of property used and useful in providing public utility
services. Therefore, the reasonableness of a public utility's rates is a function of the
reasonableness of the level of each individual component of its cost of service.
The reasonable return component of the cost of service equation refers to the overall
rate of return related to investment funded by all investors, including debt investors as well as
preferred and common equity investors.9 The costs of debt capital and preferred stock, which
are essentially fixed by contract, must be deducted from revenue, like all other components of
the cost of service, in determining income available for distribution to common stockholders.
Therefore, generally speaking, a very meaningful measure of the profitability of any utility,
and consequently the reasonableness of its overall rates and charges, is the return earned on its
common shareholders' investment, i.e., its return on common equity, over some specified
period of time. Typically, such returns are measured over a period of one year. Thus, annual
returns on common equity and certain other key financial ratios, which among other things
give significant perspective to the common equity returns, are the focal points of this report.
The Key Financial Ratios
Specifically, the key financial ratios presented herein for use in reviewing the
companies' financial viabilities, including their profitability and consequently the
reasonableness of their rates and charges are (1) the return on common equity, (2) the common
9 Regarding Limited Liability Corporations (LLCs), equity investors are, typically, referred to as “members”
rather than as “shareholders or stockholders”. Consequently, references to “common shareholders/stockholders”,
as contained herein, are also intended to apply to equity investors of LLCs as well. Additionally, discussion
regarding “return on common equity” and the “common equity capitalization ratio” would also apply to the
LLC’s “return on members’ equity” and “members’ equity capitalization ratio”.
6
equity capitalization ratio, (3) the pretax interest coverage ratio, and (4) the overall rate of
return.
The Return on Common Equity
As indicated, the return on common equity is a key financial indicator which measures
the profitability of an enterprise from the standpoint of its common stockholders over some
specified period of time. That return or earnings rate reflects the ratio of earnings available
for common equity to the common-equity investors' capital investment. As previously stated,
the ratio is significant because it traditionally represents profitability after all revenues and
costs, other than the cost of common equity capital, have been considered. From the
standpoint of measuring profitability, return on common equity is indeed "the bottom line".
The Common Equity Capitalization Ratio
The common equity capitalization ratio is the ratio of common equity capital to total
investor-supplied capital of the firm. That ratio is significant because it is a major indicator of
the financial riskiness of the firm, particularly from the standpoint of the common
stockholders. The issuance of debt capital, assuming no offsetting decrease in preferred stock,
decreases the common equity capitalization ratio, and its existence creates what has come to be
known as financial leverage. The risk borne by shareholders that accompanies that leverage is
known as financial risk. As the proportion of debt in the capital structure increases, so does
the degree of financial leverage and thus shareholders' risk and consequently the shareholders'
requirements regarding expected return, i.e., the expected return on common equity or, in
regulatory jargon, the cost of common equity capital.
Alternatively, the financial riskiness of the firm, some might argue, is more
appropriately revealed when expressed in terms of debt leverage, particularly when preferred
stock is present in the capital structure. Such leverage is the ratio of long-term debt capital to
total investor-supplied capital. Both approaches are clearly insightful and useful. In
evaluating the superiority of one approach in comparison to the other, one should consider the
context within which the information is to be used. Since a major objective of this report is to
review the reasonableness of the levels of earnings of the companies' common stockholders,
and in consideration of the other key financial benchmarks which are also presented herein,
the common equity capitalization ratio appears to be the most appropriate and meaningful
measure of the financial riskiness of the companies for use in this regard.
The Pretax Interest Coverage Ratio
The pretax interest coverage ratio is the number of times earnings, determined before
consideration of income taxes and interest charges, cover annual interest charges. That
financial indicator is particularly important to debt investors because holders of the company's
outstanding debt, including long-term bonds, receive interest payments from the company
7
before any earnings are determined to be available for distribution to preferred or common
equity investors. Pretax interest coverage is measured before income taxes because interest
expense is deductible in arriving at taxable income. Therefore, generally speaking, debt
holders can expect to be paid before the company incurs any liability for the payment of
income taxes. From the debt holder's perspective, all other things remaining equal, the higher
the pretax interest coverage the better.
The Overall Rate of Return
The overall rate of return measures the profitability of a firm from the standpoint of
earnings on total investment, including investment funded by both debt and equity investors.
Specifically, in the public utility regulatory environment, it is the ratio of operating income to
total investment.
The Propriety of the Methodology
The foregoing financial benchmarks, as presented in this report, have been determined
on the basis of the companies' actual operating experience. Under rate base, rate of return
regulation, North Carolina statutes require that the companies' rates be determined on a
normalized, pro forma, end-of-period basis based upon an historical test period. Stated
alternatively, the Commission, in setting prospective rates, essentially, must take into account
the company's current level of operations adjusted for known and material changes in the
levels of revenues and costs that the company can reasonably be expected to experience over a
reasonable period of time into the future. Thus, rates, which are established for use
prospectively, are set, to a certain extent and within certain constraints, on the basis of revenue
and cost expectations, including investor expectations regarding their return requirements, as
opposed to simply setting prospective rates solely on the basis of actual operating experience.
The process of setting prospective rates is inherently and exceedingly time consuming,
difficult, and otherwise costly to both companies and regulators. It involves the assimilation,
investigation, and evaluation of enormous amounts of complex information and data which
invariably leads to multifarious issues; many, if not most, of which must be resolved through
adjudication.
It is far less difficult and costly to perform an intellectual, financial analysis of the need
to undertake the aforesaid process. Such preliminary analysis avoids the unnecessary
incursion of the immense costs of setting prospective rates. Those are precisely the reasons
why this report is focused on a review of the returns on common equity and other key financial
ratios which the companies are currently earning or achieving under their existing rates and
charges. Those ratios, when considered in conjunction with statutory ratemaking
requirements, prevailing economic conditions, and certain other financial indicators, including
returns on common equity and overall rates of return currently being authorized by other
public utility regulatory agencies, are meaningful indicators of the need, if any, for further,
more extensive regulatory review.
8
From the standpoint of giving an added measure of meaning to the aforesaid ratios of
the individual companies and in the interest of providing a sense of current financial market
conditions, certain financial information has been included herein as notes to the first
statement included in Part II of this report. Such notes are an integral part of this report.
Additionally, also from the standpoint of providing perspective, returns on common
equity and overall rates of return currently being authorized by a number of other public
utility regulatory agencies are provided in the second statement presented in Part II.
A Final Note
It is emphasized that the information contained in this report is not intended and
should not be construed to be all inclusive from the standpoint of the criteria to be used in
assessing the reasonableness of the companies existing rates. But rather, it is submitted that
such information is clearly relevant to such a determination and as such should be considered
in conjunction with all other pertinent information and data.
The Operations Division will be pleased to receive and respond to any questions or
comments.
Part II
A Review of Key Financial Ratios
◘ Summary Statement of Key Financial Ratios For Five
Selected Companies For The Twelve Months Ended
September 30, 2013 ─ Returns on Common Equity,
Overall Rates of Return, Common Equity
Capitalization Ratios, and Debt Ratios ─ And Certain
Rate Case Data
◘ Statement of Authorized Returns on Common Equity
and Overall Rates of Return Granted By Various
Public Utility Regulatory Agencies As Reported By
Public Utilities Reports, Volume Nos. 297-306 from
June 2012 Through August 2013
Return Overall Return Overall Date of
Line On Rate of Equity Debt On Rate of Equity Last
No. Item Equity Return Ratio Ratio Equity Return Ratio Order
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i)
Electric Companies
1. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC 9.74% 7.57% 53.43% 46.57% 10.20% 7.88% 53.00% 09/24/2013
2. Duke Energy Progress, Inc. 9.78% 7.31% 52.83% 46.91% 10.20% 7.55% 53.00% 05/30/2013
d/b/a Duke Energy Progress
3. Virginia Electric and Power Company, 14.10% 10.11% 55.46% 43.04% 10.20% 7.80% 51.00% 12/21/2012
d/b/a Dominion North Carolina Power
Natural Gas Local Distribution Companies
4. Piedmont Natural Gas Company, Inc. 10.83% 6.99% 44.68% 55.32% 10.00% 7.51% 50.66% 12/17/2013
5. Public Service Company of North Carolina, Inc., 11.45% 9.06% 57.49% 42.51% 10.60% 8.54% 54.00% 10/24/2008
d/b/a PSNC Energy
10
Estimated for 12 Months Ended 09/30/2013
Common Equity Capitalization Ratios, and Debt Ratios are for Twelve Months Ended September 30, 2013
"Rate Case Data are from Orders with Various Issue Dates as Indicated in Column (i)"
Summary Statement
Of Key Financial Ratios Achieved By
And Authorized For Selected Companies
"Estimated Returns on Common Equity, Overall Rates of Return,
Authorized - Last Rate Case
Summary Statement
Of Key Financial Ratios Achieved by
And Authorized for Selected Companies
“Estimated Returns on Common Equity, Overall Rates of Return,
Common Equity Capitalization Ratios, and Debt Ratios are for Twelve Months Ended September 30, 2013”
NOTES: [1] Selected financial market indicators from “Moody’s Credit Trends” updated on December 20, 2013 follow:
Part I
________U.S. Treasury Securities________ Dealer-
Placed
Moody’s
Long-Term
3-Month
Bill
10-Year
Note
30-Year
Bond
3-Month
CP
Corporate
Bond Yield
Line No. Date % % % % %
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f)
1. December 19, 2013 0.06 2.94 3.91 0.09 4.90
2. December 18, 2013 0.07 2.89 3.90 0.10 4.93
3. December 17, 2013 0.07 2.85 3.88 0.09 4.90
4. December 16, 2013 0.07 2.89 3.90 0.09 4.93
5. December 13, 2013 0.07 2.88 3.88 0.08 4.92
6. Month of November 2013 0.07 2.72 3.80 0.27 4.91
7. Month of October 2013 0.05 2.62 3.68 0.31 4.82
Part II
Moody’s public utility long-term bond yield averages (%):
_Past 12 Months_ Monthly Average
Line No. Rating 12/20/2013 High Low Dec. 2013 Nov. 2013
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f)
1. Aa 4.51 4.60 3.74 4.60 4.56
2. A 4.73 4.81 4.00 4.81 4.77
3. Baa 5.14 5.31 4.49 5.26 5.24
[2] Most recent data available when this edition of the Quarterly Review was prepared. According to “Moody’s Credit
Trends”, updated on December 23, 2013, such long-term bond yield averages are derived from pricing data on a
regularly-replenished population of nearly 90 seasoned corporate bonds in the United States market, each with
current outstandings over $100 million. Further, the bonds have maturities as close as possible to 30 years; bonds
are dropped from the list if their remaining life falls below 20 years or if their ratings change.
11
Authorized Returns Volume No.
Line Common Date Of Public Utilities
No. Company (Jurisdiction) Equity Overall Order Reports
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
.
Electric Companies
1. Puget Sound Energy, Inc. (WA) 9.80% 7.80% 05/22/2012 Volume 297
2. Consumers Energy Company (MI) 10.30% 6.70% 06/07/2012 Volume 297
3. Northern States Power Company, d/b/a 10.37% N/A 05/14/2012 Volume 298
Xcel Energy (MN)
4. Delmarva Power & Light Company (MD) 9.81% 7.56% 07/20/2012 Volume 298
5. Black Diamond Power Company (WV) 9.75% 8.78% 08/10/2012 Volume 299
6. Potomac Electric Power Company (DC) 9.50% 8.03% 09/27/2012 Volume 300
7. Entergy Texas, Inc. (TX) 9.80% 8.27% 09/14/2012 Volume 300
8. Rocky Mountain Power (UT) 9.80% 7.86% 09/19/2012 Volume 300
9. Southern California Edison Company (CA) 10.45% 7.90% 12/20/2012 Volume 302
10. San Diego Gas & Electric Company (CA) 10.30% 7.79% 12/20/2012 Volume 302
11. Pacific Gas & Electric Company (CA) 10.40% 8.06% 12/20/2012 Volume 302
12. Wisconsin Electric Power Company, d/b/a 10.40% 7.71% 12/21/2012 Volume 302
We Energies (WI)
13. Avista Corporation d/b/a Avista Utilities (WA) 9.80% 7.64% 12/26/2012 Volume 303
14. Narragansett Electric Company, d/b/a National Grid (RI) 9.50% [1] N/A 02/01/2013 Volume 303
15. Indiana Michigan Power Company (IN) 10.20% 6.97% 02/13/2013 Volume 303
16. Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (MD) 9.75% 7.60% 02/22/2013 Volume 303
17. Duke Energy Progress, Inc., d/b/a 10.20% 7.55% 05/30/2013 Volume 306
Duke Energy Progress (NC)
18. Potomac Electric Power Company (MD) 9.36% 7.63% 07/12/2013 Volume 306
Natural Gas Local Distribution
Companies
19. Puget Sound Energy, Inc. (WA) 9.80% 7.80% 05/22/2012 Volume 297
20. SourceGas Distribution LLC (NE) 9.60% N/A 05/22/2012 Volume 297
21. Atmos Energy (KS) N/A N/A 08/22/2012 Volume 299
22. Vermont Gas Systems, Inc. (VT) 9.75% N/A 08/21/2012 Volume 300
23. San Diego Gas & Electric Company (CA) 10.30% 7.79% 12/20/2012 Volume 302
12
Statement of Authorized Returns
On Common Equity and Overall Rates of Return
Granted By Various Public Utility Regulatory Agencies As Reported In
(Statement Is All Inclusive With Respect To Returns Published)
Public Utilities Reports, Volume Nos. 297-306, from June 2012 through August 2013
Volume No.
Line Common Date Of Public Utilities
No. Company (Jurisdiction) Equity Overall Order Reports
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Natural Gas Local Distribution
Companies (continued)
24. Southern California Gas Company (CA) 10.10% 8.02% 12/20/2012 Volume 302
25. Pacific Gas & Electric Company (CA) 10.40% 8.06% 12/20/2012 Volume 302
26. Wisconsin Natural Gas, LLC, d/b/a 10.50% 6.90% 12/21/2012 Volume 302
We Energies (WI)
27. Bluefield Gas Company (WV) 9.90% 6.62% 01/30/2013 Volume 303
28. Avista Corporation d/b/a Avista Utilities (WA) 9.80% 7.64% 12/26/2012 Volume 303
29. Narragansett Electric Company, d/b/a National Grid (RI) 9.50% [1] N/A 02/01/2013 Volume 303
30. Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (MD) 9.60% 7.53% 02/22/2013 Volume 303
31. Washington Gas Light Company (DC) 9.25% 7.93% 05/15/2013 Volume 305
32. Brooklyn Union Gas Company, d/b/a 9.40% 6.98% 06/13/2013 Volume 306
National Grid New York (NY)
Water Companies
33. Tennessee American Water Company (TN) 10.00% 7.83% 04/27/2012 Volume 298
34. California Water Service Company (CA) 9.99% [2] 8.24% 07/12/2012 Volume 298
35. San Jose Water Company (CA) 9.99% [2] 8.38% 07/12/2012 Volume 298
36. California-American Water Company (CA) 9.99% [2] 8.41% 07/12/2012 Volume 298
37. Golden State Water Company (CA) 9.99% [2] 8.64% 07/12/2012 Volume 298
38. Lakes Region Water Company (NH) 9.75% 8.43% 07/13/2012 Volume 299
39. Illinois-American Water Company (IL) 9.34% 7.56% 09/19/2012 Volume 301
40. Utilities Services of South Carolina, Inc. (SC) 9.42% 7.73% 02/12/2013 Volume 304
41. Arizona Water Company (AZ) 10.55% 8.72% 02/20/2013 Volume 304
Notes:
[1] The Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission approved a settlement which includes an earnings sharing mechanism whereby
accumulated earnings over the authorized 9.50% ROE, up to and including 100 basis points above the authorized ROE, would
be shared 50/50 with customers. Earnings over 100 basis points above the authorized ROE would be shared 75% to ratepayers
and 25% to the utility.
[2] The California Public Utilities Commission approved a settlement agreement that established, for the period 2011 through 2014,
the costs of debt and equity, capital structures, and rates of return for the four Class A water utilities doing business in California.
An identical cost of common equity of 9.99% was established for each of the four utilities, but the settlement agreement provided for
a different cost of debt and capital structure for each of the utilities, yielding a different overall rate of return for each of the utilities.
[3] N/A denotes that information is not available.
13
Authorized Returns
Public Utilities Reports, Volume Nos. 297-306, from June 2012 through August 2013
(Statement Is All Inclusive With Respect To Returns Published)
Statement of Authorized Returns
On Common Equity and Overall Rates of Return
Granted By Various Public Utility Regulatory Agencies As Reported In
Part III
Overviews of Selected
Financial and Operational Data by Utility:
◘ Electric Companies
▪ Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
▪ Duke Energy Progress, Inc.,
d/b/a Duke Energy Progress
▪ Virginia Electric and Power Company,
d/b/a Dominion North Carolina Power
◘ Natural Gas Local Distribution Companies
▪ Piedmont Natural Gas Company, Inc.
▪ Public Service Company of North Carolina, Inc.,
d/b/a PSNC Energy
Annual
Line September September September September September Four Current
No. Item 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 Year Year
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)
1. Operating Revenue $4,783,693 $4,582,164 $4,481,344 $4,331,882 $3,909,940 5.17% 4.40%
2. Operating Expenses:
3. Fuel 1,133,504 974,187 1,166,247 1,146,651 1,020,584 2.66% 16.35%
4. Purchased Power 187,477 235,751 193,979 155,923 146,653 6.33% -20.48%
5. Maintenance 435,141 421,454 435,708 416,893 380,985 3.38% 3.25%
6. Other Operating Expenses 936,341 858,741 883,107 856,699 730,098 6.42% 9.04%
7. Total Operating Expenses 2,692,463 2,490,133 2,679,041 2,576,166 2,278,320 4.26% 8.13%
8. Depreciation & Amortization 642,918 625,050 531,002 495,266 473,504 7.95% 2.86%
9. Total Expenses & Depreciation 3,335,381 3,115,183 3,210,043 3,071,432 2,751,824 4.93% 7.07%
10. Total Operating Taxes 632,404 648,313 575,961 556,923 505,208 5.77% -2.45%
11. Total Expenses, Depr. & Taxes 3,967,785 3,763,496 3,786,004 3,628,355 3,257,032 5.06% 5.43%
12. Operating Income $815,908 $818,668 $695,340 $703,527 $652,908 5.73% -0.34%
13. Net Plant Investment $14,046,007 $12,408,597 $11,351,973 $10,972,871 $9,817,185 9.37% 13.20%
14. Oper. Exp. as a % of Total Revenue 56.28% 54.34% 59.78% 59.47% 58.27% -0.86% 3.57%
15. Net Plt. Investment per $ of Revenue $2.94 $2.71 $2.53 $2.53 $2.51 4.03% 8.49%
16. Number of Customers Served (000s included):
17. Residential 1,610,815 1,598,686 1,588,687 1,582,462 1,574,597 0.57% 0.76%
18. Commercial 254,339 252,424 251,025 249,322 248,662 0.57% 0.76%
19. Industrial 4,911 4,995 5,190 5,370 5,538 -2.96% -1.68%
20. Other 10,999 10,993 10,901 10,821 10,753 0.57% 0.05%
21. Total Number of Customers 1,881,064 1,867,098 1,855,803 1,847,975 1,839,550 0.56% 0.75%
22. Annual Sales Volume: (Millions kWh)
23. Residential 20,398 20,017 22,123 22,586 21,012 -0.74% 1.90%
24. Commercial 21,977 21,795 22,000 21,966 21,387 0.68% 0.84%
25. Industrial 12,370 12,244 12,233 12,066 11,693 1.42% 1.03%
26. Other 2,367 574 714 1,234 1,172 19.21% 312.37%
27. Total Sales 57,112 54,630 57,070 57,852 55,264 0.83% 4.54%
28. Estimated Overall Rate of Return 7.57% 8.00% 7.36% 8.01% 7.59% -0.07% -5.38%
29. Estimated Return on Common Equity 9.74% 10.42% 8.99% 10.19% 9.47% 0.71% -6.53%
30. Common Equity Ratio 53.43% 53.35% 53.45% 52.85% 52.03% 0.67% 0.15%
31. Debt Ratio 46.57% 46.65% 46.55% 47.15% 47.97% -0.74% -0.17%
32. Estimated Pretax Interest Coverage
Ratio (Times) 4.55 4.75 4.17 4.33 3.98 3.40% -4.21%
33. LAST RATE CASE Authorized Returns: Common Equity 10.20%, Overall 7.88%; Equity Ratio: 53.00%; Date of Order: 9-24-13
(Docket No. E-7, Sub 1026)
Notes: [1] North Carolina retail jurisdictional revenue equates to 70% of total company electric utility revenue.
[2] Net Plant Investment reflects net plant in service.
[3] Source of Data: NCUC ES-1 Reports.
[4] The increase from September 2012 to September 2013 in "Other" annual sales volume (millions kWh) can be attributed to energy sales
by DEC to Duke Energy Progress, Inc., d/b/a Duke Energy Progress (DEP) pursuant to the Joint Dispatch Agreement between DEC
and DEP filed in Docket Nos. E-2, Sub 998 and E-7, Sub 986.
15
12 Months Ended Growth Rate
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC
SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL DATA
North Carolina Retail Jurisdiction
(Amounts In Thousands)
Line September September September September September Four Current
No. Item 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 Year Year
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)
1. Operating Revenue $3,456,915 $3,329,765 $3,406,263 $3,571,805 $3,342,905 0.84% 3.82%
2. Operating Expenses:
3. Fuel 1,005,629 1,001,902 976,323 1,197,585 1,093,070 -2.06% 0.37%
4. Purchased Power 276,659 226,509 216,737 178,796 184,875 10.60% 22.14%
5. Maintenance 291,278 331,953 263,856 254,801 229,885 6.10% -12.25%
6. Other Operating Expenses 704,885 747,755 636,895 628,595 560,079 5.92% -5.73%
7. Total Operating Expenses 2,278,451 2,308,119 2,093,811 2,259,777 2,067,909 2.45% -1.29%
8. Depreciation & Amortization 339,514 360,110 338,680 326,686 360,612 -1.50% -5.72%
9. Total Expenses & Depreciation 2,617,965 2,668,229 2,432,491 2,586,463 2,428,521 1.90% -1.88%
10. Total Operating Taxes 382,325 305,633 422,270 448,238 427,507 -2.75% 25.09%
11. Total Expenses, Depr. & Taxes 3,000,290 2,973,862 2,854,761 3,034,701 2,856,028 1.24% 0.89%
12. Operating Income $456,625 $355,903 $551,502 $537,104 $486,877 -1.59% 28.30%
13. Net Plant Investment $6,454,040 $6,135,400 $5,968,221 $5,295,383 $5,260,230 5.25% 5.19%
14. Oper. Exp. as a % of Total Revenue 65.91% 69.32% 61.47% 63.27% 61.86% 1.60% -4.92%
15. Net Plt. Investment per $ of Revenue $1.87 $1.84 $1.75 $1.48 $1.57 4.47% 1.63%
16. Number of Customers Served (000s included):
17. Residential 1,109,307 1,117,444 1,109,190 1,103,946 1,095,481 0.31% -0.73%
18. Commercial 191,386 194,816 192,860 191,804 190,627 0.10% -1.76%
19. Industrial 3,647 3,874 3,954 3,970 4,026 -2.44% -5.86%
20. Other 1,492 1,514 1,611 1,748 1,818 -4.82% -1.45%
21. Total Number of Customers 1,305,832 1,317,648 1,307,615 1,301,468 1,291,952 0.27% -0.90%
22. Annual Sales Volume: (Millions kWh)
23. Residential 15,025 14,533 16,149 16,282 15,165 -0.23% 3.39%
24. Commercial 11,808 11,963 12,151 12,237 11,984 -0.37% -1.30%
25. Industrial 8,366 8,295 8,391 8,349 8,181 0.56% 0.86%
26. Other 4,380 2,728 1,616 2,181 1,838 24.25% 60.56%
27. Total Sales 39,579 37,519 38,307 39,049 37,168 1.58% 5.49%
28. Estimated Overall Rate of Return 7.31% 5.81% 9.68% 9.93% 8.95% -4.93% 25.82%
29. Estimated Return on Common Equity 9.78% 6.57% 12.80% 13.41% 11.78% -4.55% 48.86%
30. Common Equity Ratio 52.83% 54.11% 59.04% 57.55% 55.35% -1.16% -2.37%
31. Debt Ratio 46.91% 45.29% 40.32% 41.78% 43.94% 1.65% 3.58%
32. Estimated Pretax Interest Coverage
Ratio (Times) 4.89 3.51 6.65 6.77 5.65 -3.55% 39.32%
33. LAST RATE CASE Authorized Returns: Common Equity 10.20%, Overall 7.55%; Equity Ratio: 53.00%; Date of Order: 5-30-13
(Docket No. E-2, Sub 1023)
Notes: [1] North Carolina retail jurisdictional revenue equates to 71% of total company electric utility revenue.
[2] Net Plant Investment reflects net plant in service.
[3] Source of Data: NCUC ES-1 Reports.
[4] The decrease from September 2012 to September 2013 in the number of customers was primarily due to a change in reporting by
DEP. Beginning with the December 2012 NCUC ES-1 Report, PEC now reports the number of active customers rather than the
total number of customers which includes both active and inactive customers.
[5] The increase from September 2012 to September 2013 in "Other" annual sales volume (millions kWh) can be attributed to energy
sales by DEP to Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (DEC) pursuant to the Joint Dispatch Agreement between DEC and DEP filed
in Docket Nos. E-2, Sub 998 and E-7, Sub 986.
16
Annual
12 Months Ended Growth Rate
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., d/b/a
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS
SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL DATA
North Carolina Retail Jurisdiction
(Amounts In Thousands)
Annual
Line September September September September September Four Current
No. Item 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 Year Year
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)
1. Operating Revenue $363,535 $328,844 $327,970 $343,641 $322,191 3.06% 10.55%
2. Operating Expenses:
3. Fuel 68,909 84,203 50,410 95,514 82,803 -4.49% -18.16%
4. Purchased Power 50,480 62,070 85,868 75,588 68,524 -7.36% -18.67%
5. Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A
6. Other Operating Expenses 81,481 73,829 79,360 78,796 72,339 3.02% 10.36%
7. Total Operating Expenses 200,870 220,102 215,638 249,898 223,666 -2.65% -8.74%
8. Depreciation & Amortization 48,208 47,592 36,939 34,575 33,621 9.43% 1.29%
9. Total Expenses & Depreciation 249,078 267,694 252,577 284,473 257,287 -0.81% -6.95%
10. Total Operating Taxes 33,534 33,667 35,821 26,602 32,704 0.63% -0.40%
11. Total Expenses, Depr. & Taxes 282,612 301,361 288,398 311,075 289,991 -0.64% -6.22%
12. Operating Income $80,923 $27,483 $39,572 $32,566 $32,200 25.91% 194.45%
13. Net Plant Investment $963,316 $905,091 $813,746 $661,174 $633,374 11.05% 6.43%
14. Oper. Exp. as a % of Total Revenue 55.25% 66.93% 65.75% 72.72% 69.42% -5.55% -17.45%
15. Net Plt. Investment per $ of Revenue $2.65 $2.75 $2.48 $1.92 $1.97 7.69% -3.64%
16. Number of Customers Served (000s included):
17. Residential 101,163 101,139 100,916 100,933 100,727 0.11% 0.02%
18. Commercial 15,574 15,548 15,426 15,432 15,486 0.14% 0.17%
19. Industrial 50 50 53 58 59 -4.05% 0.00%
20. Other 2,241 2,233 2,244 2,252 2,261 -0.22% 0.36%
21. Total Number of Customers 119,028 118,970 118,639 118,675 118,533 0.10% 0.05%
22. Annual Sales Volume: (Millions kWh)
23. Residential 1,569 1,472 1,677 1,690 1,597 -0.44% 6.59%
24. Commercial 886 828 813 825 804 2.46% 7.00%
25. Industrial 1,675 1,607 1,632 1,624 1,464 3.42% 4.23%
26. Other 136 133 144 148 145 -1.59% 2.26%
27. Total Sales 4,266 4,040 4,266 4,287 4,010 1.56% 5.59%
28. Estimated Overall Rate of Return 10.11% 3.69% 5.96% 6.39% 6.41% 12.07% 173.98%
29. Estimated Return on Common Equity 14.10% 2.31% 6.37% 7.05% 7.08% 18.79% 510.39%
30. Common Equity Ratio 55.46% 54.65% 54.92% 52.72% 50.49% 2.37% 1.48%
31. Debt Ratio 43.04% 43.80% 43.47% 45.51% 47.56% -2.47% -1.74%
32. Estimated Pretax Interest Coverage
Ratio (Times) 5.15 2.30 3.43 2.87 3.39 11.02% 123.91%
33. LAST RATE CASE Authorized Returns: Common Equity - 10.20%, Overall - 7.80%; Equity Ratio: 51%; Date of Order: 12-21-12
(Docket No. E-22, Sub 479)
Notes: [1] North Carolina retail jurisdictional revenue equates to 5% of total company electric utility revenue.
[2] Net Plant Investment reflects net plant in service.
[3] Source of Data: NCUC ES-1 Reports.
[4] The results for the 12 months ended September 30, 2013, reflect income tax reductions related to (i) an adjustment to North Carolina
state accumulated deferred income taxes to recognize tax rate reductions effective January 1, 2014 and January 1, 2015, as enacted
in 2013 North Carolina Session Law 2013-316 (HB 998), and (ii) a change in the Company's determination of North Carolina state
income taxes that has been filed with, but not yet accepted by, the North Carolina Department of Revenue. According to the Company,
the return on common equity for the 12 months ended September 30, 2013, excluding such adjustments, would have been 10.43%.
[5] N/A denotes that the data is not available or not applicable or that information is, essentially, unmeaningful.
17
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY, d/b/a
Growth Rate
DOMINION NORTH CAROLINA POWER
SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL DATA
North Carolina Retail Jurisdiction
(Amounts In Thousands)
12 Months Ended
Annual
Growth Rate
Line September September September September September Four Current
No. Item 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 Year Year
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)
1. Operating Revenue:
2. Residential $405,990 $378,300 $454,102 $532,561 $558,664 -7.67% 7.32%
3. Commercial 228,689 214,848 262,548 313,645 337,268 -9.26% 6.44%
4. Industrial 18,709 17,388 25,470 37,985 51,334 -22.30% 7.60%
5. Public Authorities 373 443 644 983 215 14.77% -15.80%
6. Other 134,490 93,685 87,509 80,152 78,138 14.54% 43.56%
7. Total Operating Revenue 788,251 704,664 830,273 965,326 1,025,619 -6.37% 11.86%
8. Cost of Gas 357,048 304,591 438,935 583,167 642,695 -13.67% 17.22%
9. Margin 431,203 400,073 391,338 382,159 382,924 3.01% 7.78%
10. O & M Expenses 179,348 169,304 158,043 160,334 149,163 4.71% 5.93%
11. Other Deductions 143,787 134,253 129,888 123,870 128,733 2.80% 7.10%
12. Operating Income $108,068 $96,516 $103,407 $97,955 $105,028 0.72% 11.97%
13. Net Plant Investment $2,450,099 $1,873,047 $1,707,392 $1,606,257 $1,569,133 11.78% 30.81%
14. Operating Exp. as a % of Margin 41.59% 42.32% 40.39% 41.95% 38.95% 1.65% -1.72%
15. Net Plt. Investment per $ of Margin $5.68 $4.68 $4.36 $4.20 $4.10 8.49% 21.37%
16. Gas Delivered in DTs (000s omitted):
17. Residential 37,373 29,468 38,371 39,249 37,186 0.13% 26.83%
18. Commercial 28,298 24,023 28,267 28,407 27,562 0.66% 17.80%
19. Industrial 2,703 2,580 3,339 4,559 5,305 -15.51% 4.77%
20. Public Authorities 67 48 66 82 16 43.05% 39.58%
21. Other 259,613 215,023 148,732 122,802 98,193 27.52% 20.74%
22. Total DTs 328,054 271,142 218,775 195,099 168,262 18.17% 20.99%
23. Number of Customers (000s included):
24. Residential 606,286 600,350 593,848 587,461 580,665 1.09% 0.99%
25. Commercial 64,642 64,172 63,358 62,790 63,041 0.63% 0.73%
26. Industrial 1,070 1,069 1,083 1,076 1,101 -0.71% 0.09%
27. Public Authorities 1,807 1,323 1,576 1,609 360 49.68% 36.58%
28. Other 601 599 568 569 557 1.92% 0.33%
29. Total Number of Customers 674,406 667,513 660,433 653,505 645,724 1.09% 1.03%
30. Estimated Overall Rate of Return 6.99% 7.54% 8.21% 8.08% 8.38% -4.43% -7.29%
31. Estimated Return on Common Equity 10.83% 11.21% 11.07% 10.52% 12.13% -2.79% -3.39%
32. Common Equity Ratio 44.68% 48.48% 51.45% 50.16% 45.33% -0.36% -7.84%
33. Debt Ratio 55.32% 51.52% 48.55% 49.84% 54.67% 0.30% 7.38%
34. Estimated Pretax Interest Coverage
Ratio (Times) 4.73 5.25 4.74 4.13 4.20 3.02% -9.90%
35. LAST RATE CASE Authorized Returns: Common Equity 10.00%, Overall 7.51%; Equity Ratio: 50.66%; Date of Order: 12-17-13
(Docket No. G-9, Sub 631)
Notes:
[1] North Carolina retail jurisdictional revenue equates to approximately 71% of total company gas utility revenue.
[2] Net Plant Investment reflects net plant in service.
[3] Source of Data: Shareholders' reports and the NCUC GS-1 Reports.
12 Months Ended
(Amounts In Thousands)
PIEDMONT NATURAL GAS COMPANY, INC.
SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL DATA
North Carolina Jurisdiction
18
Annual
Growth Rate
Line September September September September September Four Current
No. Item 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 Year Year
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)
1. Operating Revenue:
2. Residential $334,932 $252,825 $330,258 $332,587 $388,730 -3.66% 32.48%
3. Commercial 124,087 99,088 127,737 129,870 157,891 -5.85% 25.23%
4. Industrial 16,516 14,773 18,223 22,109 28,468 -12.73% 11.80%
5. Public Authorities 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A
6. Resale 0 0 3 6 4 N/A N/A
7. Other 31,953 27,864 27,318 26,177 26,155 5.13% 14.67%
8. Total Operating Revenue 507,488 394,550 503,539 510,749 601,248 -4.15% 28.62%
9. Cost of Gas 271,743 164,762 278,023 288,801 382,886 -8.21% 64.93%
10. Margin 235,745 229,788 225,516 221,948 218,362 1.93% 2.59%
11. O & M Expenses 85,771 85,135 84,735 85,301 83,838 0.57% 0.75%
12. Other Deductions 82,713 79,445 75,298 74,091 72,130 3.48% 4.11%
13. Operating Income $67,261 $65,208 $65,483 $62,556 $62,394 1.90% 3.15%
14. Net Plant Investment $858,321 $831,731 $784,731 $768,185 $770,970 2.72% 3.20%
15. Operating Exp. as a % of Margin 36.38% 37.05% 37.57% 38.43% 38.39% -1.34% -1.81%
16. Net Plt. Investment per $ of Margin $3.64 $3.62 $3.48 $3.46 $3.53 0.77% 0.55%
17. Gas Delivered in DTs (000s omitted):
18. Residential 27,951 21,697 28,308 28,544 26,683 1.17% 28.82%
19. Commercial 14,196 11,838 14,172 14,169 13,423 1.41% 19.92%
20. Industrial 2,938 2,699 2,721 3,200 3,165 -1.84% 8.86%
21. Public Authorities 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A
22. Resale 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A
23. Other 36,859 32,982 29,635 28,924 27,303 7.79% 11.75%
24. Total DTs 81,944 69,216 74,836 74,837 70,574 3.80% 18.39%
25. Number of Customers (000s included):
26. Residential 453,101 443,728 434,601 427,873 420,807 1.87% 2.11%
27. Commercial 41,251 40,800 40,446 39,219 38,994 1.42% 1.11%
28. Industrial 167 165 172 170 172 -0.73% 1.21%
29. Public Authorities 0 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A
30. Resale 0 0 1 2 2 N/A N/A
31. Other 460 476 461 465 456 0.22% -3.36%
32. 494,979 485,169 475,681 467,729 460,431 1.83% 2.02%
33. Estimated Overall Rate of Return 9.06% 8.96% 9.13% 8.90% 8.32% 2.15% 1.12%
34. Estimated Return on Common Equity 11.45% 11.39% 11.51% 11.22% 11.82% -0.79% 0.53%
35. Common Equity Ratio 57.49% 56.11% 55.52% 54.97% 49.47% 3.83% 2.46%
36. Debt Ratio 42.51% 43.89% 44.48% 45.03% 50.53% -4.23% -3.14%
37. Estimated Pretax Interest Coverage
Ratio (Times) 5.38 5.10 4.75 4.63 4.79 2.95% 5.49%
38. LAST RATE CASE Authorized Returns: Common Equity 10.60%, Overall 8.54%; Equity Ratio: 54.00%; Date of Order: 10-24-08
(Docket No. G-5, Sub 495)
.
Notes: [1] Net Plant Investment reflects net plant in service.
[2] Source of Data: Shareholders' Reports and the NCUC GS-1 Reports.
[3] N/A denotes that the data is not available or not applicable or that information is, essentially, unmeaningful.
19
12 Months Ended
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL DATA
North Carolina Jurisdiction
(Amounts In Thousands)
Part IV
Telecommunications Companies
Annual Report Filings
21
Telecommunications Companies 2012 Annual Report Filings1
A. The following companies provided the Commission with links to their 2012 Annual
Report filings, as submitted to the SEC:
● BellSouth Telecommunications, LLC, d/b/a AT&T North Carolina –
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/732717/000073271713000017/ye12_10k.htm
● Carolina Telephone and Telegraph Company LLC, d/b/a CenturyLink; Central
Telephone Company, d/b/a CenturyLink; and Mebtel, Inc., d/b/a CenturyLink –
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/18926/000104746913002037/a2213129z10-k.htm
●Frontier Communications of the Carolinas, Inc. –
http://investor.frontier.com/sec.cfm?DocType=Annual&Year=&FormatFilter=
●Verizon South Inc.2 –
http://www22.verizon.com/investor/anualreports.htm
●Windstream Concord Telephone, Inc.; Windstream Lexcom Communications, Inc.; and
Windstream North Carolina, LLC –
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1282266/000128226613000020/a201210k.htm
B. The following companies provided the Commission with copies of their 2012 audited
financial statements:
● North State Telephone Company, d/b/a North State Communications
● Citizens Telephone Company, d/b/a Comporium3
1 The deadline for a price plan regulated company to either provide its annual report to the Commission or to
otherwise satisfy its annual reporting obligations under Commission Rule R1-32, Subsection (e1) is as soon as
possible after the close of the calendar year, but in no event later than the 30th day of April each year for the
preceding calendar year.
2 Verizon South Inc. Knotts Island Exchange.
3
Such report has been filed as confidential and proprietary information.
Part V - Appendix A
Quarterly Review Electronic Distribution List
Commission Staff
Kimberly Duffley
Roy Ericson
Corrie Foster
Bill Gilmore
Len Green
Freda Hilburn
Lemuel Hinton
Don Hoover
Kim Jones
Bliss Kite
Gail Mount
Bridget Paschal
George Sessoms
Sam Watson
Public Staff
Christopher Ayers
Jeff Davis
David Furr
John Garrison
Carl Goolsby
Robert Hinton
Jim Hoard
James McLawhorn
Antoinette Wike
Attorney General’s Office
Margaret Force
Others
Alexander Bailey
Virginia Electric and Power
Company,d/b/a Dominion North
Carolina Power
David Baker
North Carolina Department of Revenue
Bruce Barkley
Manager – Regulatory Affairs
Duke Energy
Laura Bateman, Manager
Carolinas Rates & Regulatory Strategy
Duke Energy
Felisa Bullock, Manager
Executive and Regulatory Services
CenturyLink
David Carpenter
Managing Director Regulatory Affairs
Piedmont Natural Gas Company, Inc.
Matthew L. Dosch
Senior Vice President of External Affairs
Comporium Communications
Rick Feathers
Associate General Counsel
N.C. Electric Corporation
Mary Lynne Grigg
McGuire Woods LLP
Greg Locke
ElectriCities of North Carolina
William McAulay
Director – Legislative & Regulatory Relations
Public Service Company of NC, Inc.
Ralph McDonald
Bailey & Dixon, LLP
Sharon Miller
Carolina Utility Customers Association, Inc.
Kevin O’Donnell
Nova Energy Consultants
Adam Olls
Bailey & Dixon, LLP
Stan Pace, Director
State Government Relations
Frontier Communications of
the Carolinas Inc.
Robert F. Page
Crisp, Page & Currin, L.L.P.
Candace A. Paton, Lead Analyst
Rates & Regulatory Affairs
Public Service Company of NC, Inc.
Pia K. Powers
Manager Regulatory Affairs
Piedmont Natural Gas Company, Inc.
Jo Anne Sanford
Sanford Law Office, PLLC
Carol Shrum, Vice President Rates
Duke Energy Corporation
Robert Smith, Director-External Affairs
BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.,
d/b/a AT&T North Carolina
Lawrence Somers
Deputy General Counsel
Duke Energy Corporation
State Library of North Carolina
Laura A. Sykora
Regulatory Affairs Manager
CenturyLink
Royster M. Tucker, Jr.
North State Telephone Company,
d/b/a North State Communications
Susan Warner
Bailey & Dixon, LLP
Bob Wells, Executive Director
North Carolina Telephone Alliance
Bettye J. Willis
Regional Vice President
State Government Affairs
Windstream Communications, Inc.