XML 37 R20.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.20.2

Regulatory and Rate Matters | 6 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2020
Regulated Operations [Abstract] |
Regulatory and Rate Matters | Regulatory and Rate Matters The Company is involved in various regulatory matters, some of which contain contingencies that are subject to the same uncertainties as those described in Note 11. Additional information concerning regulatory and rate matters is contained in Note 17 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2019 Annual Reports on Form 10-K. PNM New Mexico General Rate Cases New Mexico 2015 General Rate Case (“NM 2015 Rate Case”) On August 27, 2015, PNM filed an application with the NMPRC for a general increase in retail electric rates. The application proposed a revenue increase of $123.5 million, including base non-fuel revenues of $121.7 million, and proposed that new rates become effective beginning in July 2016. The NMPRC ordered PNM to file additional testimony regarding PNM’s interests in PVNGS, including the 64.1 MW of PVNGS Unit 2 that PNM repurchased in January 2016 pursuant to the terms of the initial sales-leaseback transactions. In August 2016, the Hearing Examiner in the case issued a recommended decision (the “August 2016 RD”). The August 2016 RD, among other things, recommended that the NMPRC find PNM was imprudent in the actions taken to purchase the previously leased 64.1 MW of capacity in PVNGS Unit 2, extending the leases for 114.6 MW of capacity of PVNGS Units 1 and 2, and installing the BDT equipment on SJGS Units 1 and 4. As a result, the August 2016 RD recommended the NMPRC disallow recovery of the entire $163.3 million purchase price for the January 15, 2016 purchases of the assets underlying three leases aggregating 64.1 MW of PVNGS Unit 2, the undepreciated capital improvements made during the period the 64.1 MW of purchased capacity was leased, rent expense aggregating $18.1 million annually for leases aggregating 114.6 MW of capacity that were extended through January 2023 and 2024 (Note 13), and recovery of the costs of converting SJGS Units 1 and 4 to BDT. On September 28, 2016, the NMPRC issued an order that authorized PNM to implement an increase in non-fuel rates of $61.2 million, effective for bills sent to customers after September 30, 2016. The order generally approved the August 2016 RD, but with certain significant modifications. The modifications to the August 2016 RD included: •Inclusion of the January 2016 purchase of the assets underlying three leases of capacity, aggregating 64.1 MW, of PVNGS Unit 2 at an initial rate base value of $83.7 million; and disallowance of the recovery of the undepreciated costs of capitalized improvements made during the period the 64.1 MW was being leased by PNM, which aggregated $43.8 million when the order was issued •Recovery of annual rent expenses associated with the 114.6 MW of capacity under the extended leases •Disallowance of the recovery of any future contributions for PVNGS decommissioning costs related to the 64.1 MW of capacity purchased in January 2016 and the 114.6 MW of capacity under the extended leases On September 30, 2016, PNM filed a notice of appeal with the NM Supreme Court regarding the order in the NM 2015 Rate Case. Specifically, PNM appealed the NMPRC’s determination that PNM was imprudent in certain matters in the case, including the NMPRC’s disallowance of the full purchase price of the 64.1 MW of capacity in PVNGS Unit 2, the undepreciated costs of capitalized improvements made during the period the 64.1 MW of capacity was leased by PNM, the cost of converting SJGS Units 1 and 4 to BDT, and future contributions for PVNGS decommissioning attributable to the 64.1 MW of purchased capacity and the 114.6 MW of capacity under the extended leases. NEE, NM AREA, and ABCWUA filed notices of cross-appeal to PNM’s appeal. The issues appealed by the various cross-appellants included, among other things, the NMPRC allowing PNM to recover any of the costs of the lease extensions for the 114.6 MW of PVNGS Units 1 and 2 and the purchase price for the 64.1 MW in PVNGS Unit 2, the costs incurred under the Four Corners CSA, and the inclusion of the “prepaid pension asset” in rate base. During the pendency of the appeal, PNM evaluated the consequences of the order in the NM 2015 Rate Case and the related appeals to the NM Supreme Court as required under GAAP. These evaluations indicated that it was reasonably possible that PNM would be successful on the issues it was appealing but would not be provided capital costs recovery until the NMPRC acted on a decision of the NM Supreme Court. PNM also evaluated the accounting consequences of the issues being appealed by the cross-appellants and concluded that the issues raised in the cross-appeals did not have substantial merit. In accordance with GAAP, PNM periodically updated its estimate of the amount of time necessary for the NM Supreme Court to render a decision and for the NMPRC to take action on any remanded issues. As a result of those evaluations, through March 31, 2019, PNM had recorded accumulated pre-tax impairments of its capital investments subject to the appeal in the amount of $19.7 million. On May 16, 2019, the NM Supreme Court issued its decision on the matters that had been appealed in the NM 2015 Rate Case. The NM Supreme Court rejected the matters appealed by the cross-appellants and affirmed the NMPRC’s disallowance of a portion of the purchase price of the 64.1 MW of capacity in PVNGS Unit 2; the undepreciated costs of capital improvements made during the time the 64.1 MW capacity was leased by PNM; and the costs to install BDT at SJGS Units 1 and 4. The NM Supreme Court also ruled that the NMPRC’s decision to permanently disallow recovery of future decommissioning costs related to the 64.1 MW of PVNGS Unit 2 and the 114.6 MW of PVNGS Units 1 and 2 deprived PNM of its rights to due process of law and remanded the case to the NMPRC for further proceedings consistent with the court’s findings. On January 8, 2020, the NMPRC issued its order on remand, which reaffirmed its September 2016 order except for the decision to permanently disallow recovery of certain future decommissioning costs related to PVNGS Units 1 and 2. The NMPRC indicated that PNM’s ability to recover these costs will be addressed in a future proceeding and closed the NM 2015 Rate Case docket. As a result of the NM Supreme Court’s ruling, as of June 30, 2019, PNM recorded pre-tax impairments of $150.6 million, which included $1.3 million recorded in the three months ended March 31, 2019, and is reflected as regulatory disallowances and restructuring costs on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Earnings. The impairment includes $73.2 million for a portion of the purchase price for 64.1 MW in PVNGS Unit 2, $39.7 million of undepreciated capitalized improvements made during the period the 64.1 MW was being leased by PNM, and $37.7 million for BDT on SJGS Units 1 and 4. The impairment was offset by tax impacts of $45.7 million. New Mexico 2016 General Rate Case (“NM 2016 Rate Case”) On December 7, 2016, PNM filed an application with the NMPRC for a general increase in retail electric rates. PNM did not include any of the costs disallowed in the NM 2015 Rate Case that were at issue in its then pending appeal to the NM Supreme Court. PNM’s original application used a FTY beginning January 1, 2018 and requested an increase in base non-fuel revenues of $99.2 million based on a ROE of 10.125%. The primary drivers of PNM’s revenue deficiency included implementation of modifications to PNM’s resource portfolio, which were approved by the NMPRC in December 2015 as part of the SJGS regional haze compliance plan, infrastructure investments, including environmental upgrades at Four Corners, declines in forecasted energy sales due to successful energy efficiency programs and other economic factors, and updates to FERC/retail jurisdictional allocations. After extensive settlement negotiations and public proceedings, the NMPRC issued a Revised Order Partially Adopting Certification of Stipulation dated January 10, 2018 (the “Revised Order”). The key terms of the Revised Order include: •An increase in base non-fuel revenues totaling $10.3 million, which includes a reduction to reflect the impact of the decrease in the federal corporate income tax rate and updates to PNM’s cost of debt (aggregating an estimated $47.6 million annually) •A ROE of 9.575% •Returning to customers over a three-year period the benefit of the reduction in the New Mexico corporate income tax rate to the extent attributable to PNM’s retail operations (Note 14) •Disallowing PNM’s ability to collect an equity return on certain investments aggregating $148.1 million at Four Corners, but allowing recovery with a debt-only return •An agreement to not implement non-fuel base rate changes, other than changes related to PNM’s rate riders, with an effective date prior to January 1, 2020 •A requirement to consider the prudency of PNM’s decision to continue its participation in Four Corners in PNM's next general rate case filing In accordance with the settlement agreement and the NMPRC’s final order, PNM implemented 50% of the approved increase for service rendered beginning February 1, 2018 and implemented the rest of the increase for service rendered beginning January 1, 2019. Renewable Portfolio Standard As discussed in Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2019 Annual Reports on Form 10-K, the ETA was enacted in June 2019. Prior to the enactment of the ETA, the REA established a mandatory RPS requiring a utility to acquire a renewable energy portfolio equal to 10% of retail electric sales by 2011, 15% by 2015, and 20% by 2020. The ETA amends the REA and requires utilities operating in New Mexico to have renewable portfolios equal to 20% by 2020, 40% by 2025, 50% by 2030, 80% by 2040, and 100% zero-carbon energy by 2045. The ETA also removes diversity requirements and certain customer caps and exemptions relating to the application of the RPS under the REA. The REA provides for streamlined proceedings for approval of utilities’ renewable energy procurement plans, assures that utilities recover costs incurred consistent with approved procurement plans, and requires the NMPRC to establish a RCT for the procurement of renewable resources to prevent excessive costs being added to rates. The ETA sets a RCT of $60 per MWh using an average annual levelized resource cost basis. PNM makes renewable procurements consistent with the NMPRC approved plans. PNM recovers certain renewable procurement costs from customers through a rate rider. See Renewable Energy Rider below. Included in PNM’s approved procurement plans are the following renewable energy resources: •157 MW of PNM-owned solar-PV facilities •A PPA through 2044 for the output of New Mexico Wind, having a current aggregate capacity of 204 MW, and a PPA through 2035 for the output of Red Mesa Wind, having an aggregate capacity of 102 MW •A PPA through 2040 for 140 MW of output from La Joya Wind, which is expected to be operational by December 31, 2020 •A PPA through 2042 for the output of the Lightning Dock Geothermal facility with a current capacity of 15 MW •Solar distributed generation, aggregating 138.6 MW at June 30, 2020, owned by customers or third parties from whom PNM purchases any net excess output and RECs Renewable Energy Rider The NMPRC has authorized PNM to recover certain renewable procurement costs through a rate rider billed on a per KWh basis. In its 2019 renewable energy procurement plan case, which was approved by the NMPRC on November 28, 2018, PNM proposed to collect $49.6 million for the year. The 2019 renewable energy procurement plan became effective on January 1, 2019. In its 2020 renewable energy procurement plan case, PNM proposed to collect $58.9 million through a revised rate rider beginning in 2020. In addition, PNM proposed that its FPPAC be reset from a July 1 through June 30 fiscal year to a calendar year. The NMPRC approved PNM's 2020 renewable energy procurement plan on January 29, 2020, and the revised rate rider became effective on February 1, 2020. PNM recorded revenues from the rider of $15.2 million and $30.3 million in the three and six months ended June 30, 2020 and $12.8 million and $25.5 million in the three and six months ended June 30, 2019. On June 1, 2020, PNM filed its renewable energy procurement plan for 2021 which proposes to collect $67.8 million, including $2.3 million related to PNM's voluntary Sky Blue renewable energy program. PNM is not proposing any new procurements in the plan. The NMPRC assigned this matter to a hearing examiner who scheduled a hearing for September 24, 2020. PNM cannot predict the outcome of this matter. Under the renewable rider, if PNM’s earned rate of return on jurisdictional equity in a calendar year, adjusted for items not representative of normal operations, exceeds the NMPRC-approved rate by 0.5%, PNM is required to refund the excess to customers during May through December of the following year. PNM did not exceed such limitation in 2019. Energy Efficiency and Load Management Program Costs and Incentives/Disincentives The New Mexico Efficient Use of Energy Act (“EUEA”) requires public utilities to achieve specified levels of energy savings and to obtain NMPRC approval to implement energy efficiency and load management programs. The EUEA requires the NMPRC to remove utility disincentives to implementing energy efficiency and load management programs and to provide incentives for such programs. The NMPRC has adopted a rule to implement this act. PNM’s costs to implement approved programs and incentives are recovered through a rate rider. During the 2019 New Mexico legislative session, the EUEA was amended to, among other things, include a decoupling mechanism for disincentives, preclude a reduction to a utility’s ROE based on approval of disincentive or incentive mechanisms, establish energy savings targets for the period 2021 through 2025, and require that annual program funding be 3% to 5% of an electric utility's annual customer bills excluding gross receipt taxes, franchise and right-of-way access fees, provided that a customer's annual cost not exceed seventy-five thousand dollars. In 2019, PNM submitted a filing to address incentives to be earned in 2020. PNM’s proposed incentive mechanism is similar to that approved for 2018 and 2019 with minor modifications to reflect input from interested parties. The proposed incentive mechanism includes a base incentive of 7.1% of program costs, or approximately $1.8 million, based on savings of 59 GWh in 2020 with a sliding scale that provides for additional incentive if savings exceed 68 GWh. On May 28, 2020, PNM began collecting $0.5 million of additional incentive resulting from PNM's 2019 energy efficiency reconciliation. No hearings were considered necessary and PNM’s 2020 energy efficiency rider reflecting the 2020 incentive became effective beginning December 30, 2019. On April 15, 2020, PNM filed an application for energy efficiency and load management programs to be offered in 2021, 2022, and 2023. The proposed program portfolio consists of twelve programs with a total annual budget of $31.4 million in 2021, $31.0 million in 2022, and $29.6 million in 2023. The application also seeks approval of an annual base incentive of 7.1% of the portfolio budget if PNM achieves energy savings of at least 80 GWh in a year. The proposed incentive would increase if PNM is able to achieve savings greater than 80 GWh in a year. The application also proposes an advanced metering infrastructure (“AMI”) pilot program, which includes the installation of 5,000 AMI meters at a cost of $2.9 million. PNM is proposing the pilot program to comply with an NMPRC order denying PNM’s February 2016 application to replace its existing customer metering equipment with AMI. The NMPRC assigned this matter to a hearing examiner, who scheduled a hearing for August 31, 2020. PNM cannot predict the outcome of this matter. Integrated Resource Plans NMPRC rules require that investor owned utilities file an IRP every three years. The IRP is required to cover a 20-year planning period and contain an action plan covering the first four years of that period. 2017 IRP PNM filed its 2017 IRP on July 3, 2017. The 2017 IRP addresses the 20-year planning period from 2017 through 2036 and includes an action plan describing PNM’s plan to implement the 2017 IRP in the four-year period following its filing. The 2017 IRP analyzed several scenarios utilizing assumptions that PNM continues service from its SJGS capacity beyond mid-2022 and that PNM retires its capacity after mid-2022. Key findings of the 2017 IRP included, among other things, that retiring PNM’s share of SJGS in 2022 and existing ownership in Four Corners in 2031 would provide long-term cost savings for PNM’s customers and that the best mix of new resources to replace the retired coal generation would include solar energy and flexible natural gas-fired peaking capacity as well as energy storage, if the economics support it, and wind energy provided additional transmission capacity becomes available. The 2017 IRP also indicated that PNM should retain the currently leased capacity in PVNGS. See additional discussion of PNM’s leased capacity in PVNGS below and in Note 13. PNM's 2017 IRP was subject to extensive hearings and legal challenges and was accepted as compliant with the applicable statute and rules by the NMPRC on December 19, 2018, with further consideration being denied. As discussed below, on July 1, 2019, PNM submitted its SJGS Abandonment Application with the NMPRC requesting approval to retire SJGS in 2022, for replacement resources, and for issuance of Securitized Bonds under the ETA. Many of the assumptions and findings included in PNM’s July 1, 2019 filing were consistent with those identified in PNM’s 2017 IRP. The SJGS Abandonment Application and the 2017 IRP are not final determinations of PNM’s future generation portfolio. PNM will also be required to obtain NMPRC approval of an exit from Four Corners, which PNM will seek at an appropriate time in the future. Likewise, NMPRC approval of new generation resources through CCNs, PPAs, or other applicable filings will be required. 2020 IRP In the third quarter of 2019, PNM initiated its 2020 IRP process which will cover the 20-year planning period from 2019 through 2039. Consistent with historical practice, PNM has provided notice to various interested parties and has hosted a series of public advisory presentations. PNM will continue to seek input from interested parties as a part of this process. NMPRC rules require PNM to file its 2020 IRP in July 2020. On March 16, 2020, PNM filed a motion to extend the deadline to file its 2020 IRP to six months after the NMPRC issues a final order approving a replacement resource portfolio and closes the docket in the bifurcated SJGS Abandonment Application and replacement resource proceedings. On April 8, 2020, the NMPRC approved PNM's motion to extend the deadline to file its 2020 IRP as requested. On July 29, 2020 the NMPRC issued a final order for a replacement resource portfolio in the SJGS proceedings. SJGS Abandonment Application As discussed in Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2019 Annual Reports on Form 10-K, on March 22, 2019, the Governor signed into New Mexico state law Senate Bill 489, known as the Energy Transition Act (“ETA”). The ETA became effective as of June 14, 2019 and sets a statewide standard that requires investor-owned electric utilities to have specified percentages of their electric-generating portfolios be from renewable and zero-carbon generating resources. Prior to the enactment of the ETA, the REA established a mandatory RPS requiring utilities to acquire a renewable energy portfolio equal to 10% of retail electric sales by 2011, 15% by 2015, and 20% by 2020. The ETA amends the REA and requires utilities operating in New Mexico to have renewable portfolios equal to 20% by 2020, 40% by 2025, 50% by 2030, 80% by 2040, and 100% zero-carbon energy by 2045. The ETA also provides for a transition from fossil-fuel generation resources to renewable and other carbon-free resources through certain provisions relating to the abandonment of coal-fired generating facilities. These provisions include the use of “energy transition bonds,” which are designed to be highly rated bonds that can be issued to finance certain costs of abandoning coal-fired facilities that are retired prior to January 1, 2023 for facilities operated by a “qualifying utility,” or prior to January 1, 2032 for facilities that are not operated by the qualifying utility. On July 1, 2019, PNM filed a Consolidated Application for the Abandonment and Replacement of SJGS and Related Securitized Financing Pursuant to the ETA (the “SJGS Abandonment Application”). The SJGS Abandonment Application sought NMPRC approval to retire PNM’s share of SJGS after the existing coal supply and participation agreements end in June 2022, for approval of replacement resources, and for the issuance of “energy transition bonds,” as provided by the ETA. PNM’s application proposed several replacement resource scenarios including PNM’s recommended replacement scenario, which would have provided cost savings to customers compared to continued operation of SJGS, preserved system reliability, and is consistent with PNM’s plan to have an emissions-free generation portfolio by 2040. This plan would have provided PNM authority to construct and own a 280 MW natural gas-fired peaking plant to be located on the existing SJGS facility site, and 70 MW of battery storage facilities. In addition, PNM’s recommended replacement resource scenario would have allowed PNM to execute PPAs to procure renewable energy from a total of 350 MW of solar-PV generating facilities and for energy from a total of 60 MW of battery storage facilities. PNM’s application included three other replacement resource scenarios that would have placed a greater amount of resources in the San Juan area, or resulted in no new fossil-fueled generating facilities, or no battery storage facilities being added to PNM’s portfolio. When compared to PNM's recommended replacement resource scenario, the three alternative resource scenarios were expected to result in increased costs to customers and the two alternative resource scenarios that result in no new fossil-fueled generating facilities were expected to not provide adequate system reliability. The SJGS Abandonment Application also included a request to issue approximately $361 million of energy transition bonds (the “Securitized Bonds”). PNM’s request for the issuance of Securitized Bonds included approximately $283 million of forecasted undepreciated investments in SJGS at June 30, 2020, an estimated $28.6 million for plant decommissioning and coal mine reclamation costs, approximately $9.6 million in upfront financing costs, and approximately $20.0 million for job training and severance costs for affected employees. Proceeds from the Securitization Bonds would also be used to fund approximately $19.8 million for economic development in the four corners area. On July 10, 2019, the NMPRC issued an order requiring the SJGS Abandonment Application be considered in two proceedings: one addressing SJGS abandonment and related financing, and the other addressing replacement resources. The NMPRC indicated that PNM’s July 1, 2019 filing is responsive to the January 30, 2019 order but did not definitively indicate if the abandonment and financing proceedings would be evaluated under the requirements of the ETA. The NMPRC’s July 10, 2019 order also extended the deadline to issue the abandonment and financing order to nine months and to issue the replacement resources order to 15 months. After several requests for clarification and legal challenges and following oral argument on January 29, 2020, the NM Supreme Court issued a ruling requiring the NMPRC to apply the ETA to all aspects of PNM’s SJGS Abandonment Application, indicating any previous NMPRC orders inconsistent with the ruling should be vacated, and denying parties’ request for stay. The NM Supreme Court issued a subsequent opinion, on July 23, 2020, more fully explaining the legal rationale for the January 29, 2020 ruling. Hearings on the abandonment and securitized financing proceedings were held in December 2019 and hearings on replacement resources were held in January 2020. On February 21, 2020, the Hearing Examiners issued two recommended decisions recommending approval of PNM’s proposed abandonment of SJGS, subject to approval of replacement resources, and approval of PNM’s proposed financing order to issue Securitized Bonds. The Hearing Examiners recommended that PNM be authorized to abandon SJGS by June 30, 2022, and to record regulatory assets for certain other abandonment costs that are not specifically addressed under the provisions of the ETA to preserve its ability to recover the costs in a future general rate case. The Hearing Examiner recommended that this authority only extend to the deferral of the costs and it not be an approval of any ratemaking treatment. The Hearing Examiners also recommended PNM be authorized to issue Securitized Bonds of up to $361 million and establish a rate rider to collect non-bypassable customer charges for repayment of the bonds and be subject to bi-annual adjustments (the “Energy Transition Charge”). The Hearing Examiners recommended an interim rate rider adjustment upon the start date of the Energy Transition Charge to provide immediate credits to customers for the full value of PNM’s revenue requirement related to SJGS until those reductions are reflected in base rates. In addition, the Hearing Examiners recommended PNM be granted authority to establish regulatory assets to recover costs that PNM will pay prior to the issuance of the Securitized Bonds, including costs associated with the bond issuances as well as for severances, job training, economic development, and workforce training. On April 1, 2020, the NMPRC unanimously approved the Hearing Examiners' recommended decisions regarding the abandonment of SJGS and the related securitized financing under the ETA. On April 10, 2020, CFRE and NEE filed a notice of appeal with the NM Supreme Court of the NMPRC's approval of PNM's request to issue securitized financing under the ETA. The NM Supreme Court granted motions to intervene filed by PNM, WRA, CCAE, and the Sierra Club. On May 8, 2020, CFRE and NEE filed a joint statement of issues with the NM Supreme Court which asserts that the NMPRC improperly applied the ETA and that the ETA violates the New Mexico Constitution. On June 19, 2020, WRA filed a motion to dismiss CFRE and NEE’s constitutional challenges to the ETA on the ground that the New Mexico Constitution provides that only New Mexico district courts have original jurisdiction over the claims. On July 24, 2020, the NM Supreme Court issued an order denying WRA’s motion to dismiss and requiring briefs in chief to be filed by August 17, 2020. PNM cannot predict the outcome of this matter. PNM evaluated the consequences of the NMPRC's April 1, 2020 orders approving the abandonment of SJGS and the related issuance of Securitized Bonds under GAAP. This evaluation indicated that it is probable that PNM will be required to fund severances for PNM employees at the facility upon its retirement in 2022 and for PNMR shared services employees providing administrative and other support services to SJGS. In addition, the evaluation indicated that it is probable PNM will be obligated to fund severances and other costs for the WSJ LLC employees and to fund certain state agencies for economic development and workforce training upon the issuance of the Securitized Bonds. PNM believes these obligations can be reasonably estimated as of March 31, 2020 and, pursuant to the NMPRC's April 1, 2020 orders and the requirements of the ETA, are recoverable from New Mexico retail customers. As a result, in March 2020, PNMR and PNM recorded obligations of $9.4 million and $8.1 million for estimated severances, $8.9 million for obligations to fund severances and other costs of WSJ LLC employees, and to fund $19.8 million to state agencies for economic development and workforce training upon the issuance of the Securitized Bonds. The total amount recorded for these estimates of $38.1 million and $36.8 million is reflected in other deferred credits and as a corresponding deferred regulatory asset on PNMR's and PNM's Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2020. These estimates may be adjusted in future periods as the Company refines its expectations. In addition, as discussed above these costs may be challenged by parties pursuant to the notices of appeal filed with the NM Supreme Court on April 10, 2020. On March 27, 2020, the Hearing Examiners issued a partial recommended decision on PNM’s request for approval of replacement resources recommending that the NMPRC bifurcate consideration of PNM’s requested replacement resources. The Hearing Examiners recommended that the NMPRC approve two of PNM’s requested replacement resources, including the 300 MW solar PPA combined with a 40 MW battery storage agreement and the 50 MW solar PPA combined with a 20 MW battery storage agreement. The Hearing Examiners recommended that the two solar and battery procurements be approved first because they are the most cost-effective resources proposed in the case, are supported by the majority of parties, and the economics of the projects will be in jeopardy if approval is delayed past April 30, 2020. The Hearing Examiners recommended that PNM be permitted to recover the energy costs of these PPAs through its FPPAC, and that PNM should recover the demand cost of the energy storage agreements in base rates in a future general rate case. On April 29, 2020, the NMPRC issued an order declining to bifurcate a determination on replacement resources and deferring final consideration until the issuance of a comprehensive recommended decision addressing the entire portfolio of replacement resources. On June 24, 2020, the Hearing Examiners issued a second recommended decision on PNM's request for approval of replacement resources that addressed the entire portfolio of replacement resources and superseded their March 27, 2020 partial recommended decision. The Hearing Examiners concluded that the ultimate selection of a portfolio of replacement resources involves policy considerations that are the province of the NMPRC and stated that they did not intend to make that decision for the NMPRC. The Hearing Examiners recommended that the NMPRC take one of two approaches to select replacement resources. The first approach emphasized resource selection criteria identified in the ETA which include the location of replacement resources over resource selection criteria traditionally applied by the NMPRC including price and reliability. This approach recommended approval of a replacement resource portfolio that includes a 300 MW solar PPA combined with a 150 MW battery storage agreement, a 50 MW solar PPA combined with a 20 MW battery storage agreement, a 200 MW solar PPA combined with a 100 MW battery storage agreement, a 100 MW solar PPA combined with a 30 MW battery storage agreement, and approximately 24 MW of demand response. The second approach emphasized the NMPRC’s traditional resource selection criteria including price and reliability, which included a mix of solar PPAs combined with battery storage agreements and a 200 MW PNM-owned natural gas facility. The Hearing Examiners recommended that the NMPRC require PNM to file, within 30 days, any new proposed PPAs and battery storage agreements required to implement the replacement resource portfolio approved by the NMPRC in a new docket for expedited consideration. The Hearing Examiners also recommended that PNM be permitted to recover the energy costs of these PPAs through its FPPAC, and that PNM should recover the demand cost of the battery storage agreements in base rates in a future general rate case. On July 29, 2020, the NMPRC issued an order approving the Hearing Examiners' first recommended approach, concluding that this approach satisfies threshold reliability considerations for replacement resources. The order also granted in part PNM’s request for an extension of time for PNM to file the application to implement the replacement resource portfolio. PNM has 60 days from the date of the order to file an application in a separate case seeking approval of the proposed final, executed contracts, for any replacement resources that are not currently in evidence that have been approved by the NMPRC. The financial impact of an early retirement of SJGS and the NMPRC approval process are influenced by many factors outside of PNM’s control, including the economic impact of the SJGS abandonment on the area surrounding the plant and the related mine, as well as the overall political and economic conditions of New Mexico. See additional discussion of the ETA and SJGS Abandonment Application in Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2019 Annual Reports on Form 10-K. PNM cannot predict the outcome of these matters. Joint Petition to Investigate PNM’s Option to Purchase Assets Underlying Certain Leases in PVNGS On April 22, 2019, NEE and other parties, which consist primarily of environmental not-for-profit organizations, filed a joint petition for expedited investigation with the NMPRC. The joint petition requested the NMPRC open an investigation regarding PNM’s option to purchase the assets underlying the PVNGS Unit 1 and 2 leases that will expire in January 2023 and 2024. Various parties filed to participate in the request. On May 8, 2019, the NMPRC issued an order requiring a response from both PNM and NMPRC staff. PNM filed responses indicating, among other things, that the joint petition should be denied, and that PNM has not yet made a decision to purchase or return the assets underlying the leases that expire in January 2023 and 2024. On September 16, 2019, NEE and the other parties filed a motion reiterating their initial petition and seeking the appointment of a hearing examiner to preside over the requested proceeding. On September 30, 2019, PNM filed its response in opposition stating that PNM had previously refuted NEE’s arguments and that there is no need for a hearing examiner to be assigned to this matter. The NMPRC subsequently issued an order denying the petition for investigation. On January 3, 2020, PNM filed notice with the NMPRC of 60-day waivers of the deadline to provide notice to purchase or return the assets underlying the PVNGS Unit 1 leases. On April 10, 2020, PNM filed additional notices of waivers indicating the deadline for PNM to provide irrevocable notice of its intent to purchase or return the PVNGS Unit 1 lease interests was June 15, 2020. On June 11, 2020, PNM provided notices to the lessors and the NMPRC that PNM will return the leased assets under both its PVNGS Unit 1 and Unit 2 leases upon expiration of the leases in January 2023 and 2024. PNM issued an RFP for replacement power resources on June 25, 2020. PNM intends to file for the abandonment approval of replacement resources for of its share of PVNGS leased capacity with the NMPRC in early 2021. PNM cannot predict the outcome of this matter. PNM Solar Direct On May 31, 2019, PNM filed an application with the NMPRC for approval of a program under which qualified governmental and large commercial customers could participate in a voluntary renewable energy procurement program. PNM proposed to recover costs of the program directly from subscribing customers through a rate rider. Under the rider, PNM would procure renewable energy from 50 MW of solar-PV facilities under a 15-year PPA. PNM had fully subscribed the entire output of the 50 MW facilities at the time of the filing. Hearings on the application concluded on January 9, 2020. On March 11, 2020, the hearing examiner issued a recommended decision recommending approval of PNM's application. The hearing examiner's recommended decision was approved by the NMPRC on March 25, 2020. These facilities are expected to begin commercial operations on March 31, 2021. This matter is now concluded. COVID-19 Regulatory Matters In March 2020, PNM and other utilities voluntarily implemented a temporary suspension of disconnections and late payment fees for non-payment of utility bills in response to the impacts of the novel coronavirus global pandemic (“COVID-19”). On March 18, 2020, the NMPRC conducted an emergency open meeting for the purpose of adopting emergency amendments to its rules governing service to residential customers. The NMPRC’s emergency order is applicable during the duration of the Governor of New Mexico's emergency executive order and allows for the closure of payment centers, prohibits the discontinuance of a residential customer’s service for non-payment, and suspends the expiration of medical certificates for certain customers. On April 27, 2020, PNM, El Paso Electric Company, New Mexico Gas Company, and Southwestern Public Service Company filed a joint motion with the NMPRC requesting authorization to track costs resulting from each utility's response to the COVID-19 outbreak. The utilities propose these incremental costs and uncollected customer accounts receivable resulting from COVID-19 during the period March 11, 2020 through December 31, 2020 be recorded as a regulatory asset. On June 24, 2020, the NMPRC issued an order authorizing all public utilities regulated by the NMPRC to create a regulatory asset to defer incremental costs related to COVID-19, including increases to bad debt expense incurred during the period beginning March 11, 2020 through the termination of the Governor of New Mexico’s emergency executive order. The NMPRC order requires public utilities creating regulatory assets to pursue all federal, state, or other subsidies available, to record a regulatory liability for all offsetting cost savings resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, and allows PNM to request recovery in future ratemaking proceedings. As a result, PNM deferred incremental costs related to COVID-19 of $1.3 million as a regulatory asset on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet at June 30, 2020. The NMPRC’s order also imposed additional quarterly reporting requirements on public utilities creating regulatory assets that include changes in customer usage and increased costs and savings recorded to regulatory assets and liabilities. 2020 Decoupling Petition On May 28, 2020, PNM filed a petition for approval of a rate adjustment mechanism that would decouple the rates of its residential and small power rate classes. Decoupling is a rate design principle that severs the link between the recovery of fixed costs of the utility through volumetric charges. PNM proposes to record the difference between the annual revenue per customer derived from the cost of service approved in the NM 2015 Rate Case and the annual revenue per customer actually recovered from the rate classes beginning on January 1, 2021. If approved, on January 1, 2022, PNM would begin to collect the difference from customers if the revenue per customer from the NM 2015 Rate Case exceeds the actual revenue recovered in 2021, or return the difference to customers if the actual revenue per customer recovered in 2021 exceeds the revenue per customer from the NM 2015 Rate Case. The NMPRC assigned this matter to a hearing examiner, who scheduled a hearing on PNM's petition for October 13, 2020. On July 13, 2020, NEE, ABCWUA, the City of Albuquerque, and Bernalillo County filed motions to dismiss the petition on the grounds that approving PNM’s proposed rate adjustment mechanism outside of a general rate case would result in retroactive ratemaking and piecemeal ratemaking. The motions to dismiss also allege that PNM’s proposed rate adjustment mechanism is inconsistent with the EUEA. Responses to the motions to dismiss are due by August 7, 2020. PNM cannot predict the outcome of this matter. Audit of PNM’s Compliance with OATT and Financial Reporting On December 8, 2017, FERC informed PNM it was commencing an audit of PNM’s compliance with several requirements, including compliance with FERC’s Uniform System of Accounts for the annual reporting periods ending December 31, 2015 through December 31, 2019. On July 7, 2020, FERC audit staff issued their final audit report and provided their findings and recommendations. The severity of the findings and recommendations was low as no overall market or customer harm was found. One finding disallowed inclusion of certain costs in the computation of AFUDC and required PNM to reduce previously capitalized AFUDC. As a result, PNM recorded $1.9 million pre-tax increase to interest charges for debt AFUDC and a decrease of less than $0.1 million to other income for equity AFUDC in the three and six months ended June 30, 2020. In addition, FERC also recommended PNM revise its procedures to record upfront and quarterly commitment fees, previously recorded as interest expense, to administrative and general expense. PNM has agreed to the findings and recommendations for corrective action in the report and is required to submit its implementation plan to comply with the recommendations within 30 days. TNMP TNMP 2018 Rate Case On May 30, 2018, TNMP filed a general rate proceeding with the PUCT (the “TNMP 2018 Rate Case”) requesting an annual increase to base rates of $25.9 million based on a ROE of 10.5%, a cost of debt of 7.2%, and a capital structure comprised of 50% debt and 50% equity. As part of the application, TNMP proposed to return the regulatory liability related to federal tax reform to customers and to reduce the federal corporate income tax rate to 21%. On December 20, 2018, the PUCT approved an unopposed settlement agreement in the case. The PUCT’s final order results in a $10.0 million annual increase to base rates. The key elements of the approved settlement include a ROE of 9.65%, a cost of debt of 6.44%, and a capital structure comprised of 55% debt and 45% equity. As stated by the settlement agreement, the PUCT’s final order excludes certain items from rate base that were requested in TNMP’s original filing, including approximately $10.6 million of transmission investments that TNMP included in its January 2019 transmission cost of service filing, which was approved by the PUCT in March 2019. In addition, the PUCT’s final order requires TNMP to reflect the lower federal income tax rate of 21% in rates and refund approximately $37.8 million of the regulatory liability recorded at December 31, 2017 related to federal tax reform to customers over a period of five years and the remaining amount over the estimated useful lives of plant in service as of December 31, 2017; approves TNMP’s request to integrate revenues historically recorded under TNMP’s AMS rider, as well as other unrecovered AMS investments, into base rates; approves TNMP’s request for new depreciation rates; and approves a new rider to recover Hurricane Harvey restoration costs, net of amounts to be refunded to customers resulting from the reduction in the federal income tax rate in 2018. See Note 14. The new rider is being charged to customers over a period of approximately three years beginning on the effective date of new base rates. New rates under the TNMP 2018 Rate Case were effective beginning on January 1, 2019. Recovery of TNMP Rate Case Costs Recovery of the cost of TNMP’s rate case was moved into a separate proceeding to begin after the conclusion of TNMP 2018 Rate Case. TNMP sought recovery of costs incurred through August 2019 in the amount of $3.8 million and proposed these costs be collected from customers over a three-year period. In October 2019, TNMP and other parties to the proceedings filed an unopposed settlement stipulation that reduced TNMP’s cost recovery to $3.3 million and provide for recovery over a period not to exceed three-years beginning on March 1, 2020. On January 16, 2020, the PUCT approved the settlement. As a result of the PUCT's order, TNMP recorded a pre-tax write-off of $0.5 million in December 2019. Transmission Cost of Service Rates TNMP can update its transmission cost of service (“TCOS”) rates twice per year to reflect changes in its invested capital although updates are not allowed while a general rate case is in process. Updated rates reflect the addition and retirement of transmission facilities, including appropriate depreciation, federal income tax and other associated taxes, and the approved rate of return on such facilities. The following sets forth TNMP’s recent interim transmission cost rate increases:
Effective Date |  | Approved Increase in Rate Base |  | Annual Increase in Revenue
|  | (In millions) |  |
March 21, 2019 |  | $ | 111.8 |  |  | $ | 14.3 |
September 19, 2019 |  | 21.9 |  |  | 3.3 |
March 27, 2020 |  | 59.2 |  |  | 7.8 |
On July 24, 2020, TNMP filed an application to further update its transmission rates to reflect an increase in total rate base of $10.8 million, which would increase revenues by $2.0 million annually. The application is pending before the PUCT. Periodic Distribution Rate Adjustment PUCT rules permit interim rate adjustments to reflect changes in investments in distribution assets. Distribution utilities may file for a periodic rate adjustment between April 1 and April 8 of each year as long as the electric utility is not earning more than its authorized rate of return using weather-normalized data. On April 6, 2020, TNMP filed its first application for a distribution cost recovery factor (the "2020 DCOS"). The 2020 DCOS application requests an increase in TNMP's annual distribution revenue requirement of $14.7 million based on net capital incremental distribution investments of $149.2 million. TNMP requested a procedural schedule that would result in rates being effective in September 2020. On June 26, 2020, the parties filed a unanimous settlement for a $14.3 million annual distribution revenue requirement with rates effective September 1, 2020. Subsequently, the ALJ issued an order on June 30, 2020, approving interim rates effective September 1, 2020, and remanding the case to the PUCT for approval. The case is pending review by the PUCT. Energy Efficiency TNMP recovers the costs of its energy efficiency programs through an energy efficiency cost recovery factor (“EECRF”), which includes projected program costs, under and over collected costs from prior years, rate case expenses, and performance bonuses (if programs exceed mandated savings goals). TNMP’s 2019 EECRF filing requested recovery of $5.9 million, including a performance bonus of $0.8 million, and became effective on March 1, 2020. On May 29, 2020, TNMP filed its request to adjust the EECRF to reflect changes in costs for 2021. The total amount requested was $5.9 million of program costs in 2021, which includes a performance bonus of $1.0 million based on TNMP’s energy efficiency achievements in the 2019 plan year. A procedural schedule was issued setting a hearing on merits for August 21, 2020. On July 2, 2020, the parties filed a joint motion to abate the procedural schedule in order to pursue settlement and on July 27, 2020, a unanimous settlement stipulation was filed with the PUCT to recover its requested costs in 2021, including the performance bonus of $1.0 million. The settlement stipulation is pending PUCT approval. COVID-19 Electricity Relief Program On March 26, 2020, the PUCT issued an order establishing an electricity relief program for electric utilities, REPs, and customers impacted by COVID-19. The program allows providers to implement a rider to collect unpaid residential retail customer bills and to ensure these customers continue to have electric service. In addition, the program provides transmission and distribution providers access to zero-interest loans from ERCOT. Collectively, ERCOT’s loans may not exceed $15 million. The program has a term of six months unless extended by the PUCT. In a separate order, the PUCT authorized electric utilities to establish a regulatory asset for costs related to COVID-19. These costs may include but are not limited to costs related to unpaid accounts. TNMP filed its rider on March 30, 2020. The rider was effective immediately and establishes a charge of $0.33 per MWh in accordance with the PUCT's order. As of June 30, 2020, collections under the rider exceeded unpaid residential retail customer bills and are presented net as a regulatory liability of $0.4 million on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. Other COVID-19 related costs of $0.3 million were recorded separately as a regulatory asset on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. On April 14, 2020, TNMP executed an interest-free loan agreement to borrow $0.5 million from ERCOT. The loan must be repaid upon completion of the electricity relief program. Competition Transition Charge Final Reconciliation In connection with the adoption of Senate Bill 7 by the Texas Legislature in 1999 that deregulated electric utilities operating within ERCOT, TNMP was allowed to recover its stranded costs through the CTC including a carrying charge. On July 10, 2020, TNMP filed to reconcile and stop the CTC surcharge beginning on September 1, 2020, as TNMP will have fully collected its CTC regulatory asset. On July 23, 2020, the ALJ accepted TNMP's filing effectively stopping the CTC surcharge on September 1, 2020. Additionally, TNMP must make a subsequent compliance filing, by September 14, 2020, to reconcile any under- or over-recoveries that may exist.

X
- Definition Regulatory And Rate Matters [Text Block] + References No definition available. + Details
Name: | pnm_RegulatoryAndRateMattersTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | pnm_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_RegulatedOperationsAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration