XML 55 R25.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT

Regulatory and Rate Matters

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2020

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 16.

PNM

New Mexico General Rate Cases

New Mexico 2015 General Rate Case (“NM 2015 Rate Case”)

In 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. 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 8), 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. 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. 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 December 31, 2018, PNM recorded accumulated pre-tax impairments of its capital investments subject to the appeal in the amount of $18.4 million, of which $4.0 million was recorded during the year ended December 31, 2018, and $3.1 million was recorded during the year ended December 31, 2017.

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 July 17, 2019, the NMPRC heard oral argument from parties in the case on how to best proceed with the NM Supreme Court’s remand. At oral argument, parties presented various positions ranging from re-litigating the value of PVNGS resources determined by the NMPRC and affirmed by the NM Supreme Court to re-affirming the NMPRC’s final order with a single modification to address recovery of future PVNGS decommissioning costs in a future case. 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, during the year ended December 31, 2019, PNM recorded pre-tax impairments of $150.6 million, which 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 and is reflected as regulatory disallowances and restructuring costs in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings. The impairment was offset by tax impacts of $45.7 million, which are reflected as income taxes on the Consolidated Statements of Earnings.

New Mexico 2016 General Rate Case (“NM 2016 Rate Case”)

In 2016, PNM filed an application with the NMPRC for a general increase in retail electric rates. PNM’s 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 18)

•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.

On December 29, 2020, Sierra Club filed a motion asking the NMPRC to re-open the NM 2016 Rate Case for the limited purpose of conducting a prudence review of certain Four Corners investments that were deferred at the conclusion of the case. In the alternative, Sierra Club requested that the NMPRC order that the deferred prudence review be conducted in the Four Corners Abandonment Application, filed on January 8, 2021. On February 10, 2021, the NMPRC rejected Sierra Club’s motion to re-open the NM 2016 Rate Case and stated that issues on whether the terms of the ETA provide an opportunity for consideration of prudence for Four Corners undepreciated investments included in a financing order or what effects the rates approved in the NM 2016 Rate Case may have on determining energy transition cost should be considered in the Four Corners Abandonment Application. See discussion regarding PNM’s Four Corners Abandonment Application discussed below.

Renewable Portfolio Standard

As discussed in Note 16, the ETA, enacted on June 14, 2019 amends the REA including removal of 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 and 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:

•158 MW of PNM-owned solar-PV facilities

•A PPA through 2044 for the output of New Mexico Wind, having a current aggregate capacity of 200 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 II

•A PPA through 2042 for the output of the Lightning Dock Geothermal facility with a current capacity of 11 MW

•Solar distributed generation, aggregating 161.0 MW at December 31, 2020, owned by customers or third parties from whom PNM purchases any net excess output and RECs

On June 1, 2017, PNM filed its 2018 renewable energy procurement plan. PNM requested approval to procure an additional 80 GWh in 2019 and 105 GWh in 2020 from a re-powering of New Mexico Wind; approval to procure an additional 55 GWh in 2019 and 77 GWh in 2020 from a re-powering of Lightning Dock Geothermal; approval to procure 50 MW of new PNM-owned solar facilities to be constructed beginning in 2018, and continuation of customer REC purchase programs and other purchases of RECs to ensure annual compliance with the RPS. The plan also sought a variance from the “other” diversity category in 2018 due to a revised production forecast of the Lightning Dock Geothermal facility in 2018. On October 17, 2017, the Hearing Examiner issued a recommended decision that PNM’s 2018 renewable energy procurement plan be approved by the NMPRC, except for the re-powering of Lightning Dock Geothermal and PNM’s request to procure 50 MW of new PNM-owned solar facilities. On November 15, 2017, the NMPRC issued an order approving PNM’s plan and rejecting the Hearing Examiner’s recommendations. On November 29, 2017, NM AREA filed an appeal with the NM Supreme Court objecting to the fuel allocation methodology and requested a partial stay of the NMPRC order, which was denied. NEE subsequently filed a motion to intervene and cross-appeal objecting to the approval of the 50 MW of new PNM-owned solar facilities. On July 5, 2019, the NM Supreme Court approved a motion filed by NM AREA to dismiss its appeal. On August 8, 2019, the NM Supreme Court issued an opinion affirming the NMPRC’s approval of PNM’s 2018 renewable energy procurement plan and denying NEE’s cross appeal. This matter is now concluded.

On June 1, 2018, PNM filed its 2019 renewable energy procurement plan. The plan met RPS and diversity requirements for 2019 and 2020 using resources already approved by the NMPRC and did not propose any significant new procurements. PNM projected the plan would be within the RCT in 2019 and will slightly exceed the current RCT in 2020. The NMPRC approved PNM’s 2019 renewable energy procurement plan on November 28, 2018.

On June 3, 2019, PNM filed its 2020 renewable energy procurement plan. The plan requested approval of a 20-year PPA to purchase 140 MW of renewable energy and RECs from La Joya Wind II. PNM intends to utilize the BB2 line to deliver power from the PPA. See additional discussion below under Application for a New 345-kV Transmission Line. PNM’s 2020 renewable energy procurement plan requested a variance from the RPS for 2020 and proposes the shortfall be met with excess RECs that will be available under the La Joya Wind II PPA in 2021. PNM also submitted proposed adjustments to the current FPPAC methodology for non-renewable fuel allocations to reflect the ETA’s removal of certain customer cost caps associated with the RPS and requested that the fuel clause year be reset to correspond to the January 1 reset date under the renewable energy rider. On December 2, 2019, the Hearing Examiner issued a recommended decision in the case recommending approval of PNM’s 2020 renewable energy procurement plan including La Joya Wind II. On January 29, 2020, the NMPRC accepted the Hearing Examiners recommended decision and approved PNM’s 2020 renewable energy procurement plan.

On June 1, 2020, PNM filed its 2021 renewable energy procurement plan. In the plan, PNM proposed to collect a revenue requirement of approximately $67.8 million through the renewable energy rider, including recovery of a regulatory asset of $2.3 million for costs of administering PNM's Sky Blue voluntary renewable energy program that PNM has not been able to collect from Sky Blue participants. The Sky Blue regulatory asset of $2.3 million included carrying charges of 8.64% totaling approximately $0.7 million. PNM did not propose any new procurements in the plan. On November 18, 2020 the NMPRC issued a final order approving the 2021 renewable energy procurement plan with the exception of PNM’s request to recover the Sky Blue regulatory asset. The NMPRC denied PNM’s request to recover the regulatory asset, in part, because PNM did not adequately account for the renewable energy certificates associated with the regulatory asset. The NMPRC indicated that it will initiate a separate proceeding on the subject of whether the Sky Blue program should continue in its current form, be modified, or be terminated. The NMPRC also placed conditions on PNM’s ability to recover the Sky Blue regulatory asset from all customers, rather than from program participants, in a future proceeding, including that the carrying charge associated with the regulatory asset be reduced from 8.64% to 4% and that PNM be prohibited from collecting carrying charges from the date of the final order. However, PNM is permitted to seek recovery of carrying charges for the full 8.64% through the current Sky Blue program.

Renewable Energy Rider

The NMPRC has authorized PNM to recover certain renewable procurement costs through a rate rider billed on a per KWh basis. PNM recorded revenues from the rider of $56.4 million, $52.0 million, and $41.4 million in 2020, 2019, and 2018. The 2020 renewable energy procurement plan became effective on February 1, 2020. In its 2021 renewable energy procurement plan case, PNM proposed to collect $67.8 million through a revised rate rider beginning in 2021. The NMPRC approved recovery of $65.5 million through the rider in 2021, which reflected the NMPRC’s rejection of PNM’s request to recover the $2.3 million Sky Blue regulatory asset in 2021. The revised rate rider became effective on January 1, 2021.

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 and does not expect to exceed the limitation in 2020.

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.

On July 26, 2017, PNM, NMPRC staff, and other parties filed a stipulation in PNM’s energy efficiency and load management application, providing for all of PNM’s proposed energy efficiency and load management programs to be approved with limited modifications and PNM’s base level incentive would be $1.7 million and could earn an incentive of up to $1.9 million based on savings of 69 GWh in 2018. The settlement also established a base level incentive for PNM of $1.8 million with the opportunity to earn up to $2.7 million in 2019 and required PNM to make a filing in 2019 to address incentives to be earned in 2020. On November 8, 2017, the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the stipulation with various modifications, including adoption of a discount rate equal to the tax-adjusted WACC of 9.59% rather than the 7.71% proposed in the stipulation and modifying the program budgets to $23.6 million for 2018 and $24.9 million for 2019. On January 31, 2018, the NMPRC issued an order that largely accepted the certification with certain exceptions concerning the measurement and verification of the approved load management programs.

In 2019, PNM submitted a filing to address incentives to be earned in 2020. PNM’s proposed incentive mechanism was 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. 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 sought approval of an annual base incentive of 7.1% of the portfolio budget if PNM were to achieve 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 proposed an advanced metering infrastructure (“AMI”) pilot program, which included the installation of 5,000 AMI meters at a cost of $2.9 million. PNM proposed the pilot program to comply with an NMPRC order denying PNM’s February 2016 application to replace its existing customer metering equipment with AMI. PNM did not recommend the AMI pilot program due to the limited benefits that are cost-effective under a pilot structure. On September 17, 2020 the Hearing Examiner in the case issued a recommended decision recommending that PNM's proposed energy efficiency and load management program be approved, with the exception of the proposed AMI pilot program. On October 28, 2020 the NMPRC issued an order adopting the recommended decision in its entirety.

2020 Decoupling Petition

As discussed above, the legislature amended the EUEA to, among other things, include a decoupling mechanism for disincentives. 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 proposed 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. 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 were filed on August 7, 2020. On September 16, 2020 ABCWUA, Bernalillo County, CCAE, the City of Albuquerque, NEE, NMAG, Staff and WRA filed testimony. CCAE and WRA support PNM's petition, but recommend that the rate adjustment mechanism not take effect until new rates are approved in PNM's next general rate case. The other parties filing testimony oppose PNM's petition. On October 2, 2020, PNM requested an order to vacate the public hearing, scheduled to begin October 13, 2020, and staying the proceeding until the NMPRC decides whether to entertain a petition to issue a declaratory order resolving the issues raised in the motions to dismiss. On October 7, 2020, the Hearing Examiner approved PNM's request to stay the proceeding and vacate the public hearing and required PNM to file a petition for declaratory order by October 30, 2020. On October 30, 2020 PNM filed a petition for declaratory order asking the NMPRC to issue an order finding that full revenue decoupling is authorized by the EUEA. On November 4, 2020, ABCWUA and Bernalillo County jointly filed a competing petition asking the NMPRC to issue a declaratory order on the EUEA’s requirements related to disincentives. On November 24, 2020, the NMAG requested that the NMPRC deny both petitions for declaratory orders and instead address disincentives under the EUEA in a rulemaking. 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 addressing the 20-year planning period, from 2017 through 2036. 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 8. 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.

2020 IRP

NMPRC rules required 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 January 29, 2021 PNM filed its 2020 IRP addressing the 20-year planning period, from 2020 through 2040. The plan focuses on a carbon-free electricity portfolio by 2040 that would eliminate coal at the end of 2024. This includes replacing the power from San Juan with a mix of approved carbon-free resources and the plan to exit Four Corners at the end of 2024. The plan highlights the need for additional investments in a diverse set of resources, including renewables to supply carbon-free power, energy storage to balance supply and demand, and efficiency and other demand-side resources to mitigate load growth.

Abandonment Applications made under the ETA

As discussed in Note 16, the ETA 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. 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.

SJGS Abandonment Application

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. 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, 2022, 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.

As discussed in Note 16, the NM Supreme Court granted a request by PNM to stay a January 30, 2019 NMPRC order requiring PNM to file an abandonment application for SJGS by March 1, 2019. On June 26, 2019, and after the effective date of the ETA, the NM Supreme Court lifted the stay and denied PNM’s petition without discussion. 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. On July 22, 2019, Western Resource Advocates filed a motion requesting the NMPRC clarify whether it intends to evaluate the abandonment and financing proceeding under the requirements of the ETA and, in the event the abandonment and financing proceeding would not be evaluated under the ETA, to reconsider its decision and provide parties an opportunity to present oral argument on the matter. The NMPRC chair responded on July 24, 2019, indicating that the Hearing Examiners assigned to the proceeding would address the issue of law applicable to the approvals sought by PNM in the scheduling orders. On July 25, 2019, the Hearing Examiners issued procedural orders that set public hearings on SJGS abandonment and related financing to begin on December 10, 2019, on PNM’s proposed PPA replacement resources to begin on December 2, 2019, and on PNM-owned replacement resources to begin on March 2, 2020. These procedural orders were subsequently amended to allow public hearings for both the PPA and PNM-owned replacement resources to begin in January 2020. The procedural orders also required PNM to file legal brief by August 23, 2019 regarding the extent to which the state constitution might prevent the ETA from applying to the issues in each proceeding, that parties file responses to PNM’s legal briefs by October 18, 2019, and that parties may file testimony on the merits of their claims regarding the SJGS abandonment and replacement resources if the ETA is ultimately determined to not apply to PNM’s application. On July 29, 2019, Western Resource Advocates filed a motion for interlocutory appeal of the July 24, 2019 order indicating that the procedural order would not provide parties adequate time to determine the applicability of the ETA and requesting an expedited decision from the NMPRC stating their intent to review the proceedings under the requirements of the ETA or under prior law. On August 21, 2019, the NMPRC denied the motion for interlocutory appeal. On August 23, 2019, PNM filed legal briefing in support of the applicability of the ETA to all aspects of the consolidated application. On October 18, 2019, various parties filed legal briefings with a range of positions that support or oppose the applicability of the ETA, as well as testimony regarding the SJGS abandonment and financing proceedings.

On August 26, 2019, NEE and other advocacy groups filed an emergency petition for a writ of mandamus requesting the NM Supreme Court stay the SJGS abandonment and financing proceedings, declare the ETA inapplicable to such proceedings and declare certain provisions of the ETA unconstitutional because they limit the regulatory oversight responsibilities of the NMPRC. The petition was dismissed for failure to comply with the appellate rules and an amended petition was filed on September 18, 2019. On August 30, 2019, PNM and other parties filed a petition for a writ of mandamus requesting the NM Supreme Court clarify that the reason underlying its June 2019 decision denying the stay was due to the

passage of the ETA and to clarify that the ETA applies to any application filed after the stay had been lifted. In early October 2019, the NM Supreme Court denied both PNM’s and NEE’s petitions for writ of mandamus without discussion.

On December 9, 2019, the Governor of the State of New Mexico, the President of the Navajo Nation, and several New Mexico state senators and representatives filed an emergency petition for a writ of mandamus requesting the NM Supreme Court require the NMPRC to comply with its constitutional duties and apply the ETA to every aspect of PNM’s SJGS Abandonment Application. The petition indicated the NMPRC’s January 2019 order to initiate SJGS abandonment proceedings was intended to create a pending case predating the effectiveness of the ETA, that irreversible harm to the state of New Mexico and the Navajo Nation has resulted from the NMPRC’s refusal to establish the applicability of the ETA, and that the NMPRC’s refusal to review the SJGS abandonment and financing proceedings under the ETA violates the authority of the legislature and the separation of powers doctrine. On December 16, 2019, the NM Supreme Court issued an order requiring responses by January 3, 2020. PNM and other parties filed in support of the petition and NEE submitted a filing indicating the petition should be denied. On January 3, 2020, the NMPRC filed its response stating that, among other things, the NMPRC’s order initiating SJGS abandonment proceedings was made pursuant to the NMPRC’s December 2015 order authorizing the abandonment of SJGS Units 2 and 3 by December 2017, which predates the ETA and required PNM to submit a filing regarding the future of SJGS by December 31, 2018, and that the NMPRC has an obligation to provide parties in the case due process regarding the applicability of the ETA to PNM’s application. In January 2020, the NM Supreme Court denied NEE’s and other parties petitions, granted PNM’s motion to intervene, and scheduled oral arguments to be presented by the NMPRC and PNM. On January 29, 2020, and after oral argument, the NM Supreme Court issued a ruling requiring the NMPRC apply the ETA to all aspects of PNM’s SJGS Abandonment Application, indicating any previous NMPRC orders inconsistent with their ruling should be vacated, and denying parties’ request for stay. The NM Supreme Court issued a subsequent opinion, on July 23, 2020, 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. On August 17, 2020, the appellants filed a Brief in Chief and on October 5, 2020, PNM, WRA, CCAE, and Sierra Club filed Answer Briefs. 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. 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. 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

Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 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 docket 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.

On September 28, 2020 PNM filed its application for approval of the final executed contracts for the replacement resources. PNM proposed an alternative to the 200 MW solar PPA combined with a 100 MW battery storage agreement and the 100 MW solar PPA combined with a 30 MW battery storage agreement: a single 299 MW solar PPA combined with a 130 MW battery storage agreement. Approval of the alternative would result in customer savings without materially changing the resource selection criteria relied on by the NMPRC in approving the replacement resources. In addition, PNM provided updated costs estimates of $8.1 million for the SJGS replacement resources, based on the NMPRC authorization to create regulatory assets granted in the abandonment order, which it plans to seek recovery of in a future general rate case. PNM asked the NMPRC to issue a final order in the proceeding no later than December 4, 2020 to allow for expeditious approval of the contracts so that the replacement resources may be in service to meet peak summer demand in 2022. On November 13, 2020 the Hearing Examiner issued a recommended decision recommending approval of a 200 MW solar PPA combined with a 100 MW battery storage agreement and the 100 MW solar PPA combined with a 30 MW battery storage agreement and denial of PNM’s alternative request for approval of a single 299 MW solar PPA combined with a 130 MW battery storage agreement. On December 2, 2020 the NMPRC issued an order adopting the recommended decision in its entirety.

Four Corners Abandonment Application

On November 1, 2020, PNM entered into the Four Corners Purchase and Sale Agreement with NTEC, pursuant to which PNM will sell its 13% ownership interest (other than certain transmission assets) in Four Corners to NTEC. The sale is contingent upon NMPRC approval and expected to close by the end of 2024. In connection with the sale, PNM would make payments of $75.0 million to NTEC for relief from its obligations under the coal supply agreement for Four Corners after

December 31, 2024. Pursuant to the Four Corners Purchase and Sale Agreement, PNM will retain its current plant decommissioning and coal mine reclamation obligations. PNM made an initial payment to NTEC of $15.0 million in November 2020, subject to refund with interest upon termination of the Four Corners Purchase and Sale Agreement prior to closing. Under the terms of the Four Corners Purchase and Sale Agreement, upon receipt of the NMPRC approval, PNM would make a final payment of $60.0 million. The initial $15.0 million payment was recorded in other current assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2020.

On January 8, 2021, PNM filed the Four Corners Abandonment Application, which seeks NMPRC approval to exit PNM’s share of Four Corners as of December 31, 2024, and issuance of approximately $300 million of energy transition bonds as provided by the ETA. PNM’s request for the issuance of Securitized Bonds included approximately $272 million of forecasted undepreciated investments in Four Corners at December 31, 2024, an estimated $4.6 million for plant decommissioning costs, estimated $7.3 million in upfront financing costs, and estimated $16.5 million in economic development. PNM intends to submit a separate application for NMPRC approval of a replacement resource portfolio following NMPRC action on this application. This deferral is authorized by the ETA and will provide for adequate time to complete a competitive bid process to develop and finalize a replacement resource portfolio from feasible replacement resources for NMPRC consideration.

On January 26, 2021, Sierra Club filed a motion in the Four Corners Abandonment Application requesting that the NMPRC order PNM to file supplemental testimony addressing the prudence of Four Corners investments or alternatively that the NMPRC dismiss the Four Corners Abandonment Application and permit PNM to refile after the prudence issue is resolved. In addition, on January 28, 2021, NEE and CFRE filed a motion requesting that the NMPRC dismiss the application, stating that approval of the abandonment would be contrary to the provision of the REA that prevents the sale of carbon dioxide emitting electricity-generating resources as a means of complying with the RPS, and that the Four Corners Abandonment Application does not demonstrate that the sale of 200 MW to NTEC will not result in a net detriment to public interest. Parties filed positions on the sufficiency of PNM’s application on February 11, 2021. On February 18, 2021, PNM filed a consolidated response to the motions and the positions on the sufficiency of the application which defended the legal sufficiency of PNM’s application and addressed potential amendments to the application and testimonies. On February 26, 2021 the Hearing Examiner issued an order on the sufficiency of the Four Corners Application finding that the application was deficient on its face and fails to adequately support whether or not the sale and transfer of PNM’s interest in Four Corners to NTEC is in the public interest. However, given the NMPRC’s preference to address Four Corners issues in the case, as well as PNM’s concession on filing an amended application, the Hearing Examiner did not dismiss the case. The order requires PNM to file an amended application by March 15, 2021; establishes that the nine-month period for review of the amended application shall start on the date of PNM’s filing of the amended application and run through December 15, 2021; requires PNM to file supplemental testimony addressing the prudence of its investment in Four Corners; requires PNM to more explicitly address the statutory standards for approval of the proposed transfer to NTEC; and requires PNM to withdraw the January 8, 2021 Four Corners Application.

The financial impact of an early exit of Four Corners and the NMPRC approval process are influenced by many factors outside of PNM’s control, including the overall political and economic conditions of New Mexico. See additional discussion of the ETA in Note 16. PNM cannot predict the outcome of these matters.

Cost Recovery Related to Joining the EIM

The California Independent System Operator (“CAISO”) developed the Western Energy Imbalance Market (“EIM”) as a real-time wholesale energy trading market that enables participating electric utilities to buy and sell energy. The EIM aggregates the variability of electricity generation and load for multiple balancing authority areas and utility jurisdictions. In addition, the EIM facilitates greater integration of renewable resources through the aggregation of flexible resources by capturing diversity benefits from the expanded geographic footprint and the expanded potential uses for those resources.

PNM completed a cost-benefit analysis of participating in the EIM. PNM’s analysis indicated participation in the EIM would provide substantial benefits to retail customers. In 2018, PNM filed an application with the NMPRC requesting, among other things, to recover an estimated $20.9 million of initial capital investments and authorization to establish a regulatory asset to recover an estimated $7.4 million of other expenses that would be incurred in order to join the EIM. PNM’s application proposed the regulatory asset be adjusted to provide for full recovery of such costs, including carrying charges, until the effective date of new rates in PNM’s next general rate case. PNM’s application also proposed the benefits of participating in the EIM be credited to retail customers through PNM’s existing FPPAC and that PNM would seek recovery of its costs in a future proceeding. On December 19, 2018, the NMPRC issued an order approving the establishment of a regulatory asset to recover PNM’s cost of joining the EIM, which was subsequently challenged by several parties. On February 6, 2019, the NMPRC issued an order granting rehearing and vacating the December 19, 2018 order. On March 18, 2019, the Hearing

Examiner issued an updated recommended decision recommending approval of the establishment of a regulatory asset but deferring certain rate making issues, including but not limited to issues related to implementation and ongoing EIM costs and savings, the prudence and reasonableness of costs to be included in the regulatory asset, and the period over which costs would be charged to customers until PNM’s next general rate case filing, which was approved by the NMPRC. PNM and other parties filed a joint motion requesting the NMPRC clarify that the quarterly benefits reports prepared by CAISO be used to determine the benefits of participating in the EIM, as well as to support the prudence of costs incurred to join the EIM. On April 24, 2019, the NMPRC issued an order granting the joint motion for clarification and indicating the CAISO quarterly benefits reports may be used in a future rate case. PNM anticipates it will begin participating in the EIM in April 2021.

Facebook, Inc. Data Center Project

PNM has a special service contract to provide service to Facebook, Inc. for a data center being constructed in PNM’s service area. Facebook’s service requirements include the acquisition by PNM of a sufficient amount of new renewable energy resources and RECs to match the energy and capacity requirements of the data center. The cost of renewable energy procured is passed through to Facebook under a rate rider. A special service rate is applied to Facebook’s energy consumption in those hours of the month when their consumption exceeds the energy production from the renewable resources. As of December 31, 2020, PNM is procuring energy from 130 MW of solar-PV capacity from NMRD, a 50% equity method investee of PNMR Development. See additional discussion of NMRD in Note 21.

PNM has NMPRC approval for additional 25-year PPAs to purchase renewable energy and RECs to supply renewable energy to the data center. These PPAs include the purchase of the power and RECs from:

•Casa Mesa Wind, LLC, a subsidiary of NextEra Energy Resources, LLC, which is located near House, New Mexico, has a total capacity of 50 MW, and became operational in November 2018

•166 MW from La Joya Wind I, owned by Avangrid Renewables, LLC, which is located near Estancia, New Mexico and began commercial operational in February 2021

•Route 66 Solar Energy Center, LLC, a subsidiary of NextEra Energy Resources, LLC, which is expected to be located west of Albuquerque, New Mexico, have a total capacity of 50 MW, and be operational in December 2021

•Two PPAs to purchase renewable energy and RECs from an aggregate of approximately 100 MW of capacity from two solar-PV facilities to be owned and operated by NMRD. The first 50 MW of these facilities began commercial operation in December 2019 and the remaining capacity began commercial operation in July 2020.

On February 8, 2021 PNM filed an application with the NMPRC for approval to service the data center for an additional 190 MW of solar PPA combined with 100 MW of battery storage and a 50 MW solar PPA expected to be operational in 2023. In its application, PNM filed a Motion for Expedited Consideration seeking an expedited schedule for this proceeding that would provide a Final Order by June 1, 2021, in order to facilitate timely completion of the renewable resources to meet the expected completion date of the Data Center expansion. On February 17, 2021 the NMPRC approved an order with a schedule targeting a final order by June 1, 2021.

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 in September 2021. This matter is now concluded.

Application for a New 345-kV Transmission Line

On August 10, 2018, PNM filed an application seeking NMPRC approval of a CCN to construct and operate a 345-kV transmission line and associated facilities (the “BB2 Line”), and to determine the rate making treatment to apply to the BB2 line and related rights-of-way. PNM’s application requested that the NMPRC apply standard ratemaking treatment to the estimated $85 million cost of the project resulting in a jurisdictional allocation of costs to all of PNM’s transmission and retail customers. On June 12, 2019, the NMPRC issued an updated final order granting the CCN but defers rate making treatment to a future rate case. On October 2, 2020, PNM made a voluntary interim compliance filing notifying the NMPRC that the cost of the project increased by approximately $24 million, to approximately $109 million. The filing states that the updated engineering

requirements, particularly increased strength requirements for the steel structures as the reason for the cost increase. The BB2 Line was placed in service in December 2020. This matter is now concluded.

Western Spirit Line

On May 1, 2019, PNM, the New Mexico Renewable Energy Transmission Authority (“RETA”), a New Mexico state authority, and Western Spirit Transmission LLC (“Western Spirit”), an affiliate of Pattern Energy Group, Inc., entered into agreements for the construction of a transmission line to transmit power generated from wind facilities to be owned by Pattern Wind New Mexico, LLC (“Pattern Wind”), an affiliate of Western Spirit and Pattern Development. As a part of the arrangement, the parties executed a Build Transfer Agreement that would allow PNM to purchase the approximately 165-mile 345-kV transmission line and associated facilities (the “Western Spirit Line”). The Western Spirit Line will be developed and constructed by RETA and Western Spirit LLC and sold to PNM upon its commercial operation date. The Build Transfer Agreement contains a number of customary representations and warranties and indemnification provisions as well as closing conditions, including regulatory and third-party approvals, and if necessary, anti-trust review under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. The Build Transfer Agreement also includes termination provisions that can be exercised under certain circumstances, including failure of the developer to achieve project milestones or to achieve commercial operation by specified dates, and failure of an affiliate of Pattern Wind to provide adequate credit support prior to closing. PNM estimates the net cost of the project to be approximately $285 million, including an estimated $75 million that Pattern Wind has chosen to self-fund under the agreement.

On May 10, 2019, PNM filed an application with the NMPRC requesting that the NMPRC determine that it is not unlawful or inconsistent with the public interest for PNM to purchase the Western Spirit Line. On September 11, 2019, the Hearing Examiner issued a recommended decision that would allow PNM to purchase the Western Spirit Line, and indicating that PNM’s proposal satisfies the NMPRC’s acquisition standards and that no CCN is required until such time that PNM seeks recovery for costs associated with the line from retail rate payers. On October 2, 2019, the NMPRC approved the recommended decision with limited modifications.

PNM also has entered into Transmission Service Agreements and other ancillary agreements (“TSAs”) with Pattern Wind for firm transmission service. The TSAs use an incremental rate based on the construction and other ongoing costs of the Western Spirit Line, including adjustments for construction costs that Pattern Wind has chosen to self-fund under the agreement. FERC approved PNM’s TSAs with Pattern Wind effective July 9, 2019. On August 8, 2019, FERC approved PNM’s request to purchase the Western Spirit Line.

On October 29, 2020 PNM received written notice from Western Spirit that all conditions set forth in the Build Transfer Agreement for Development Completion had been satisfied. These conditions include state and federal regulatory approvals, real property rights for right-of-way easements, environmental and construction permits and arrangements for financing the project. On November 5, 2020 PNM provided Western Spirit Development Completion Acknowledgement. On December 31, 2020 Pattern Energy Group LP achieved financial close on financing necessary for construction of the combined wind and transmission projects related to Western Spirit.

Formula Transmission Rates

PNM charges wholesale electric transmission service customers using a formula rate mechanism pursuant to which wholesale transmission service rates are calculated annually in accordance with an approved formula. The formula reflects a ROE of 10% and includes updating cost of service components, including investment in plant and operating expenses, based on information contained in PNM’s annual financial report filed with FERC, as well as including projected large transmission capital projects to be placed into service in the following year. The projections included are subject to true-up in the following year formula rate. Certain items, including changes to return on equity and depreciation rates, require a separate filing to be made with FERC before being included in the formula rate.

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 of December 31, 2020 PNM deferred incremental costs related to COVID-19 of $8.8 million in a regulatory asset and cost savings related to COVID-19 of $0.9 million in a regulatory liability on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. 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.

On February 3, 2021 the NMPRC issued an order finding that the temporary mandatory moratorium on disconnections of residential utility customers shall be in effect from the date of the order for 100 days (May 14th). At the end of the moratorium, a 90 day transition period will begin, which continues the temporary moratorium on disconnections to provide the utilities additional time to assist residential customers with arrearages to enter into installment agreements. The transition period may be a mandatory continuation of the temporary moratorium on disconnections if the Governor of New Mexico’s executive order remains in effect or may be a consensual continuation of the moratorium on disconnections if the Governor of New Mexico’s executive order terminates or expires prior to the end of the transition period. All regulated public utilities may begin disconnections at the end of the transition period.

Transportation Electrification Program

On December 18, 2020, in compliance with New Mexico Statute, PNM filed its PNM 2022-2023 Transportation Electrification Program (“TEP”) for approval with the NMPRC. PNM’s requested TEP includes a budget of approximately $8.4 million with flexibility of 25%. As proposed, up to 25% of the program budget will be dedicated to low and moderate income customers and is based on a model with no company ownership of charging facilities. PNM’s proposed TEP provides incentives through rebates to both residential and non-residential customers towards the purchase of chargers and/or behind-the-meter infrastructure. PNM’s TEP includes a request for a modified rate to add an electric vehicle pilot with a time-of-use option, a new non-residential electric vehicle time-of-use rate pilot without demand charges and implementation of a new rider to collect the actual costs of the TEP. PNM’s application requested NMPRC approval by the end of August 2021, as well as for authority to file a new TEP by the end of June 2023.

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. TNMP’s application included a request to establish new rate riders to recover Hurricane Harvey restoration, rate case, and additional vegetation management costs. The application also included the integration of revenues previously recorded under the AMS rider and collection of other unrecovered AMS investments into base rates. The TNMP 2018 Rate Case application also proposed to return the regulatory liability recorded at December 31, 2017 related to federal tax reform to customers and to reduce the federal corporate income tax rate to 21%. As discussed in Note 18, at December 31, 2017, TNMP recorded a regulatory liability of $146.5 million to reflect the change in federal corporate income tax rates that will be refunded to customers in future periods. The TNMP 2018 Rate Case application proposed to refund $14.4 million of this regulatory liability over a period of five years and the remaining amount over the estimated useful lives of plant in service as of December 31, 2017.

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%, 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 Notes 13 and 18. 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, which is reflected as regulatory disallowances on TNMP’s Consolidated Statements of Earnings.

Advanced Meter System Deployment

In July 2011, the PUCT approved a settlement and authorized an AMS deployment plan that permits TNMP to collect $113.4 million in deployment costs through a surcharge over a 12-year period. TNMP began collecting the surcharge in August 2011 and deployment of advanced meters began in September 2011. TNMP completed its mass deployment in 2016 and has installed more than 242,000 advanced meters. The TNMP 2018 Rate Case and associated approved settlement discussed above included a reconciliation of AMS costs and integrate TNMP’s AMS recovery into base rates beginning on January 1, 2019.

TNMP was notified by its largest AMS service provider that its existing communication platform would be decommissioned in February 2022. TNMP evaluated technological alternatives for its AMS and on October 2, 2020, filed an application with the PUCT for authorization to implement necessary upgrades of approximately $46 million by November 2022. On January 14, 2021, the PUCT approved TNMP’s application. TNMP will seek recovery of the investment associated with the upgrade in a future general rate proceeding or distribution cost recovery factor filing.

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 or over collected costs from prior years, rate case expenses, and performance bonuses (if the programs exceed mandated savings goals).

The following sets forth TNMP’s approved EECRF increases:


Effective Date	Aggregate Collection Amount		Performance Bonus
	(In millions)



March 1, 2018	$	6.0	$	1.1
March 1, 2019	5.6		0.8
March 1, 2020	5.9		0.8

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 included a performance bonus of $1.0 million based on TNMP’s energy efficiency achievements in the 2019 plan year. 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. On September 10, 2020, the PUCT issued a final order approving TNMP’s energy efficiency application.

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 27, 2018	$	32	$	0.6
March 21, 2019	111.8		14.3
September 19, 2019	21.9		3.3
March 27, 2020	59.2		7.8
October 7, 2020	10.8		2.0

On January 22, 2021, TNMP filed an application to further update its transmission rates, which would increase revenues by $14.1 million annually, based on an increase in rate base of $112.6 million. 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 2020 DCOS that requested an increase in TNMP's annual distribution revenue requirement of $14.7 million based on net capital incremental distribution investments of $149.2 million. 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. On August 13, 2020 the PUCT approved the unanimous settlement.

Competition Transition Charge Compliance Filing

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 and to recover a carrying charge on the CTC. The amounts yet to be collected are recorded as regulatory assets by TNMP. Further, the order authorizing TNMP’s CTC included a true-up provision requiring an adjustment to the CTC due to a cumulative over- or under-collection of revenues, including interest, greater-than or equal to 15% of the most recent annual CTC funding amount. On July 10, 2020, TNMP filed to reconcile and stop the CTC surcharge beginning on September 1, 2020, as TNMP had 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. TNMP made a compliance filing on September 14, 2020, to reconcile recoveries under the rider. On September 28, 2020, PUCT Staff filed its recommendation for approval of TNMP's proposed revisions to the CTC Rider and on September 29, 2020 the ALJ approved the recommended decision with rates effective for one month in November 2020. Pursuant to the order approved by the ALJ, a final compliance filing was made on January 11, 2021, concluding the matter.

Order Related to Changes in Federal Income Tax Rates

On January 25, 2018, the PUCT issued an accounting order that addresses the change in the federal corporate income tax rates on investor-owned utilities in the state of Texas. The order required investor-owned utilities to record a regulatory liability equal to the reduction in accumulated federal deferred income tax balances at the end of 2017 due to the change in the federal corporate income tax rate. In addition, the order required that a regulatory liability be recorded to reflect the difference between revenues collected under existing rates and those that would have been collected had those rates been set reflecting federal income tax reform beginning on the date of the order. In compliance with the PUCT order, during the year ended December 31, 2018, TNMP reduced revenues by $5.4 million, which amount was offset against TNMP’s Hurricane Harvey restoration costs and is being refunded to customers as a component of a new rate rider over a period of approximately three years beginning on January 1, 2019.

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 allowed providers to implement a rider to collect unpaid residential retail customer bills and to ensure these customers continued to have electric service. In addition, the program provided transmission and distribution providers access to zero-interest loans from ERCOT. Collectively, ERCOT’s loans could not exceed $15 million. The program had 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 included but were 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 December 31, 2020, collections under the rider exceeded unpaid residential retail customer bills and are presented net as a regulatory liability of $0.1 million on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Other COVID-19 related costs of $0.7 million were also recorded as a regulatory asset on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. On April 14, 2020, TNMP executed an interest-free loan agreement to borrow $0.5 million from ERCOT. On October 30, 2020, TNMP repaid the balance of the loan.

On August 27, 2020, the PUCT issued an order determining that new enrollments in the program should end on August 31, 2020 and benefits under the program should end on September 30, 2020 to allow eligible customers a minimum of one month of benefits from the program.