XML 59 R38.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.22.0.1

Regulatory and Rate Matters | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2021
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 16. PNMR Merger Regulatory Proceedings On October 20, 2020, PNMR, Avangrid and Merger Sub entered into the Merger Agreement pursuant to which Merger Sub will merge with and into PNMR, with PNMR surviving the Merger as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Avangrid. Among other conditions, consummation of the Merger is subject to receipt of all required regulatory approvals. Five federal agencies and the PUCT have completed their reviews and approved the Merger, leaving the NMPRC as the only remaining approval necessary for the merger. The original application before the NMPRC was filed in November 2020. For additional information on the Merger regulatory proceedings see Note 22. 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. 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 Energy 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 the renewable energy rider billed on a per KWh basis. 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 201.2 MW at December 31, 2021, owned by customers or third parties from whom PNM purchases any net excess output and RECs 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’s 2020 renewable energy procurement plan requested a variance from the RPS for 2020 and proposed the shortfall be met with excess RECs 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 examiner’s recommended decision and approved PNM’s 2020 renewable energy procurement plan, effective February 1, 2020. 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 and 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, effective January 1, 2021. 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. On June 1, 2021 PNM filed its 2022 renewable energy procurement plan which proposed to collect $66.9 million for the year. PNM did not propose any new procurements in the plan, but proposed to retire a small number of RECs in 2022 from resources that had not been previously approved as part of the RPS plan. The NMPRC assigned this matter to a hearing examiner and a hearing was held on September 30, 2021. On October 15, 2021, NMPRC Staff and PNM jointly filed the post-hearing brief stating that pending issues to the case had been resolved with PNM agreeing to certain compliance provisions. On October 30, 2021 the hearing examiner issued a recommended decision recommending approval of PNM’s filing. On November 17, 2021 the NMPRC issued a final order adopting the recommended decision. The 2022 renewable energy procurement plan became effective on January 1, 2022. The following sets forth PNM’s revenues recorded for the renewable energy rider:
Year Ended |  | Annual Revenues
|  | (In millions)
2019 |  | $52.0
2020 |  | 56.4
2021 |  | 61.7
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 2020 and does not expect to exceed the limitation in 2021. The NMPRC currently has an open inquiry docket into the continued use of renewable riders by New Mexico utilities. PNM is unable to predict the outcome of the NMPRC’s inquiry. 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 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, 2021, PNM filed its 2020 Energy Efficiency Annual Report which reconciles the actual 2020 profit incentive collections with the profit incentive authorized by the NMPRC resulting in an additional $0.8 million incentive collected during the remainder of 2021. The additional incentive was authorized for 2020 because annual energy savings for the year exceeded 87 GWh and was the maximum level of profit incentive allowed under the approved mechanism. PNM began collecting the additional incentive effective May 27, 2021. 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, PNM would collect the difference from customers if the revenue per customer from the NM 2015 Rate Case exceeds the actual revenue recovered, or return the difference to customers if the actual revenue per customer recovered 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, NMPRC Staff (“Staff”), and WRA filed testimony. CCAE and WRA supported PNM's petition, but recommended 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 opposed 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. On March 17, 2021, the NMPRC issued an order granting the petitions for declaratory order, commencing a declaratory order proceeding to address the petitions, denying the NMAG’s request to initiate a rulemaking, and appointing a hearing examiner to preside over the declaratory order proceeding. Initial briefs were filed on June 7, 2021 and response briefs were filed on June 28, 2021. Oral arguments were made on July 15, 2021. On January 14, 2022, the hearing examiner issued a recommended decision recommending the NMPRC find that the EUEA does not mandate the NMPRC to authorize or approve a full decoupling mechanism, defining full decoupling as limited to energy efficiency and load management measures and programs. The recommended decision also states that a utility may request approval of a rate adjustment mechanism to remove regulatory disincentives to energy efficiency and load management measures and programs through a stand-alone petition, as part of the utility’s triennial energy efficiency application or a general rate case and that PNM is not otherwise precluded from petitioning for a rate adjustment mechanism prior to its next general rate case. Finally, the recommended decision stated that the EUEA does not permit the NMPRC to reduce a utility’s ROE based on approval of a disincentive removal mechanism founded on removing regulatory disincentives to energy efficiency and load management measures and programs. The recommended decision does not specifically prohibit a downward adjustment to a utility’s capital structure, based on approval of a disincentive removal mechanism. On January 27, 2022, PNM filed exceptions to the recommended decision and response exceptions were filed on February 4, 2022. 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. 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. On May 24, 2021, the hearing examiner issued a procedural schedule and required PNM, upon request, to provide modeling data and assumptions to parties within two weeks. Additionally, PNM was required upon request, to run modeling or provide reasonable access to PNM virtual machines at PNM's expense. The alternative modeling deadline concluded on August 30, 2021 and Staff's recommendation was filed on November 12, 2021. The recommendation found that PNM has met the requirements of the IRP rule, but not the requirements of the NM 2016 Rate Case. 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 January 30, 2019, the NMPRC issued an order initiating a proceeding and requiring PNM to submit an application for the abandonment of PNM’s share of SJGS by March 1, 2019. 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. 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. 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. 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. On January 10, 2022, the NM Supreme Court issued its decision rejecting CFRE’s and NEE’s constitutional challenges to the ETA and affirmed the NMPRC final order. On February 28, 2022, WRA and CCAE filed a Joint Motion for Order to Show Cause and Enforce Financing Order and Supporting Brief, which requests that the NMPRC order PNM to show cause why its rates should not be reduced at the time SJGS is abandoned, and to otherwise enforce the NMPRC’s April 1, 2020 final order. 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 at December 31, 2020. PNM revised its estimates in 2021 and $36.9 million and $36.0 million is reflected in other current liabilities and as a corresponding deferred regulatory asset on PNMR's and PNM's Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2021. These estimates may be adjusted in future periods as the Company refines its expectations. On June 24, 2020, the hearing examiners issued a recommended decision on PNM's request for approval of replacement resources that addressed the entire portfolio of replacement resources, which superseded a previous partial recommended decision issued on March 27, 2020. 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. On July 29, 2020, the NMPRC issued an order approving resource selection criteria identified in the ETA that would include PPAs for 650 MW of solar and 300 MW of battery storage. 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 had 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 not in evidence that had been approved by the NMPRC. On September 28, 2020, PNM filed its application for approval of the final executed contracts for 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. 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. On December 2, 2020 the NMPRC issued an order adopting the recommended decision in its entirety. Throughout 2021 and continuing into 2022, PNM provided notices of delays and status updates to the NMPRC for the approved SJGS replacement resource projects. All four project developers have notified PNM that completion of the projects will be delayed and no longer available for most, if any of the 2022 summer peak load period. The delays in the SJGS replacement resources, coupled with the abandonment of SJGS Units 1 and 4 present a risk that PNM will have insufficient operational resources to meet the 2022 summer peak to reliably serve its customers if PNM is unable to find additional generation resources. PNM entered into three agreements to purchase power from third parties in the second half of 2021 to minimize potential impacts to customers; the purchase of 85 MW, unit contingent from Four Corners for June through September of 2022; the purchase of 150 MW, firm power in June and September 2022; and the purchase of 40 MW, unit contingent from PVNGS Unit 3 for the full year of 2022. Even after accounting for these additional contracts, PNM projected a system reserve margin ranging from 0.9% to (3.4%) during the 2022 summer peak. As a result, on February 17, 2022, PNM filed a Notice and Request for Modification to or Variance from Abandonment Date for SJGS Unit 4 with the NMPRC. The filing provided notice that PNM had obtained agreement from the SJGS owners and WSJ LLC to extend operation of Unit 4 until September 30, 2022. SJGS Unit 4 will provide 327 MW of capacity and improve PNM’s projected system reserve margin ranging from approximately 17.4% to 9.8%. On February 23, 2022, the NMPRC issued an order finding that PNM did not require NMPRC approval to extend operation of SJGS Unit 4 for an additional three-month period. The NMPRC’s order states that issues regarding the prudence or reasonableness of the decisions and actions taken by PNM and recoverably of costs related to the continued operation of SJGS Unit 4, including fuel costs collected through PNM’s FPPAC, shall be subject to review in a future proceeding. On February 25, 2022, the amended SJGS participation agreement was filed with FERC. PNM cannot predict the outcome of this matter. 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 deferred charges and other current assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2021 and 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, an estimated $7.3 million in upfront financing costs, and an 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. 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 recommend that the case be dismissed. The order required PNM to file an amended application by March 15, 2021; established 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; required PNM to file supplemental testimony addressing the prudence of its investment in Four Corners; required PNM to more explicitly address the statutory standards for approval of the proposed transfer to NTEC; and required PNM to file a motion to withdraw the January 8, 2021 Four Corners Application. On March 15, 2021, PNM filed an amended application and supplemental testimony for the approval of the abandonment and transfer of Four Corners and issuance of a financing order pursuant to the ETA and a motion to withdraw the January 8, 2021 Four Corners Application. The amended application and supplemental testimony provided additional information to support PNM's request to abandon its interest in Four Corners and transfer that interest to NTEC, and also provided additional detail explaining how the proposed sale and abandonment provides a net public benefit. On May 17, 2021 NEE and CFRE (“Joint Movants”) again filed motions to dismiss the case, providing reasons which include; PNM's failure to disclose the reason for the divestiture in the plant is the Merger; the application is deficient because PNM has failed to produce the seasonal operation agreement with the other Four Corners owners; and reiterated their prior view that PNM's amended application is contrary to the REA. Also on May 17, 2021, CCAE filed a motion to dismiss the case stating that PNM's application is devoid of any discussion of the assumption of liabilities by NTEC pertaining to PNM's share of Four Corners. On May 18, 2021, San Juan Citizens Alliance/Dine Care and the Native American Voters Alliance Education Project (“NAVAEP”) filed a joinder supporting CCAE's motion. On June 1, 2021, PNM filed responses to the Joint Movants' and CCAE motions to dismiss and filed a motion to strike portions of the Joint Movants' and CCAE's motions to dismiss. PNM's motion states that the Joint Movants and CCAE rely upon materials beyond the pleadings in the case and within the record in other proceedings to support their motions. On June 14, 2021, the hearing examiner issued an order denying the motions to dismiss from NEE, CFRE and CCAE. A hearing began August 31, 2021, briefs were filed October 1, 2021 and response briefs were filed October 13, 2021. On November 12, 2021, the hearing examiner issued a recommended decision recommending approval of the Four Corners Abandonment Application and the corresponding request for issuance of securitized financing. On December 15, 2021, the NMPRC issued a final order rejecting the hearing examiners recommended decision and denying approval of the Four Corners Abandonment Application and the corresponding request for issuance of securitized financing. In its order, the NMPRC concluded that PNM needed to conduct a review of the actual replacement resource portfolio and determined that the record was insufficient to determine the prudence of PNM’s investments in Four Corners. On December 22, 2021, PNM filed a Notice of Appeal with the NM Supreme Court of the NMPRC decision to deny the application. On January 21, 2022, PNM filed a statement of issues outlining the arguments for appeal asserting, among other things, that the NMPRC misinterpreted and improperly applied the ETA in concluding that the NMPRC needed to review the actual replacement resource portfolio before authorizing abandonment and that the NMPRC improperly deferred the issue of prudence with respect to certain of PNM’s investments in Four Corners, where other parties were given the opportunity to present evidence and failed to demonstrate PNM was imprudent in its decisions. On October 30, 2020, NEE filed a formal complaint with the NMPRC seeking an investigation into the reasonableness and lawfulness of PNM’s continued reliance on “climate-altering and uneconomic coal” at Four Corners. NEE explained that they withdrew their NM Supreme Court appeal of the NM 2016 Rate Case under the notion that PNM would be filing a rate case in 2019 and they would be able to challenge the Four Corners expenditures in that case. NEE explained that because PNM has delayed its rate case several times, Four Corners has remained “imprudently” in rates. NEE asked that PNM be required to demonstrate that PNM’s investment in Four Corners was prudent. NEE stated if the NMPRC deems PNM’s investment as imprudent, ratepayers will be held harmless and all costs including carrying charges, effective October 30, 2020, and going forward, be denied. On February 10, 2021, the NMPRC denied NEE’s complaint and stated that issues related to Four Corners prudence should be addressed in the Four Corners Abandonment Application. On February 22, 2021, NEE filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the NMPRC’s February 10, 2021 order, which was denied on March 10, 2021. On April 9, 2021, NEE filed a Notice of Appeal with the NM Supreme Court regarding their formal complaint on Four Corners. On July 6, 2021, NEE filed a motion to withdraw its Notice of Appeal with the NM Supreme Court. On September 21, 2021, the NM Supreme Court issued its order granting NEE's motion to withdraw its appeal; the court also issued a mandate to the NMPRC to take further action as might be needed consistent with the order. GAAP requires a loss be recognized when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. As of December 31, 2021, PNM evaluated the NMPRC order in the Four Corners Abandonment Application and determined it was reasonably possible that PNM would be successful in recovery of its undepreciated investment in a future proceeding. Therefore, no loss has been recorded. 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. PVNGS Leased Interest Abandonment Application On April 2, 2021, PNM filed an application with the NMPRC requesting approval for the decertification and abandonment of 114 MW of leased PVNGS capacity, sale and transfer of related assets, and approval to procure new resources (“PVNGS Leased Interest Abandonment Application”). As discussed in Note 8, PNM currently controls leased capacity in PVNGS Unit 1 and Unit 2 under five separate leases (“Leased Interest”) that were approved and certificated by the predecessor agency to the NMPRC in the 1980s. Four of the five leases for 104 MW of Leased Interest terminate on January 15, 2023, while the remaining lease for 10 MW of Leased Interest terminates on January 15, 2024. Associated with the Leased Interest are certain PNM-owned assets and nuclear fuel that are necessary for the ongoing operation and maintenance of the Leased Interest and integration of the Leased Interest generation to the transmission network. PNM has determined that there will be net benefits to its customers to return the Leased Interest to the lessors in conformity with the leases, sell and transfer the related PNM-owned assets, and to replace these Leased Interest with new resources. In the application, PNM is requesting NMPRC authorization to decertify and abandon its Leased Interest and to create regulatory assets for the associated remaining undepreciated investments with consideration of cost recovery of the undepreciated investments in a future rate case. PNM is also seeking NMPRC approval to sell and transfer the PNM-owned assets and nuclear fuel supply associated with the Leased Interest to SRP, which will be acquiring the Leased Interest from the lessors upon termination of the existing leases. In addition, PNM is seeking NMPRC approval for a 150 MW solar PPA combined with a 40 MW battery storage agreement, and a stand-alone 100 MW battery storage agreement to replace the Leased Interest. To ensure system reliability and load needs are met in 2023, when a majority of the leases expire, PNM is also requesting NMPRC approval for a 300 MW solar PPA combined with a 150 MW battery storage agreement. PNM's application sought a six-month regulatory time frame. On April 21, 2021, the NMPRC issued an order assigning a hearing examiner and stated PNM's request to abandon the Leased Interest does not have any statutory or rule time limitation and the six-month limit in which the NMPRC must issue an order regarding the request for approvals of the solar PPAs and battery storage agreements does not begin until after the NMPRC acts on the abandonment request. The NMPRC’s April 21, 2021, order also stated that issues reserved to a separate proceeding in the NM 2015 Rate Case regarding the decision to permanently disallow recovery of certain future decommissioning costs related to PVNGS Units 1 and 2 shall be addressed in this case and PNM shall file testimony addressing the issue. On June 14, 2021 and June 25, 2021, PNM filed supplemental testimony responding to questions provided by the hearing examiner. On June 28, 2021, NEE and CCAE jointly filed a motion to dismiss a portion of the application claiming that since PNM's request to abandon the Leased Interest was filed after PNM had already provided irrevocable notice it would not acquire the Leased Interest, abandonment is no longer required. On July 28, 2021, the hearing examiner issued a recommended decision on NEE's and CCAE's joint motion to dismiss, recommending dismissal of PNM's requests for approval to abandon and decertify the Leased Interest; dismissal of PNM's request for approval to sell and transfer the related assets; and dismissal of PNM's request to create regulatory assets for the associated remaining undepreciated investments, but did not preclude PNM seeking recovery of the costs in a general rate case in which the test year period includes the time period in which PNM incurs such costs. The hearing examiner's recommended decision further provides that PNM's request for replacement and system reliability resources and the decision to permanently disallow recovery of certain future decommissioning costs related to PVNGS Units 1 and 2 should remain within the scope of this case. On August 25, 2021, the NMPRC issued an order granting portions of the July 28, 2021 recommended decision that were not contested related to dismissal of PNM's request for approval to abandon and decertify the Leased Interest and dismissal of PNM's request for approval to sell and transfer the related assets. In addition, the order bifurcated the issue of approval for the two PPAs and three battery storage agreements into a separate docket so it may proceed expeditiously. On September 8, 2021 the NMPRC issued an order on the remaining issues in the recommended decision. The order found that PNM's request for a regulatory asset to record costs associated with obtaining an abandonment order should be dismissed. However, the requests for regulatory assets associated with the remaining undepreciated investments should be addressed at an evidentiary hearing. On September 20, 2021, ABCWUA, Bernalillo County, NEE and the NMAG filed a joint motion to reconsider the September 8, 2021 NMPRC order. Also, on September 20, 2021, PNM filed a motion for rehearing of the September 8, 2021 order stating that certain requirements of the order would lead to compromising PNM's First Amendment rights. On October 6, 2021, the NMPRC issued an order granting the motions for reconsideration and vacated the September 8, 2021 order, without specifically addressing issues raised in the motions. The hearing on the two PPAs and three battery storage agreements was held on November 12 and 15, 2021 and December 3, 2021 and post-hearing briefing was completed on January 18, 2022. On February 14, 2022, the hearing examiner issued a recommended decision recommending the NMPRC approve the 150 MW solar PPA combined with a 40 MW battery storage agreement, the stand-alone 100 MW battery storage agreement, and the 300 MW solar PPA combined with a 150 MW battery storage agreement. On February 16, 2022, the NMPRC adopted an order approving the recommended decision. In addition to approval by the NMPRC, PNM and SRP received NRC approval for the transfer of the associated possessory licenses at the end of the term of each of the respective leases. PNM cannot predict the outcome of this matter. Cost Recovery Related to Joining the EIM The CAISO developed the 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 joined and began participating in the EIM in April 2021. Meta Platforms, Inc. Data Center Project PNM has a special service contract to provide service to Meta, Inc. for a data center in PNM’s service area. Meta’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 Meta under a rate rider. A special service rate is applied to Meta’s energy consumption in those hours of the month when their consumption exceeds the energy production from the renewable resources. As of December 31, 2021, 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 is expected to be operational in 2022 •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. On June 16, 2021, a hearing was held by the NMPRC with closing statements filed on June 21, 2021. On June 23, 2021, the NMPRC issued an Order for Continuance, stating concerns with the proposed addendum to the special service contract and its methodology for calculating a credit to Meta for the capacity supplied by the 100 MW battery storage agreement. On July 28, 2021, the NMPRC approved the solar PPAs for 190 MW and 50 MW; approved only 50 MW of the requested 100 MW battery storage; and rejected the proposed addendum to the special service contract and its methodology for calculating a credit to Meta for the capacity supplied by the battery storage. On October 1, 2021, in compliance with the final order, PNM filed a Notice of Filing Amendments recognizing that the battery storage is 50 MW instead of 100 MW and PPA and battery storage requirements for approval of the addendum to the special service contract is waived. This matter is now concluded. 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 2022. 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. As a part of the arrangement, the parties executed a Build Transfer Agreement that would allow PNM to purchase the Western Spirit Line. 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 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. In December 2021, PNM completed the purchase of the Western Spirit Line, an approximately 150-mile 345-kV transmission line and related facilities, and service under TSAs was initiated. The total cost of the Western Spirit Line was approximately $360 million, which includes the cost of certain PNM built facilities and does not include customer self-funding of $75.0 million provided by the Western Spirit and Pattern Wind affiliates. The net cost is presented as cash flows from investing activities on the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows for the twelve months ending December 31, 2021. 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 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 was applicable during the duration of the Governor of New Mexico's emergency executive order and allowed 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 proposed 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 had deferred costs related to COVID-19 of $8.8 million in regulatory assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2020. PNM still intends to seek recovery of the increased bad debt expense resulting from COVID-19 through a regulatory asset in a future general rate proceeding. As a result, PNM has deferred bad debt expense related to COVID-19 of $6.9 million in regulatory assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2021. PNM no longer intends to seek recovery of the other incremental costs in a future rate proceeding as a regulatory asset and therefore, reversed regulatory assets of $2.7 million previously deferred at December 31, 2020. In addition, PNM has cost savings related to COVID-19 of $0.9 million in regulatory liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at both December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020. On February 3, 2021, the NMPRC issued an order finding that the temporary mandatory moratorium on disconnections of residential utility customers would be in effect from the date of the order for 100 days, which ended May 14, 2021. At the end of the moratorium, the 90-day transition period began, which continued the temporary moratorium on disconnections to provide the utilities additional time to assist residential customers with arrearages to enter into installment agreements. On July 14, 2021, the NMPRC issued an order clarifying previous orders that the mandatory requirements of the NMPRC's previous order prohibiting residential disconnects should be voluntarily complied with by investor-owned utilities until August 12, 2021. PNM began 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 TEP for approval with the NMPRC. PNM’s requested TEP included 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 and authority to file a new TEP by the end of June 2023. On August 30, 2021, the hearing examiner issued a recommended decision approving, among other things, PNM's budget flexibility proposal, PNM's proposed pilot time-of-use rate and PNM's TEP Rider. On November 10, 2021, the NMPRC issued a final order approving PNM’s TEP. Unexecuted Transmission Service Agreements (TSAs) with Leeward Renewable Energy On March 12, 2021, PNM filed four unexecuted TSAs with FERC totaling 145 MW with Leeward. The unexecuted TSAs provide long-term firm, point-to-point transmission service on PNM’s transmission system. The unexecuted TSAs are based on the pro-forma transmission service agreements with certain non-conforming provisions under Attachment A of PNM’s OATT and include PNM’s OATT rate. PNM is filing the unexecuted TSAs at the request of Leeward because the parties have been unable to reach an agreement on the terms and conditions for transmission service. In particular, Leeward believes the rate under the unexecuted TSAs should be an incremental rate while PNM believes the appropriate rate is its OATT rate. On April 2, 2021, Leeward and Pattern Wind separately protested PNM’s March 12, 2021 filing of four unexecuted TSAs with Leeward. The parties are requesting that FERC direct PNM to apply the same rate to the unexecuted TSAs as the incremental rate assessed to the Western Spirit transmission facilities, inclusive of Leeward’s network upgrades and requested service, or, in the alternative, initiate hearing and settlement judge procedures to address the unjust and unreasonable application of the FERC’s “higher of” policy. On April 19, 2021, PNM filed a motion for leave to answer and contested the arguments made by Leeward and Pattern Wind. In its response, PNM stated that it disagrees with the parties' pricing scheme because doing so would not recognize all the transmission facilities necessary to provide Leeward service, does not hold PNM's other transmission customers harmless, and is inconsistent with FERC pricing policy and precedent. PNM further explained that the proposal to include its FERC approved embedded rate in the unexecuted TSAs is just and reasonable and should be accepted by FERC. On May 11, 2021, FERC issued an order accepting PNM's four unexecuted TSAs. In the order, FERC stated that it agreed with PNM's pricing scheme and agreed that PNM's proposal to use the OATT rate will ensure that the benefit of Leeward's addition to the system will be spread among other existing system users, rather than simply transferred to Pattern Wind. On June 10, 2021, Pattern Wind and Leeward both filed a request for rehearing of the FERC Order. On September 10, 2021, Leeward filed a petition in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for review of FERC's order accepting PNM's four unexecuted TSAs. On November 15, 2021, FERC issued an order denying the rehearing. On December 3, 2021, Leeward filed an Unopposed Motion for Voluntary Dismissal with the United States District Court for the District of Columbia of its petition for review. PNM is unable to predict the outcome of this matter. FERC Compliance PNM is conducting a comprehensive internal review of its filings with FERC regarding the potential timely filing of certain agreements that contained deviations from PNM’s standard form of service agreement in its OATT and assessing any applicable FERC waivers or refund requirements. PNM anticipates it will pursue any applicable waivers with FERC upon completion of PNM’s internal review. PNM is unable to predict the outcome of this matter. The Community Solar Act On June 18, 2021, Senate Bill 84, known as the Community Solar Act, became effective. The Community Solar Act establishes a program that allows for the development of community solar facilities and provides customers of a qualifying utility with the option of accessing solar energy produced by a community solar facility in accordance with the Community Solar Act. The NMPRC is charged with administering the Community Solar Act program, establishing a total maximum capacity of 200 MW community solar (applicable until November 2024) facilities and allocating proportionally to the New Mexico electric investor-owned utilities and participating cooperatives. As required under the Community Solar Act, the NMPRC opened a docket on May 12, 2021 to adopt rules to establish a community solar program no later than April 1, 2022. On June 15, 2021, the NMPRC issued an order which required utilities provide a notice to all future applicants and to any likely applicants that, until the effective date of the NMPRC's rules in this area the NMPRC's existing interconnection rules and manual remain in place until amended or replaced by the NMPRC, and further, that a place in a utility's applicant queue for interconnection does not and will not provide any advantage for selection as a community solar project. PNM has provided the required notices. On October 27, 2021, the NMPRC adopted an order issuing a NOPR starting the formal process for adoption of rules pursuant to the Community Solar Act. PNM cannot predict the full impact of the Community Solar Act or the outcome of the NMPRC's rulemaking. San Juan Generating Station Unit 1 Outage On June 30, 2021, a cooling tower used for SJGS Unit 1 failed resulting in a unit outage. SJGS Unit 1 was brought back online on July 25, 2021. PNM anticipates the damages to the facility will be reimbursed under an existing property insurance policy that covers SJGS, subject to a deductible of $2.0 million. PNM’s share of the deductible of $1.0 million, reflects PNM’s 50% ownership interest in SJGS Unit 1. On July 14, 2021, the NMPRC issued an order opening a formal docket and inquiry into the cooling tower incident. PNM has responded to a number of NMPRC questions in the inquiry, including questions about the cause of the cooling tower failure, cost and progress of the cleanup and remediation, whether customers experienced loss of service, how PNM provided power during the outage, safety practices and procedures at SJGS, and the history of inspections on the cooling towers. PNM cannot predict the outcome of this matter. 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%. 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 a 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 was 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 DCOS filing. AMS Reconciliation On July 14, 2021, TNMP filed a request with the PUCT to consider and approve its final reconciliation of the costs spent on the deployment of AMS from April 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 of $9.0 million and approve appropriate carrying charges until full collection. On September 13, 2021, the PUCT Staff filed a recommendation for approval of TNMP's application for substantially all costs from April 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. On February 10, 2022, the PUCT approved substantially all costs included in TNMP's AMS reconciliation application. 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 EECRF increases:
Effective Date |  | Aggregate Collection Amount |  | Performance Bonus
|  | (In millions)
March 1, 2019 |  | $ | 5.6 |  |  | $ | 0.8 |
March 1, 2020 |  | 5.9 |  |  | 0.8 |
March 1, 2021 |  | 5.9 |  |  | 1.0
On May 27, 2021, TNMP filed its request to adjust the EECRF to reflect changes in costs for 2022. The total amount requested was $7.2 million, which includes a performance bonus of $2.3 million based on TNMP's energy efficiency achievements in the 2020 plan year. On July 28, 2021, a unanimous stipulation and settlement was filed with the PUCT to recover its requested costs in 2022, including the performance bonus of $2.3 million. On October 7, 2021, the PUCT approved TNMP's energy efficiency application. Transmission Cost of Service Rates TNMP can update its 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 |
October 7, 2020 |  | 10.8 |  |  | 2.0 |
March 12, 2021 |  | 112.6 |  |  | 14.1 |
September 20, 2021 |  | 41.2 |  |  | 6.3 |
On January 26, 2022, TNMP filed an application to further update its transmission rates, which would increase revenues by $14.2 million annually, based on an increase in rate base of $95.6 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. Utilities are limited to four periodic interim distribution rate adjustments between general rate cases. 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 rate base 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. On August 13, 2020, the PUCT approved the unanimous settlement. On April 5, 2021, TNMP filed its 2021 DCOS that requested an increase in TNMP annual distribution revenue requirement of $14.0 million based on an increase in rate base of $104.5 million. On July 1, 2021, TNMP reached a unanimous settlement agreement with parties that would authorize TNMP to collect an increase in annual distribution revenues of $13.5 million beginning in September 2021. Subsequently, the ALJ issued an order on July 9, 2021 approving interim rates effective September 1, 2021, and remanded the case to the PUCT for approval. On September 23, 2021, the PUCT approved substantially all costs in the unanimous settlement. 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 established a charge of $0.33 per MWh in accordance with the PUCT's order. Final collections under the rider exceeded unpaid residential retail customer bills and were presented net as a regulatory liability of $0.1 million on the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2020. TNMP is refunding the net regulatory liability through its transmission cost recovery factor. Other COVID-19 related costs of $0.7 million were also recorded as a regulatory asset on the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2020. TNMP no longer intends to seek recovery of the other incremental costs in a future rate proceeding as a regulatory asset and therefore, reversed the regulatory asset in 2021. On April 14, 2020, TNMP executed an interest-free loan agreement to borrow $0.5 million from ERCOT, and on October 30, 2020, the balance of the loan was repaid. 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. All requests for reimbursement were made by November 30, 2020. On December 4, 2020, TNMP filed to end collections under the tariff. Final collections under the rider were made on December 11, 2020. On January 14, 2021, TNMP made a final compliance filing for the electricity relief program.

X
- Definition Regulatory And Rate Matters [Text Block] + References No definition available. + Details
Name: | pnm_RegulatoryAndRateMattersTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | pnm_
Data Type: | dtr-types: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