Docoh
Loading...

MWPSP MidAmerican Energy

Filed: 21 Feb 20, 9:52pm
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

[X] Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019
or
[ ] Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the transition period from ______ to _______

Commission Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter; IRS Employer
File Number State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization Identification No.
001-14881 BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANY 94-2213782
  (An Iowa Corporation)  
  666 Grand Avenue, Suite 500  
  Des Moines, Iowa 50309-2580  
  515-242-4300  
     
001-05152 PACIFICORP 93-0246090
  (An Oregon Corporation)  
  825 N.E. Multnomah Street  
  Portland, Oregon 97232  
  888-221-7070  
     
333-90553 MIDAMERICAN FUNDING, LLC 47-0819200
  (An Iowa Limited Liability Company)  
  666 Grand Avenue, Suite 500  
  Des Moines, Iowa 50309-2580  
  515-242-4300  
     
333-15387 MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY 42-1425214
  (An Iowa Corporation)  
  666 Grand Avenue, Suite 500  
  Des Moines, Iowa 50309-2580  
  515-242-4300  
     
000-52378 NEVADA POWER COMPANY 88-0420104
  (A Nevada Corporation)  
  6226 West Sahara Avenue  
  Las Vegas, Nevada 89146  
  702-402-5000  
     
000-00508 SIERRA PACIFIC POWER COMPANY 88-0044418
  (A Nevada Corporation)  
  6100 Neil Road  
  Reno, Nevada 89511  
  775-834-4011  



RegistrantSecurities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANYNone
PACIFICORPNone
MIDAMERICAN FUNDING, LLCNone
MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANYNone
NEVADA POWER COMPANYNone
SIERRA PACIFIC POWER COMPANYNone

RegistrantName of exchange on which registered:
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANYNone
PACIFICORPNone
MIDAMERICAN FUNDING, LLCNone
MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANYNone
NEVADA POWER COMPANYNone
SIERRA PACIFIC POWER COMPANYNone

RegistrantSecurities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANYNone
PACIFICORPNone
MIDAMERICAN FUNDING, LLCNone
MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANYNone
NEVADA POWER COMPANYCommon Stock, $1.00 stated value
SIERRA PACIFIC POWER COMPANYCommon Stock, $3.75 par value

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
RegistrantYesNo
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANY X
PACIFICORP X
MIDAMERICAN FUNDING, LLC X
MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANYX 
NEVADA POWER COMPANYX 
SIERRA PACIFIC POWER COMPANY X

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.
RegistrantYesNo
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANY X
PACIFICORP X
MIDAMERICAN FUNDING, LLCX 
MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY X
NEVADA POWER COMPANY X
SIERRA PACIFIC POWER COMPANY X




Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
RegistrantYesNo
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANYX 
PACIFICORPX 
MIDAMERICAN FUNDING, LLC X
MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANYX 
NEVADA POWER COMPANYX 
SIERRA PACIFIC POWER COMPANYX 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants have submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrants were required to submit such files).Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrants' knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer," "smaller reporting company," and "emerging growth company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
RegistrantLarge accelerated filerAccelerated filerNon-accelerated filerSmaller reporting companyEmerging growth company
BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANY  X  
PACIFICORP  X  
MIDAMERICAN FUNDING, LLC  X  
MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY  X  
NEVADA POWER COMPANY  X  
SIERRA PACIFIC POWER COMPANY  X  

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrants have elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrants are a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).Yes o No x

All shares of outstanding common stock of Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company are privately held by a limited group of investors. As of January 31, 2020, 76,549,232 shares of common stock, no par value, were outstanding.

All shares of outstanding common stock of PacifiCorp are indirectly owned by Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company. As of January 31, 2020, 357,060,915 shares of common stock, no par value, were outstanding.

All of the member's equity of MidAmerican Funding, LLC is held by its parent company, Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company, as of January 31, 2020.

All shares of outstanding common stock of MidAmerican Energy Company are owned by its parent company, MHC Inc., which is a direct, wholly owned subsidiary of MidAmerican Funding, LLC. As of January 31, 2020, 70,980,203 shares of common stock, no par value, were outstanding.

All shares of outstanding common stock of Nevada Power Company are owned by its parent company, NV Energy, Inc., which is an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company. As of January 31, 2020, 1,000 shares of common stock, $1.00 stated value, were outstanding.




All shares of outstanding common stock of Sierra Pacific Power Company are owned by its parent company, NV Energy, Inc. As of January 31, 2020, 1,000 shares of common stock, $3.75 par value, were outstanding.

Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company, MidAmerican Funding, LLC, MidAmerican Energy Company, Nevada Power Company and Sierra Pacific Power Company meet the conditions set forth in General Instruction I(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K and are therefore filing portions of this Form 10-K with the reduced disclosure format specified in General Instruction I(2) of Form 10‑K.

This combined Form 10-K is separately filed by Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company, PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Funding, LLC, MidAmerican Energy Company, Nevada Power Company and Sierra Pacific Power Company. Information contained herein relating to any individual company is filed by such company on its own behalf. Each company makes no representation as to information relating to the other companies.




TABLE OF CONTENTS
 


i


Definition of Abbreviations and Industry Terms

When used in Forward-Looking Statements, Part I - Items 1 through 4, Part II - Items 5 through 7A, and Part III - Items 10 through 14, the following terms have the definitions indicated.
Entity Definitions
BHE Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company
Berkshire Hathaway Berkshire Hathaway Inc.
Berkshire Hathaway Energy or the Company Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company and its subsidiaries
PacifiCorp PacifiCorp and its subsidiaries
MidAmerican Funding MidAmerican Funding, LLC and its subsidiaries
MidAmerican Energy MidAmerican Energy Company
NV Energy NV Energy, Inc. and its subsidiaries
Nevada Power Nevada Power Company and its subsidiaries
Sierra Pacific Sierra Pacific Power Company
Nevada Utilities Nevada Power Company and Sierra Pacific Power Company
Registrants Berkshire Hathaway Energy, PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy, MidAmerican Funding, Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific
Subsidiary Registrants PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy, MidAmerican Funding, Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific
Northern Powergrid Northern Powergrid Holdings Company
Northern Natural Gas Northern Natural Gas Company
Kern River Kern River Gas Transmission Company
BHE Canada BHE Canada Holdings Corporation
AltaLink AltaLink, L.P.
BHE U.S. Transmission BHE U.S. Transmission, LLC
HomeServices HomeServices of America, Inc. and its subsidiaries
BHE Pipeline Group or Pipeline Companies Northern Natural Gas and Kern River
BHE Transmission AltaLink and BHE U.S. Transmission
BHE Renewables BHE Renewables, LLC and CalEnergy Philippines
ETT Electric Transmission Texas, LLC
Domestic Regulated Businesses PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy Company, Nevada Power Company, Sierra Pacific Power Company, Northern Natural Gas Company and Kern River Gas Transmission Company
Regulated Businesses PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy Company, Nevada Power Company, Sierra Pacific Power Company, Northern Natural Gas Company, Kern River Gas Transmission Company and AltaLink, L.P.
Utilities PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy Company, Nevada Power Company and Sierra Pacific Power Company
Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies Northern Powergrid (Northeast) Limited and Northern Powergrid (Yorkshire) plc
Topaz Topaz Solar Farms LLC
Topaz Project 550-megawatt solar project in California
Agua Caliente Agua Caliente Solar, LLC
Agua Caliente Project 290-megawatt solar project in Arizona
Bishop Hill II Bishop Hill Energy II LLC
Bishop Hill Project 81-megawatt wind-powered generating facility in Illinois
Pinyon Pines I Pinyon Pines Wind I, LLC
Pinyon Pines II Pinyon Pines Wind II, LLC
Pinyon Pines Projects 168-megawatt and 132-megawatt wind-powered generating facilities in California
Jumbo Road Jumbo Road Holdings, LLC
Jumbo Road Project 300-megawatt wind-powered generating facility in Texas
Solar Star Funding Solar Star Funding, LLC
Solar Star Projects A combined 586-megawatt solar project in California
Solar Star I Solar Star California XIX, LLC
Solar Star II Solar Star California XX, LLC
   
Certain Industry Terms  
2017 Tax Reform The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act enacted on December 22, 2017, effective January 1, 2018
AESO Alberta Electric System Operator
AFUDC Allowance for Funds Used During Construction
AUC Alberta Utilities Commission
Bcf Billion cubic feet
BTER Base Tariff Energy Rate
California ISO California Independent System Operator Corporation
CPUC California Public Utilities Commission
DEAA Deferred Energy Accounting Adjustment
Dodd-Frank Reform Act Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
Dth Decatherm
DSM Demand-side Management
EBA Energy Balancing Account
ECAC Energy Cost Adjustment Clause
ECAM Energy Cost Adjustment Mechanism
EEIR Energy Efficiency Implementation Rate
EEPR Energy Efficiency Program Rate
EIM Energy Imbalance Market
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
ERCOT Electric Reliability Council of Texas
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
GAAP Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
GEMA Gas and Electricity Markets Authority
GHG Greenhouse Gases
GWh Gigawatt Hour
ICC Illinois Commerce Commission
IPUC Idaho Public Utilities Commission
IRP Integrated Resource Plan
IUB Iowa Utilities Board
kV Kilovolt
LNG Liquefied Natural Gas
LDC Local Distribution Company
MATS Mercury and Air Toxics Standards
MISO Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
MW Megawatt
MWh Megawatt Hour
NERC North American Electric Reliability Corporation
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission
OATT Open Access Transmission Tariff
OCA Iowa Office of Consumer Advocate
Ofgem Office of Gas and Electric Markets
OPUC Oregon Public Utility Commission
PCAM Power Cost Adjustment Mechanism
PTAM Post Test-year Adjustment Mechanism
PTC Production Tax Credit
PUCN Public Utilities Commission of Nevada
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RAC Renewable Adjustment Clause
REC Renewable Energy Credit
RPS Renewable Portfolio Standards
RRA Renewable Energy Credit and Sulfur Dioxide Revenue Adjustment Mechanism
RTO Regional Transmission Organization
SEC United States Securities and Exchange Commission
SIP State Implementation Plan
TAM Transition Adjustment Mechanism
UPSC Utah Public Service Commission
WECC Western Electricity Coordinating Council
WPSC Wyoming Public Service Commission
WUTC Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission

ii



iii




iv


Forward-Looking Statements

This report contains statements that do not directly or exclusively relate to historical facts. These statements are "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements can typically be identified by the use of forward-looking words, such as "will," "may," "could," "project," "believe," "anticipate," "expect," "estimate," "continue," "intend," "potential," "plan," "forecast" and similar terms. These statements are based upon the relevant Registrant's current intentions, assumptions, expectations and beliefs and are subject to risks, uncertainties and other important factors. Many of these factors are outside the control of each Registrant and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These factors include, among others:
general economic, political and business conditions, as well as changes in, and compliance with, laws and regulations, including income tax reform, initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the utility industry, and reliability and safety standards, affecting the respective Registrant's operations or related industries;
changes in, and compliance with, environmental laws, regulations, decisions and policies that could, among other items, increase operating and capital costs, reduce facility output, accelerate facility retirements or delay facility construction or acquisition;
the outcome of regulatory rate reviews and other proceedings conducted by regulatory agencies or other governmental and legal bodies and the respective Registrant's ability to recover costs through rates in a timely manner;
changes in economic, industry, competition or weather conditions, as well as demographic trends, new technologies and various conservation, energy efficiency and private generation measures and programs, that could affect customer growth and usage, electricity and natural gas supply or the respective Registrant's ability to obtain long-term contracts with customers and suppliers;
performance, availability and ongoing operation of the respective Registrant's facilities, including facilities not operated by the Registrants, due to the impacts of market conditions, outages and repairs, transmission constraints, weather, including wind, solar and hydroelectric conditions, and operating conditions;
the effects of catastrophic and other unforeseen events, which may be caused by factors beyond the control of each respective Registrant or by a breakdown or failure of the Registrants' operating assets, including severe storms, floods, fires, earthquakes, explosions, landslides, an electromagnetic pulse, mining incidents, litigation, wars, terrorism, embargoes, and cyber security attacks, data security breaches, disruptions, or other malicious acts;
a high degree of variance between actual and forecasted load or generation that could impact a Registrant's hedging strategy and the cost of balancing its generation resources with its retail load obligations;
changes in prices, availability and demand for wholesale electricity, coal, natural gas, other fuel sources and fuel transportation that could have a significant impact on generating capacity and energy costs;
the financial condition, creditworthiness and operational stability of the respective Registrant's significant customers and suppliers;
changes in business strategy or development plans;
availability, terms and deployment of capital, including reductions in demand for investment-grade commercial paper, debt securities and other sources of debt financing and volatility in interest rates;
changes in the respective Registrant's credit ratings;
risks relating to nuclear generation, including unique operational, closure and decommissioning risks;
hydroelectric conditions and the cost, feasibility and eventual outcome of hydroelectric relicensing proceedings;
the impact of certain contracts used to mitigate or manage volume, price and interest rate risk, including increased collateral requirements, and changes in commodity prices, interest rates and other conditions that affect the fair value of certain contracts;
the impact of inflation on costs and the ability of the respective Registrants to recover such costs in regulated rates;
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates, primarily the British pound and the Canadian dollar;
increases in employee healthcare costs;
the impact of investment performance and changes in interest rates, legislation, healthcare cost trends, mortality and morbidity on pension and other postretirement benefits expense and funding requirements;

v


changes in the residential real estate brokerage, mortgage and franchising industries and regulations that could affect brokerage, mortgage and franchising transactions;
the ability to successfully integrate future acquired operations into a Registrant's business;
unanticipated construction delays, changes in costs, receipt of required permits and authorizations, ability to fund capital projects and other factors that could affect future facilities and infrastructure additions;
the availability and price of natural gas in applicable geographic regions and demand for natural gas supply;
the impact of new accounting guidance or changes in current accounting estimates and assumptions on the financial results of the respective Registrants; and
other business or investment considerations that may be disclosed from time to time in the Registrants' filings with the SEC or in other publicly disseminated written documents.

Further details of the potential risks and uncertainties affecting the Registrants are described in the Registrants' filings with the SEC, including Item 1A and other discussions contained in this Form 10-K. Each Registrant undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. The foregoing factors should not be construed as exclusive.


vi


PART I

Item 1.    Business

GENERAL

BHE is a holding company that owns a highly diversified portfolio of locally managed businesses principally engaged in the energy industry and is a consolidated subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway. As of January 31, 2020, Berkshire Hathaway, Mr. Walter Scott, Jr., a member of BHE's Board of Directors (along with his family members and related or affiliated entities) and Mr. Gregory E. Abel, BHE's Chairman, beneficially owned 90.9%, 8.1% and 1.0%, respectively, of BHE's voting common stock.

Berkshire Hathaway Energy's operations are organized as eight business segments: PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Funding (which primarily consists of MidAmerican Energy), NV Energy (which primarily consists of Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific), Northern Powergrid (which primarily consists of Northern Powergrid (Northeast) Limited and Northern Powergrid (Yorkshire) plc), BHE Pipeline Group (which consists of Northern Natural Gas and Kern River), BHE Transmission (which consists of BHE Canada and BHE U.S. Transmission), BHE Renewables and HomeServices. BHE, through these locally managed and operated businesses, owns four utility companies in the United States serving customers in 11 states, two electricity distribution companies in Great Britain, two interstate natural gas pipeline companies in the United States, an electric transmission business in Canada, interests in electric transmission businesses in the United States, a renewable energy business primarily investing in wind, solar, geothermal and hydroelectric projects, the largest residential real estate brokerage firm in the United States and one of the largest residential real estate brokerage franchise networks in the United States.

BHE owns a highly diversified portfolio of primarily regulated businesses that generate, transmit, store, distribute and supply energy and serve customers and end-users across geographically diverse service territories, including 18 states in the Western and Midwestern United States and in Great Britain and Canada.
88% of Berkshire Hathaway Energy's consolidated operating income during 2019 was generated from rate-regulated businesses.
The Utilities serve 5.1 million electric and natural gas customers in 11 states in the United States, Northern Powergrid serves 3.9 million end-users in northern England and AltaLink serves approximately 85% of Alberta, Canada's population.
As of December 31, 2019, the Company owns approximately 33,600 MWs of generation capacity in operation and under construction:
Approximately 29,000 MWs of generation capacity is owned by its regulated electric utility businesses;
Approximately 4,600 MWs of generation capacity is owned by its nonregulated subsidiaries, the majority of which provides power to utilities under long-term contracts;
Owned generation capacity in operation and under construction consists of 36% wind and solar, 32% natural gas, 26% coal, 5% hydroelectric and geothermal and 1% nuclear and other; and,
Cumulative investments in wind, solar, geothermal and biomass generation facilities is approximately $29 billion.
The Company owns approximately 33,400 miles of transmission lines and owns a 50% interest in ETT that has approximately 1,200 miles of transmission lines.
The BHE Pipeline Group owns approximately 16,300 miles of pipeline with a market area design capacity of approximately 8.5 Bcf of natural gas per day, serves customers and end-users in 14 states and transported approximately 8% of the total natural gas consumed in the United States during 2019.
HomeServices closed over $134.6 billion of home sales in 2019, up 3.6% from 2018, and continued to grow its brokerage, mortgage and franchise businesses, with services in 49 states. HomeServices' franchise business has approximately 380 franchisees primarily in the United States and internationally.

As of December 31, 2019, the Company had approximately 23,000 employees, of which approximately 8,200 were covered by union contracts. The majority of the union employees are employed by the Utilities and are represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the Utility Workers Union of America, the United Utility Workers Association and the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers. HomeServices currently has over 43,000 real estate agents who are independent contractors and not employees.


1


BHE was incorporated under the laws of the state of Iowa in 1999 and its principal executive offices are located at 666 Grand Avenue, Suite 500, Des Moines, Iowa 50309-2580, its telephone number is (515) 242-4300 and its internet address is www.brkenergy.com.

PACIFICORP

General

PacifiCorp, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of BHE, is a United States regulated electric utility company headquartered in Oregon that serves 1.9 million retail electric customers in portions of Utah, Oregon, Wyoming, Washington, Idaho and California. PacifiCorp is principally engaged in the business of generating, transmitting, distributing and selling electricity. PacifiCorp's combined service territory covers approximately 141,400 square miles and includes diverse regional economies across six states. No single segment of the economy dominates the combined service territory, which helps mitigate PacifiCorp's exposure to economic fluctuations. In the eastern portion of the service territory, consisting of Utah, Wyoming and southeastern Idaho, the principal industries are manufacturing, mining or extraction of natural resources, agriculture, technology, recreation and government. In the western portion of the service territory, consisting of Oregon, southern Washington and northern California, the principal industries are agriculture, manufacturing, forest products, food processing, technology, government and primary metals. In addition to retail sales, PacifiCorp buys and sells electricity on the wholesale market with other utilities, energy marketing companies, financial institutions and other market participants to balance and optimize the economic benefits of electricity generation, retail customer loads and existing wholesale transactions. Certain PacifiCorp subsidiaries support its electric utility operations by providing coal mining services.

PacifiCorp's operations are conducted under numerous franchise agreements, certificates, permits and licenses obtained from federal, state and local authorities. The average term of the franchise agreements is approximately 23 years. Several of these franchise agreements allow the municipality the right to seek amendment to the franchise agreement at a specified time during the term. PacifiCorp generally has an exclusive right to serve electric customers within its service territories and, in turn, has an obligation to provide electric service to those customers. In return, the state utility commissions have established rates on a cost-of-service basis, which are designed to allow PacifiCorp an opportunity to recover its costs of providing services and to earn a reasonable return on its investments.

PacifiCorp was incorporated under the laws of the state of Oregon in 1989 and its principal executive offices are located at 825 N.E. Multnomah Street, Portland, Oregon 97232, its telephone number is (888) 221-7070 and its internet address is www.pacificorp.com. PacifiCorp delivers electricity to customers in Utah, Wyoming and Idaho under the trade name Rocky Mountain Power and to customers in Oregon, Washington and California under the trade name Pacific Power.

BHE controls substantially all of PacifiCorp's voting securities, which include both common and preferred stock.

Regulated Electric Operations

Customers

The GWhs and percentages of electricity sold to PacifiCorp's retail customers by jurisdiction for the years ended December 31 were as follows:

 2019 2018 2017
            
Utah24,490
 45% 24,514
 45% 24,134
 44%
Oregon13,089
 24
 12,867
 23
 13,200
 24
Wyoming9,393
 17
 9,393
 17
 9,330
 17
Washington4,145
 7
 3,949
 7
 4,221
 8
Idaho3,485
 6
 3,643
 7
 3,603
 6
California741
 1
 749
 1
 762
 1
Total55,343
 100% 55,115
 100% 55,250
 100%


2


Electricity sold to PacifiCorp's retail and wholesale customers by class of customer and the average number of retail customers for the years ended December 31 were as follows:
 2019 2018 2017
GWhs sold:           
Residential16,668
 27% 16,227
 26% 16,625
 27%
Commercial18,151
 30
 18,078
 28
 17,726
 28
Industrial, irrigation and other20,524
 34
 20,810
 33
 20,899
 33
Total retail55,343
 91
 55,115
 87
 55,250
 88
Wholesale5,480
 9
 8,309
 13
 7,218
 12
Total GWhs sold60,823
 100% 63,424
 100% 62,468
 100%
            
Average number of retail customers (in thousands):           
Residential1,682
 87% 1,651
 87% 1,622
 87%
Commercial214
 11
 212
 11
 208
 11
Industrial, irrigation and other37
 2
 37
 2
 37
 2
Total1,933
 100% 1,900
 100% 1,867
 100%


Variations in weather, economic conditions and various conservation, energy efficiency and private generation measures and programs can impact customer usage. Wholesale sales are impacted by market prices for energy relative to the incremental cost to generate power.

The annual hourly peak customer demand, which represents the highest demand on a given day and at a given hour, occurs in the summer when air conditioning and irrigation systems are heavily used. The winter also experiences a peak demand due to heating requirements. During 2019, PacifiCorp's peak demand was 10,334 MWs in the summer and 8,604 MWs in the winter.


3



Generating Facilities and Fuel Supply

PacifiCorp has ownership interest in a diverse portfolio of generating facilities. The following table presents certain information regarding PacifiCorp's owned generating facilities as of December 31, 2019:
        Facility Net Owned
      Installed / Net Capacity Capacity
Generating Facility Location Energy Source 
Repowered(1)
 
(MWs)(2)
 
(MWs)(2)
COAL:          
Jim Bridger Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 Rock Springs, WY Coal 1974-1979 2,123
 1,415
Hunter Nos. 1, 2 and 3 Castle Dale, UT Coal 1978-1983 1,363
 1,158
Huntington Nos. 1 and 2 Huntington, UT Coal 1974-1977 909
 909
Dave Johnston Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 Glenrock, WY Coal 1959-1972 745
 745
Cholla No. 4(3)
 Joseph City, AZ Coal 1981 395
 395
Naughton Nos. 1 and 2 Kemmerer, WY Coal 1963-1968 357
 357
Wyodak No. 1 Gillette, WY Coal 1978 332
 266
Craig Nos. 1 and 2 Craig, CO Coal 1979-1980 837
 161
Colstrip Nos. 3 and 4 Colstrip, MT Coal 1984-1986 1,480
 148
Hayden Nos. 1 and 2 Hayden, CO Coal 1965-1976 441
 77
        8,982
 5,631
NATURAL GAS:          
Lake Side 2 Vineyard, UT Natural gas/steam 2014 631
 631
Lake Side Vineyard, UT Natural gas/steam 2007 546
 546
Currant Creek Mona, UT Natural gas/steam 2005-2006 524
 524
Chehalis Chehalis, WA Natural gas/steam 2003 477
 477
Gadsby Steam Salt Lake City, UT Natural gas 1951-1955 238
 238
Hermiston Hermiston, OR Natural gas/steam 1996 461
 231
Gadsby Peakers Salt Lake City, UT Natural gas 2002 119
 119
Naughton No. 3(4)
 Kemmerer, WY Natural gas 1971 27
 27
        3,023
 2,793
HYDROELECTRIC:          
Lewis River System WA Hydroelectric 1931-1958 578
 578
North Umpqua River System OR Hydroelectric 1950-1956 204
 204
Klamath River System CA, OR Hydroelectric 1903-1962 170
 170
Bear River System ID, UT Hydroelectric 1908-1984 105
 105
Rogue River System OR Hydroelectric 1912-1957 52
 52
Minor hydroelectric facilities Various Hydroelectric 1895-1986 26
 26
        1,135
 1,135
WIND:          
Marengo Dayton, WA Wind 2007-2008 210
 210
Glenrock Glenrock, WY Wind 2008-2009 / 2019 139
 139
Seven Mile Hill Medicine Bow, WY Wind 2008 / 2019 119
 119
Dunlap Ranch Medicine Bow, WY Wind 2010 111
 111
Leaning Juniper Arlington, OR Wind 2006 / 2019 100
 100
Rolling Hills Glenrock, WY Wind 2009 / 2019 100
 100
High Plains McFadden, WY Wind 2009 / 2019 99
 99
Goodnoe Hills Goldendale, WA Wind 2008 / 2019 94
 94
Foote Creek(5)
 Arlington, WY Wind 1999 41
 41
McFadden Ridge McFadden, WY Wind 2009 / 2019 28
 28
        1,041
 1,041
OTHER:          
Blundell Milford, UT Geothermal 1984, 2007 32
 32
        32
 32
Total Available Generating Capacity     14,213
 10,632
           
PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION:          
Various wind projects     1,190
 1,190
        15,403
 11,822

4



(1)
Repowered dates are associated with component replacements on existing wind-powered generating facilities commonly referred to by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) as repowering. IRS rules provide for re-establishment of the PTCs for an existing wind-powered generating facility upon the replacement of a significant portion of its components. If the degree of component replacement in such projects meets IRS guidelines, PTCs are re-established for ten years at rates that depend upon the date on which construction begins.
(2)Facility Net Capacity represents the lesser of nominal ratings or any limitations under applicable interconnection, power purchase, or other agreements for intermittent resources and the total net dependable capability available during summer conditions for all other units. An intermittent resource's nominal rating is the manufacturer's contractually specified capability (in MWs) under specified conditions. Net Owned Capacity indicates PacifiCorp's ownership of Facility Net Capacity.
(3)In December 2019, PacifiCorp initiated steps towards retiring Cholla Unit 4 by December 31, 2020 consistent with the preferred portfolio in PacifiCorp’s 2019 IRP that ceasing operations at Cholla Unit 4 as early as the end of 2020 provides economic benefits to customers. Refer to "Environmental Laws and Regulations" in Item 1 of this Form 10-K for further discussion.
(4)PacifiCorp removed the unit from coal-fueled service on January 30, 2019, and determined in its 2019 IRP that converting Naughton Unit 3 to a natural gas-fueled generation resource provides economic benefits to customers. Refer to "Environmental Laws and Regulations" in Item 1 of this Form 10-K for further discussion.
(5)In June 2019, PacifiCorp acquired the remaining joint owner's 21% interest in the Foote Creek I facility, and is in the process of repowering the facility.

The following table shows the percentages of PacifiCorp's total energy supplied by energy source for the years ended December 31:
 2019 2018 2017
      
Coal53% 54% 56%
Natural gas19
 16
 11
Hydroelectric(1)
4
 5
 7
Wind and other(1)
4
 5
 5
Total energy generated80
 80
 79
Energy purchased - short-term contracts and other10
 10
 11
Energy purchased - long-term contracts (renewable)(1)
10
 10
 10
 100% 100% 100%

(1)
All or some of the renewable energy attributes associated with generation from these sources may be: (a) used in future years to comply with RPS or other regulatory requirements, (b) sold to third parties in the form of RECs or other environmental commodities, or (c) excluded from energy purchased.

PacifiCorp is required to have resources available to continuously meet its customer needs and reliably operate its electric system. The percentage of PacifiCorp's energy supplied by energy source varies from year to year and is subject to numerous operational and economic factors such as planned and unplanned outages, fuel commodity prices, fuel transportation costs, weather, environmental considerations, transmission constraints and wholesale market prices of electricity. PacifiCorp evaluates these factors continuously in order to facilitate economical dispatch of its generating facilities. When factors for one energy source are less favorable, PacifiCorp places more reliance on other energy sources. For example, PacifiCorp can generate more electricity using its low cost hydroelectric and wind-powered generating facilities when factors associated with these facilities are favorable. In addition to meeting its customers' energy needs, PacifiCorp is required to maintain operating reserves on its system to mitigate the impacts of unplanned outages or other disruption in supply, and to meet intra-hour changes in load and resource balance. This operating reserve requirement is dispersed across PacifiCorp's generation portfolio on a least-cost basis based on the operating characteristics of the portfolio. Operating reserves may be held on hydroelectric, coal-fueled, natural gas-fueled or certain types of interruptible load. PacifiCorp manages certain risks relating to its supply of electricity and fuel requirements by entering into various contracts, which may be accounted for as derivatives and may include forwards, options, swaps and other agreements. Refer to "General Regulation" in Item 1 of this Form 10-K for a discussion of energy cost recovery by jurisdiction and to PacifiCorp's Item 7A in this Form 10-K for a discussion of commodity price risk and derivative contracts.

Coal

PacifiCorp has interests in coal mines that support its coal-fueled generating facilities and jointly operates the Bridger surface and Bridger underground coal mines. These mines supplied 19%, 17% and 16% of PacifiCorp's total coal requirements during the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The remaining coal requirements are acquired through long and short-term third-party contracts.


5


Most of PacifiCorp's coal reserves are held through agreements with the federal Bureau of Land Management and from certain states and private parties. The agreements generally have multi-year terms that may be renewed or extended, and require payment of rents and royalties. In addition, federal and state regulations require that comprehensive environmental protection and reclamation standards be met during the course of mining operations and upon completion of mining activities.

Coal reserve estimates are subject to adjustment as a result of the development of additional engineering and geological data, new mining technology and changes in regulation and economic factors affecting the utilization of such reserves. PacifiCorp's recoverable coal reserves of operating mines as of December 31, 2019, based on recent engineering studies, were as follows (in millions):
Coal Mine Location Generating Facility Served Mining Method Recoverable Tons
         
Bridger Rock Springs, WY Jim Bridger Surface 14
(1)
Bridger Rock Springs, WY Jim Bridger Underground 3
(1)
Trapper Craig, CO Craig Surface 4
(2)
        21
 

(1)These coal reserves are leased and mined by Bridger Coal Company, a joint venture between Pacific Minerals, Inc. and a subsidiary of Idaho Power Company. Pacific Minerals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of PacifiCorp, has a two-thirds interest in the joint venture. The amounts included above represent only PacifiCorp's two-thirds interest in the coal reserves.
(2)These coal reserves are leased and mined by Trapper Mining Inc., a cooperative in which PacifiCorp has an ownership interest of 21%. The amount included above represents only PacifiCorp's 21% interest in the coal reserves. PacifiCorp does not operate the Trapper mine.

Recoverability by surface mining methods typically ranges from 90% to 95%. Recoverability by underground mining techniques ranges from 50% to 70%. To meet applicable standards, PacifiCorp blends coal from its owned mines with contracted coal and utilizes emissions reduction technologies for controlling sulfur dioxide and other emissions. For fuel needs at PacifiCorp's coal-fueled generating facilities in excess of coal reserves available, PacifiCorp believes it will be able to purchase coal under both long- and short-term contracts to supply its generating facilities over their currently expected remaining useful lives.

Natural Gas

PacifiCorp uses natural gas as fuel for its generating facilities that use combined-cycle, simple-cycle and steam turbines. Oil and natural gas are also used for igniter fuel and standby purposes. These sources are presently in adequate supply and available to meet PacifiCorp's needs.

PacifiCorp enters into forward natural gas purchases at fixed or indexed market prices. PacifiCorp purchases natural gas in the spot market with both fixed and indexed market prices for physical delivery to fulfill any fuel requirements not already satisfied through forward purchases of natural gas and sells natural gas in the spot market for the disposition of any excess supply if the forecasted requirements of its natural gas-fueled generating facilities decrease. PacifiCorp also utilizes financial swap contracts to mitigate price risk associated with its forecasted fuel requirements.

Hydroelectric

The amount of electricity PacifiCorp is able to generate from its hydroelectric facilities depends on a number of factors, including snowpack in the mountains upstream of its hydroelectric facilities, reservoir storage, precipitation in its watersheds, generating unit availability and restrictions imposed by oversight bodies due to competing water management objectives.

PacifiCorp operates the majority of its hydroelectric generating portfolio under long-term licenses. The FERC regulates 99% of the net capacity of this portfolio through 15 individual licenses, which have terms of 30 to 50 years. The licenses for major hydroelectric generating facilities expire at various dates through 2059. A portion of this portfolio is licensed under the Oregon Hydroelectric Act. For discussion of PacifiCorp's hydroelectric relicensing activities, including updated information regarding the Klamath River hydroelectric system, refer to Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of Berkshire Hathaway Energy in Item 8 of this Form 10-K and Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of PacifiCorp in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.


6


Wind and Other Renewable Resources

PacifiCorp has pursued renewable resources as a viable, economical and environmentally prudent means of supplying electricity and complying with laws and regulations. Renewable resources have low to no emissions and require little or no fossil fuel. PacifiCorp's wind-powered generating facilities include those facilities where a significant portion of the equipment is currently being replaced to become eligible for federal renewable electricity PTCs for 10 years from the date the repowered facilities are placed in-service. PTCs for PacifiCorp's currently eligible wind-powered generating facilities began expiring in 2016 with final expiration in 2020. PacifiCorp is in the process of repowering all of its wind-powered generating facilities by the end of 2020 to requalify the facilities for federal renewable electricity PTCs for 10 years. The repowering project will extend the lives of the existing wind facilities by 10 years or more while increasing the anticipated electrical generation from the repowered wind facilities, on average, by approximately 26%. In addition to the discussion contained herein regarding repowering activities, refer to "Regulatory Matters" in Item 1 of this Form 10-K.

Wholesale Activities

PacifiCorp purchases and sells electricity in the wholesale markets as needed to balance its generation with its retail load obligations. PacifiCorp may also purchase electricity in the wholesale markets when it is more economical than generating electricity from its own facilities and may sell surplus electricity in the wholesale markets when it can do so economically. When prudent, PacifiCorp enters into financial swap contracts and forward electricity sales and purchases for physical delivery at fixed prices to reduce its exposure to electricity price volatility.

Energy Imbalance Market

PacifiCorp and the California ISO implemented an EIM in November 2014, which reduces costs to serve customers through more efficient dispatch of a larger and more diverse pool of resources, more effectively integrates renewables and enhances reliability through improved situational awareness and responsiveness. The EIM expands the real-time component of the California ISO's market technology to optimize and balance electricity supply and demand every five minutes across the EIM footprint. The EIM is voluntary and available to all balancing authorities in the western United States. EIM market participants submit bids to the California ISO market operator before each hour for each generating resource they choose to be dispatched by the market. Each bid is comprised of a dispatchable operating range, ramp rate and prices across the operating range. The California ISO market operator uses sophisticated technology to select the least-cost resources to meet demand and send simultaneous dispatch signals to every participating generator across the EIM footprint every five minutes. In addition to generation resource bids, the California ISO market operator also receives continuous real-time updates of the transmission grid network, meteorological and load forecast information that it uses to optimize dispatch instructions. Outside the EIM footprint, utilities in the western United States do not utilize comparable technology and are largely limited to transactions within the borders of their balancing authority area to balance supply and demand intra-hour using a combination of manual and automated dispatch. The EIM delivers customer benefits by leveraging automation and resource diversity to result in more efficient dispatch, more effective integration of renewables and improved situational awareness. Benefits are expected to increase further with renewable resource expansion and as more entities join the EIM, bringing incremental resource diversity.

PacifiCorp will continue to monitor regional market expansion efforts, including creation of a regional Independent System Operator ("ISO"). California Senate Bill No. 350, which was passed in October 2015, authorized the California legislature to consider making changes to current laws that would create an independent governance structure for a regional ISO during the 2017 legislative session. The California legislature did not pass any legislation related to a regional ISO during its 2019 legislative session, which adjourned September 13, 2019.

Transmission and Distribution

PacifiCorp operates one balancing authority area in the western portion of its service territory ("PacifiCorp-West") and one balancing authority area in the eastern portion of its service territory ("PacifiCorp-East"). A balancing authority area is a geographic area with transmission systems that control generation to maintain schedules with other balancing authority areas and ensure reliable operations. In operating the balancing authority areas, PacifiCorp is responsible for continuously balancing electricity supply and demand by dispatching generating resources and interchange transactions so that generation internal to the balancing authority area, plus net imported power, matches customer loads. Deliveries of energy over PacifiCorp's transmission system are managed and scheduled in accordance with FERC requirements.


7


PacifiCorp's transmission system is part of the Western Interconnection, which includes the interconnected transmission systems of 14 western states, two Canadian provinces and parts of Mexico. PacifiCorp's transmission system, together with contractual rights on other transmission systems, enables PacifiCorp to integrate and access generation resources to meet its customer load requirements. PacifiCorp's transmission and distribution systems included approximately 16,600 miles of transmission lines in ten states, 64,600 miles of distribution lines and 900 substations as of December 31, 2019.

PacifiCorp's transmission and distribution system is managed on a coordinated basis to obtain maximum load-carrying capability and efficiency. Portions of PacifiCorp's transmission and distribution systems are located:

On property owned or used through agreements by PacifiCorp;
Under or over streets, alleys, highways and other public places, the public domain and national forests and state and federal lands under franchises, easements or other rights that are generally subject to termination;
Under or over private property as a result of easements obtained primarily from the title holder of record; or
Under or over Native American reservations through agreements with the United States Secretary of Interior or Native American tribes.
It is possible that some of the easements and the property over which the easements were granted may have title defects or may be subject to mortgages or liens existing at the time the easements were acquired.

PacifiCorp's Energy Gateway Transmission Expansion Program represents plans to build approximately 2,000 miles of new high-voltage transmission lines, with an estimated cost exceeding $6 billion, primarily in Wyoming, Utah, Idaho and Oregon. The $6 billion estimated cost includes: (a) the 135-mile, 345-kV Populus to Terminal transmission line between the Terminal substation near the Salt Lake City Airport and the Populus substation in Downey, Idaho placed in-service in 2010; (b) the 100-mile, 345/500-kV Mona to Oquirrh transmission line between the Mona substation in central Utah and the Oquirrh substation in the Salt Lake Valley placed in-service in 2013; (c) the 170-mile, 345-kV transmission line between the Sigurd Substation in central Utah and the Red Butte Substation in southwest Utah placed in-service in May 2015; and (d) the 140-mile, 500-kV transmission line between Aeolus Substation near Medicine Bow in Wyoming and Jim Bridger generating facility expected to be placed in-service in 2020, (e) other segments that are expected to be placed in-service in future years, depending on load growth, siting, permitting and construction schedules. The transmission line segments are intended to: (a) address customer load growth; (b) improve system reliability; (c) reduce transmission system constraints; (d) provide access to diverse generation resources, including renewable resources; and (e) improve the flow of electricity throughout PacifiCorp's six-state service area. Proposed transmission line segments are evaluated to ensure optimal benefits and timing before committing to move forward with permitting and construction. Through December 31, 2019, $2.5 billion had been spent and $1.6 billion, including AFUDC, had been placed in-service.

Future Generation, Conservation and Energy Efficiency

Energy Supply Planning

As required by certain state regulations, PacifiCorp uses an IRP to develop a long-term resource plan to ensure that PacifiCorp can continue to provide reliable and cost-effective electric service to its customers while maintaining compliance with existing and evolving environmental laws and regulations. The IRP process identifies the amount and timing of PacifiCorp's expected future resource needs, accounting for planning uncertainty, risks, reliability, state energy policies and other factors. The IRP is prepared following a public process, which provides an opportunity for stakeholders to participate in PacifiCorp's resource planning process. PacifiCorp files its IRP on a biennial basis with the state commissions in each of the six states where PacifiCorp operates. Five states indicate whether the IRP meets the state commission's IRP standards and guidelines, a process referred to as "acknowledgment" in some states.


8


In October 2019, PacifiCorp filed its 2019 IRP with its state commissions. The IRP includes new transmission investments that will facilitate growth in new renewable energy resources, new storage resources, and expansion in new energy efficiency measures and demand-response programs. The IRP also includes accelerated coal-fueled generation facility retirements and the need for incremental flexible capacity resources beginning in 2026. Delivery of new transmission infrastructure that will facilitate approximately 4,400 MWs of new renewable energy resources, incremental to new renewable capacity that will come online by the end of 2020, and the addition of approximately 600 MWs of new storage capacity is planned through 2023. The IRP outlines PacifiCorp's plan to procure these near-term generating facilities through a Request for Proposals ("RFP") process that will determine how many of the new resources identified in the IRP will be developed as owned assets or power purchase agreements. Over the next 20 years, the IRP calls for retiring approximately 4,500 MWs of coal-fueled generating capacity while adding approximately 8,900 MWs of new renewable resources, incremental to new renewable capacity of approximately 2,000 MWs that will come online by the end of 2020, and approximately 2,800 MWs of new storage capacity. All or some of the renewable energy attributes associated with generation from these renewable resources may be used in future years to comply with RPS or other regulatory requirements, sold to third parties in the form of RECs or other environmental commodities, or excluded from energy purchased.

Requests for Proposals

PacifiCorp issues individual RFPs, each of which typically focuses on a specific category of generation resources consistent with the IRP or other customer-driven demands. The IRP and the RFPs provide for the identification and staged procurement of resources to meet load or renewable portfolio standard requirements. Depending upon the specific RFP, applicable laws and regulations may require PacifiCorp to file draft RFPs with the UPSC, the OPUC and the WUTC. Approval by the UPSC, the OPUC or the WUTC may be required depending on the nature of the RFPs. In 2019, PacifiCorp completed the agreements for acquisition of follow-on wind turbine equipment for the final two projects associated with the 2017R RFP. PacifiCorp is not currently administering active resource RFPs.

Energy Efficiency Programs

PacifiCorp has provided a comprehensive set of DSM programs to its customers since the 1970s. The programs are designed to reduce energy consumption and more effectively manage when energy is used, including management of seasonal peak loads. PacifiCorp offers services to customers such as energy engineering audits and information on how to improve the efficiency of their homes and businesses. To assist customers in investing in energy efficiency, PacifiCorp offers rebates or incentives encouraging the purchase and installation of high-efficiency equipment such as lighting, heating and cooling equipment, weatherization, motors, process equipment and systems, as well as incentives for energy project management, efficient building operations and efficient construction. Incentives are also paid to solicit participation in load management programs by residential, business and agricultural customers through programs such as PacifiCorp's residential and small commercial air conditioner load control program and irrigation equipment load control programs. Although subject to prudence reviews, state regulations allow for contemporaneous recovery of costs incurred for the DSM programs through state-specific energy efficiency surcharges to retail customers or for recovery of costs through rates. During 2019, PacifiCorp spent $152 million on these DSM programs, resulting in an estimated 551,088 MWhs of first-year energy savings and an estimated 284 MWs of peak load management. In addition to these DSM programs, PacifiCorp has load curtailment contracts with a number of large industrial customers that deliver up to 305 MWs of load reduction when needed, depending on the customers' actual loads. Recovery of the costs associated with the large industrial load management program are captured in the retail special contract agreements with those customers approved by their respective state commissions or through PacifiCorp's general rate case process.

Employees

As of December 31, 2019, PacifiCorp had approximately 5,300 employees, of which approximately 3,000 were covered by union contracts, principally with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the Utility Workers Union of America and the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers.


9


MIDAMERICAN FUNDING AND MIDAMERICAN ENERGY

General

MidAmerican Funding and MHC

MidAmerican Funding, a wholly owned subsidiary of BHE, is a holding company headquartered in Iowa that owns all of the outstanding common stock of MHC Inc. ("MHC"), which is a holding company owning all of the common stock of MidAmerican Energy and Midwest Capital Group, Inc. ("Midwest Capital"). MidAmerican Funding and MidAmerican Energy are indirect consolidated subsidiaries of Berkshire Hathaway. MidAmerican Funding conducts no business other than activities related to its debt securities and the ownership of MHC. MHC conducts no business other than the ownership of its subsidiaries and related corporate services. MidAmerican Energy is a substantial portion of MidAmerican Funding's and MHC's assets, revenue and earnings.

MidAmerican Funding was formed as a limited liability company under the laws of the state of Iowa in 1999 and its principal executive offices are located at 666 Grand Avenue, Suite 500, Des Moines, Iowa 50309-2580 and its telephone number is (515) 242-4300.

MidAmerican Energy

MidAmerican Energy, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of BHE, is a United States regulated electric and natural gas utility company headquartered in Iowa that serves 0.8 million retail electric customers in portions of Iowa, Illinois and South Dakota and 0.8 million retail and transportation natural gas customers in portions of Iowa, South Dakota, Illinois and Nebraska. MidAmerican Energy is principally engaged in the business of generating, transmitting, distributing and selling electricity and in distributing, selling and transporting natural gas. MidAmerican Energy's service territory covers approximately 11,000 square miles. Metropolitan areas in which MidAmerican Energy distributes electricity at retail include Council Bluffs, Des Moines, Fort Dodge, Iowa City, Sioux City and Waterloo, Iowa; and the Quad Cities (Davenport and Bettendorf, Iowa and Rock Island, Moline and East Moline, Illinois). Metropolitan areas in which it distributes natural gas at retail include Cedar Rapids, Des Moines, Fort Dodge, Iowa City, Sioux City and Waterloo, Iowa; the Quad Cities; and Sioux Falls, South Dakota. MidAmerican Energy has a diverse customer base consisting of urban and rural residential customers and a variety of commercial and industrial customers. Principal industries served by MidAmerican Energy include electronic data storage; processing and sales of food products; manufacturing, processing and fabrication of primary metals, farm and other non-electrical machinery; cement and gypsum products; and government. In addition to retail sales and natural gas transportation, MidAmerican Energy sells electricity principally to markets operated by RTOs and natural gas to other utilities and market participants on a wholesale basis. MidAmerican Energy is a transmission-owning member of the MISO and participates in its capacity, energy and ancillary services markets.

MidAmerican Energy's regulated electric and natural gas operations are conducted under numerous franchise agreements, certificates, permits and licenses obtained from federal, state and local authorities. The franchise agreements, with various expiration dates, are typically for 20- to 25-year terms. Several of these franchise agreements give either party the right to seek amendment to the franchise agreement at one or two specified times during the term. MidAmerican Energy generally has an exclusive right to serve electric customers within its service territories and, in turn, has an obligation to provide electricity service to those customers. In return, the state utility commissions have established rates on a cost-of-service basis, which are designed to allow MidAmerican Energy an opportunity to recover its costs of providing services and to earn a reasonable return on its investment. In Illinois, MidAmerican Energy's regulated retail electric customers may choose their energy supplier.


10


The percentages of MidAmerican Energy's operating revenue and operating income derived from the following business activities for the years ended December 31 were as follows:

 2019 2018 2017
Operating revenue:     
Regulated electric76% 75% 75%
Regulated gas23
 25
 25
Other1
 
 
 100% 100% 100%
      
Operating income:     
Regulated electric86% 85% 86%
Regulated gas13
 15
 14
Other1
 
 
 100% 100% 100%

MidAmerican Energy was incorporated under the laws of the state of Iowa in 1995 and its principal executive offices are located at 666 Grand Avenue, Suite 500, Des Moines, Iowa 50309-2580, its telephone number is (515) 242-4300 and its internet address is www.midamericanenergy.com.

Regulated Electric Operations

Customers

The GWhs and percentages of electricity sold to MidAmerican Energy's retail customers by jurisdiction for the years ended December 31 were as follows:
 2019 2018 2017
            
Iowa24,073
 92% 23,670
 92% 22,365
 91%
Illinois1,894
 7
 1,944
 7
 1,891
 8
South Dakota234
 1
 237
 1
 236
 1
 26,201
 100% 25,851
 100% 24,492
 100%


11


Electricity sold to MidAmerican Energy's retail and wholesale customers by class of customer and the average number of retail customers for the years ended December 31 were as follows:

 2019 2018 2017
GWhs sold:           
Residential6,575
 18% 6,763
 18% 6,207
 18%
Commercial3,921
 11
 3,897
 11
 3,761
 11
Industrial14,127
 39
 13,587
 37
 12,957
 39
Other1,578
 4
 1,604
 4
 1,567
 5
Total retail26,201
 72
 25,851
 70
 24,492
 73
Wholesale10,000
 28
 11,181
 30
 9,165
 27
Total GWhs sold36,201
 100% 37,032
 100% 33,657
 100%
            
Average number of retail customers (in thousands):           
Residential675
 86% 670
 86% 662
 86%
Commercial95
 12
 94
 12
 92
 12
Industrial2
 
 2
 
 2
 
Other14
 2
 14
 2
 14
 2
Total786
 100% 780
 100% 770
 100%

Variations in weather, economic conditions and various conservation and energy efficiency measures and programs can impact customer usage. Wholesale sales are impacted by market prices for energy relative to the incremental cost to generate power.

There are seasonal variations in MidAmerican Energy's electricity sales that are principally related to weather and the related use of electricity for air conditioning. Additionally, electricity sales are priced higher in the summer months compared to the remaining months of the year. As a result, 40% to 50% of MidAmerican Energy's regulated electric revenue is reported in the months of June, July, August and September.

A degree of concentration of sales exists with certain large electric retail customers. Sales to the ten largest customers, from a variety of industries, comprised 21%, 20% and 19% of total retail electric sales in 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. Sales to electronic data storage customers included in the ten largest customers comprised 12%, 9% and 9% of total retail electric sales in 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively.

The annual hourly peak demand on MidAmerican Energy's electric system usually occurs as a result of air conditioning use during the cooling season. Peak demand represents the highest demand on a given day and at a given hour. On July 19, 2019, retail customer usage of electricity caused a new record hourly peak demand of 5,095 MWs on MidAmerican Energy's electric distribution system, which is 44 MWs greater than the previous record hourly peak demand of 5,051 MWs set July 12, 2018.


12


Generating Facilities and Fuel Supply

MidAmerican Energy has ownership interest in a diverse portfolio of generating facilities. The following table presents certain information regarding MidAmerican Energy's owned generating facilities as of December 31, 2019:
        Facility Net
      Year Installed / Net Capacity Owned Capacity
Generating Facility Location Energy Source 
Repowered(1)
 
(MWs)(2)
 
(MWs)(2)
WIND:          
Ida Grove Ida Grove, IA Wind 2016-2019 501
 501
Orient Greenfield, IA Wind 2018-2019 501
 501
Highland Primghar, IA Wind 2015 475
 475
Rolling Hills Massena, IA Wind 2011 443
 443
Beaver Creek Ogden, IA Wind 2017-2018 340
 340
North English Montezuma, IA Wind 2018-2019 340
 340
Pomeroy Pomeroy, IA Wind 2007-2011 / 2018-2019 286
 286
Arbor Hill Greenfield, IA Wind 2018-2019 281
 281
Lundgren Otho, IA Wind 2014 250
 250
O'Brien Primghar, IA Wind 2016 250
 250
Palo Alto Palo Alto, IA Wind 2019 248
 248
Century Blairsburg, IA Wind 2005-2008 / 2017-2018 200
 200
Eclipse Adair, IA Wind 2012 200
 200
Intrepid Schaller, IA Wind 2004-2005 / 2017 176
 176
Adair Adair, IA Wind 2008 / 2019 175
 175
Prairie Montezuma, IA Wind 2017-2018 168
 168
Carroll Carroll, IA Wind 2008 / 2019 150
 150
Walnut Walnut, IA Wind 2008 / 2019 150
 150
Vienna Gladbrook, IA Wind 2012-2013 150
 150
Adams Lennox, IA Wind 2015 150
 150
Wellsburg Wellsburg, IA Wind 2014 139
 139
Laurel Laurel, IA Wind 2011 120
 120
Macksburg Macksburg, IA Wind 2014 119
 119
Morning Light Adair, IA Wind 2012 100
 100
Victory Westside, IA Wind 2006 / 2017-2018 99
 99
Ivester Wellsburg, IA Wind 2018 91
 91
Charles City Charles City, IA Wind 2008 / 2018 75
 75
        6,177
 6,177
COAL:          
Louisa Muscatine, IA Coal 1983 749
 659
Walter Scott, Jr. Unit No. 3 Council Bluffs, IA Coal 1978 698
 552
Walter Scott, Jr. Unit No. 4 Council Bluffs, IA Coal 2007 817
 487
Ottumwa Ottumwa, IA Coal 1981 720
 375
George Neal Unit No. 3 Sergeant Bluff, IA Coal 1975 510
 367
George Neal Unit No. 4 Salix, IA Coal 1979 643
 261
        4,137
 2,701
NATURAL GAS AND OTHER:          
Greater Des Moines Pleasant Hill, IA Gas 2003-2004 483
 483
Electrifarm Waterloo, IA Gas or Oil 1975-1978 183
 183
Pleasant Hill Pleasant Hill, IA Gas or Oil 1990-1994 155
 155
Sycamore Johnston, IA Gas or Oil 1974 144
 144
River Hills Des Moines, IA Gas 1966-1967 118
 118
Riverside Unit No. 5 Bettendorf, IA Gas 1961 114
 114
Coralville Coralville, IA Gas 1970 66
 66
Moline Moline, IL Gas 1970 64
 64
28 portable power modules Various Oil 2000 56
 56
Parr Charles City, IA Gas 1969 33
 33
        1,416
 1,416
           
NUCLEAR:          
Quad Cities Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Cordova, IL Uranium 1972 1,821
 455
           
HYDROELECTRIC:          
Moline Unit Nos. 1-4 Moline, IL Hydroelectric 1941 4
 4
           
Total Available Generating Capacity     13,555
 10,753
           
PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION:        
Various wind projects       626
 626
    14,181
 11,379

13


(1)
Repowered dates are associated with component replacements on existing wind-powered generating facilities commonly referred to by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) as repowering. IRS rules provide for re-establishment of the PTCs for an existing wind-powered generating facility upon the replacement of a significant portion of its components. If the degree of component replacement in such projects meets IRS guidelines, PTCs are re-established for ten years at rates that depend upon the date on which construction begins.
(2)Facility Net Capacity represents the lesser of nominal ratings or any limitations under applicable interconnection, power purchase, or other agreements for intermittent resources and the total net dependable capability available during summer conditions for all other units. An intermittent resource's nominal rating is the manufacturer's contractually specified capability (in MWs) under specified conditions. Net Owned Capacity indicates MidAmerican Energy's ownership of Facility Net Capacity.

The following table shows the percentages of MidAmerican Energy's total energy supplied by energy source for the years ended December 31:
 2019 2018 2017
      
Coal33% 42% 40%
Nuclear10
 10
 11
Natural gas1
 2
 1
Wind and other(1)
44
 36
 38
Total energy generated88
 90
 90
Energy purchased - short-term contracts and other10
 8
 8
Energy purchased - long-term contracts (renewable)(1)
1
 1
 1
Energy purchased - long-term contracts (non-renewable)1
 1
 1
 100% 100% 100%

(1)
All or some of the renewable energy attributes associated with generation from these sources may be: (a) used in future years to comply with RPS or other regulatory requirements, (b) sold to third parties in the form of RECs or other environmental commodities, or (c) excluded from energy purchased.

MidAmerican Energy is required to have resources available for dispatch by MISO to continuously meet its customer needs and reliably operate its electric system. The percentage of MidAmerican Energy's energy supplied by energy source varies from year to year and is subject to numerous operational and economic factors such as planned and unplanned outages, fuel commodity prices, fuel transportation costs, weather, environmental considerations, transmission constraints, and wholesale market prices of electricity. MidAmerican Energy evaluates these factors continuously in order to facilitate economical dispatch of its generating facilities by MISO. When factors for one energy source are less favorable, MidAmerican Energy places more reliance on other energy sources. For example, MidAmerican Energy can generate more electricity using its low cost wind-powered generating facilities when factors associated with these facilities are favorable. When factors associated with wind resources are less favorable, MidAmerican Energy must increase its reliance on more expensive generation or purchased electricity. Refer to "General Regulation" in Item 1 of this Form 10-K for a discussion of energy cost recovery by jurisdiction.

Coal

All of the coal-fueled generating facilities operated by MidAmerican Energy are fueled by low-sulfur, western coal from the Powder River Basin in northeast Wyoming. MidAmerican Energy's coal supply portfolio includes multiple suppliers and mines under short-term and multi-year agreements of varying terms and quantities through 2023. MidAmerican Energy believes supplies from these sources are presently adequate and available to meet MidAmerican Energy's needs. MidAmerican Energy's coal supply portfolio has substantially all of its expected 2020 requirements under fixed-price contracts. MidAmerican Energy regularly monitors the western coal market for opportunities to enhance its coal supply portfolio.

14



MidAmerican Energy has a multi-year long-haul coal transportation agreement with BNSF Railway Company ("BNSF"), an affiliate company, for the delivery of coal to all of the MidAmerican Energy-operated coal-fueled generating facilities other than the George Neal Energy Center. Under this agreement, BNSF delivers coal directly to MidAmerican Energy's Walter Scott, Jr. Energy Center and to an interchange point with Canadian Pacific Railway Company for short-haul delivery to the Louisa Energy Center. MidAmerican Energy has a multi-year long-haul coal transportation agreement with Union Pacific Railroad Company for the delivery of coal to the George Neal Energy Center.

Nuclear

MidAmerican Energy is a 25% joint owner of Quad Cities Generating Station Units 1 and 2 ("Quad Cities Station"), a nuclear power plant, which is currently licensed by the NRC for operation until December 14, 2032. Exelon Generation Company, LLC ("Exelon Generation"), a subsidiary of Exelon Corporation, is the 75% joint owner and the operator of Quad Cities Station. Approximately one-third of the nuclear fuel assemblies in each reactor core at Quad Cities Station is replaced every 24 months. MidAmerican Energy has been advised by Exelon Generation that the following requirements for Quad Cities Station can be met under existing supplies or commitments: uranium requirements through 2021 and partial requirements through 2025; uranium conversion requirements through 2021 and partial requirements through 2025; enrichment requirements through 2021 and partial requirements through 2025; and fuel fabrication requirements through 2022. MidAmerican Energy has been advised by Exelon Generation that it does not anticipate it will have difficulty in contracting for uranium, uranium conversion, enrichment or fabrication of nuclear fuel needed to operate Quad Cities Station during these time periods. In reaction to concerns about the profitability of Quad Cities Station and Exelon Generation's ability to continue its operation, in December 2016, Illinois passed legislation creating a zero emission standard, which went into effect June 1, 2017. The zero emission standard requires the Illinois Power Agency to purchase zero emission credits ("ZECs") and recover the costs from certain ratepayers in Illinois, subject to certain limitations. The proceeds from the zero emission credits will provide Exelon Generation additional revenue through 2027 as an incentive for continued operation of Quad Cities Station.

Natural Gas

MidAmerican Energy uses natural gas and oil as fuel for intermediate and peak demand electric generation, igniter fuel, transmission support and standby purposes. These sources are presently in adequate supply and available to meet MidAmerican Energy's needs.

Wind and Other

MidAmerican Energy owns more wind-powered generating capacity than any other United States rate-regulated electric utility and believes wind-powered generation offers a viable, economical and environmentally prudent means of supplying electricity and complying with laws and regulations. Pursuant to ratemaking principles approved by the IUB, all of MidAmerican Energy's wind-powered generating facilities in-service at December 31, 2019, are authorized to earn over their regulatory lives a fixed rate of return on equity ranging from 11.0% to 12.2% on the depreciated cost of their original construction, which excludes the cost of later replacements, in any future Iowa rate proceeding. MidAmerican Energy's wind-powered generating facilities, including those facilities where a significant portion of the equipment was replaced, commonly referred to as repowered facilities, are eligible for federal renewable electricity PTCs for 10 years from the date the facilities are placed in-service. PTCs are earned as energy from qualifying wind-powered generating facilities is produced and sold. PTCs for MidAmerican Energy's wind-powered generating facilities currently in-service began expiring in 2014, with final expiration in 2029. MidAmerican Energy has repowered, or plans to repower, 2,234 MWs of the 2,284 MWs of wind-powered generating facilities for which PTCs have expired or will expire by the end of 2022. MidAmerican Energy anticipates energy generation from the repowered facilities will increase between 19% and 30% depending upon the technology being repowered.

Of the 6,260 MWs (nominal ratings) of wind-powered generating facilities in-service as of December 31, 2019, 6,155 MWs were generating PTCs, including 1,221 MWs of repowered facilities. Of those facilities currently not generating PTCs, 55 MWs are scheduled to be repowered by the end of 2020. PTCs earned by MidAmerican Energy's wind-powered generating facilities placed in-service prior to 2013, except for repowered facilities, are included in MidAmerican Energy's Iowa energy adjustment clause, through which MidAmerican Energy is allowed to recover fluctuations in its electric retail energy costs. Facilities earning PTCs that currently benefit customers through the Iowa energy adjustment clause totaled 1,000 MWs (nominal ratings) as of December 31, 2019, with the eligibility of those facilities to earn PTCs expiring by the end of 2022. MidAmerican Energy earned PTCs totaling $378 million and $308 million in 2019 and 2018, respectively, of which 19% and 33%, respectively, were included in the Iowa energy adjustment clause.


15


Regional Transmission Organizations

MidAmerican Energy sells and purchases electricity and ancillary services related to its generation and load in wholesale markets pursuant to the tariffs in those markets. MidAmerican Energy participates predominantly in the MISO energy and ancillary service markets, which provide MidAmerican Energy with wholesale opportunities over a large market area. MidAmerican Energy can enter into wholesale bilateral transactions in addition to market activity related to its assets. MidAmerican Energy is authorized to participate in the Southwest Power Pool, Inc. and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. ("PJM") markets and can contract with several other major transmission-owning utilities in the region. MidAmerican Energy can utilize both financial swaps and physical fixed-price electricity sales and purchases contracts to reduce its exposure to electricity price volatility.

MidAmerican Energy's decisions regarding additions to or reductions of its generation portfolio may be impacted by the MISO's minimum reserve margin requirement. The MISO requires each member to maintain a minimum reserve margin of its accredited generating capacity over its peak demand obligation based on the member's forecast filed with the MISO each year. The MISO's reserve requirement was 7.9% for the summer of 2019 and will increase to 8.9% for the summer of 2020. MidAmerican Energy's owned and contracted capacity accredited for the 2019-2020 MISO capacity auction was 5,471 MWs compared to a peak demand obligation of 4,730 MWs, or a reserve margin of 15.7%. Accredited capacity represents the amount of generation available to meet the requirements of MidAmerican Energy's retail customers and consists of MidAmerican Energy-owned generation, interruptible retail customer load, certain customer private generation that MidAmerican Energy is contractually allowed to dispatch and the net amount of capacity purchases and sales. Accredited capacity may vary from the nominal, or design, capacity ratings, particularly for wind turbines whose output is dependent upon wind levels at any given time. Additionally, the actual amount of generating capacity available at any time may be less than the accredited capacity due to regulatory restrictions, transmission constraints, fuel restrictions and generating units being temporarily out of service for inspection, maintenance, refueling, modifications or other reasons.

Transmission and Distribution

MidAmerican Energy's transmission and distribution systems included 4,100 miles of transmission lines in four states, 38,700 miles of distribution lines and 380 substations as of December 31, 2019. Electricity from MidAmerican Energy's generating facilities and purchased electricity is delivered to wholesale markets and its retail customers via the transmission facilities of MidAmerican Energy and others. MidAmerican Energy participates in the MISO capacity, energy and ancillary services markets as a transmission-owning member and, accordingly, operates its transmission assets at the direction of the MISO. The MISO manages its energy and ancillary service markets using reliability-constrained economic dispatch of the region's generation. For both the day-ahead and real-time (every five minutes) markets, the MISO analyzes generation commitments to provide market liquidity and transparent pricing while maintaining transmission system reliability by minimizing congestion and maximizing efficient energy transmission. Additionally, through its FERC-approved OATT, the MISO performs the role of transmission service provider throughout the MISO footprint and administers the long-term planning function. MISO and related costs of the participants are shared among the participants through a number of mechanisms in accordance with the MISO tariff.

Regulated Natural Gas Operations

MidAmerican Energy is engaged in the distribution of natural gas to customers in its service territory and the related procurement, transportation and storage of natural gas for the benefit of those customers. MidAmerican Energy purchases natural gas from various suppliers and contracts with interstate natural gas pipelines for transportation of the gas to MidAmerican Energy's service territory and for storage and balancing services. MidAmerican Energy sells natural gas and delivery services to end-use customers on its distribution system; sells natural gas to other utilities, municipalities and energy marketing companies; and transports natural gas through its distribution system for end-use customers who have independently secured their supply of natural gas. During 2019, 56% of the total natural gas delivered through MidAmerican Energy's distribution system was associated with transportation service.

Natural gas property consists primarily of natural gas mains and service lines, meters, and related distribution equipment, including feeder lines to communities served from natural gas pipelines owned by others. The natural gas distribution facilities of MidAmerican Energy included 24,000 miles of natural gas main and service lines as of December 31, 2019.


16


Customer Usage and Seasonality

The percentages of natural gas sold to MidAmerican Energy's retail customers by jurisdiction for the years ended December 31 were as follows:
 2019 2018 2017
      
Iowa76% 76% 76%
South Dakota13
 13
 13
Illinois10
 10
 10
Nebraska1
 1
 1
 100% 100% 100%

The percentages of natural gas sold to MidAmerican Energy's retail and wholesale customers by class of customer, total Dths of natural gas sold, total Dths of transportation service and the average number of retail customers for the years ended December 31 were as follows:
 2019 2018 2017
      
Residential45% 43% 41%
Commercial(1)
22
 21
 20
Industrial(1)
4
 5
 4
Total retail71
 69
 65
Wholesale(2)
29
 31
 35
 100% 100% 100%
      
Total Dths of natural gas sold (in thousands)125,655
 126,272
 114,298
Total Dths of transportation service (in thousands)112,143
 102,198
 92,136
Total average number of retail customers (in thousands)766
 759
 751

(1)
Commercial and industrial customers are classified primarily based on the nature of their business and natural gas usage. Commercial customers are non-residential customers that use natural gas principally for heating. Industrial customers are non-residential customers that use natural gas principally for their manufacturing processes.
(2)Wholesale sales are generally made to other utilities, municipalities and energy marketing companies for eventual resale to end-use customers.

There are seasonal variations in MidAmerican Energy's regulated natural gas business that are principally due to the use of natural gas for heating. Typically, 50-60% of MidAmerican Energy's regulated natural gas revenue is reported in the months of January, February, March and December.

On January 29, 2019, MidAmerican Energy recorded its all-time highest peak-day delivery through its distribution system of 1,314,526 Dths. This peak-day delivery consisted of 68% traditional retail sales service and 32% transportation service. MidAmerican Energy's 2019/2020 winter heating season peak-day delivery as of February 3, 2020, was 1,197,419 Dths, reached on January 19, 2020. This preliminary peak-day delivery consisted of 61% traditional retail sales service and 39% transportation service.

Fuel Supply and Capacity

MidAmerican Energy uses several strategies designed to maintain a reliable natural gas supply and reduce the impact of volatility in natural gas prices on its regulated retail natural gas customers. These strategies include the purchase of a geographically diverse supply portfolio from producers and third-party energy marketing companies, the use of interstate pipeline storage services and MidAmerican Energy's LNG peaking facilities, and the use of financial derivatives to fix the price on a portion of the anticipated natural gas requirements of MidAmerican Energy's customers. Refer to "General Regulation" in Item 1 of this Form 10-K for a discussion of the purchased gas adjustment clauses ("PGA").


17


MidAmerican Energy contracts for firm natural gas pipeline capacity to transport natural gas from key production areas and liquid market centers to its service territory through direct interconnects to the pipeline systems of several interstate natural gas pipeline systems, including Northern Natural Gas, an affiliate company. MidAmerican Energy has multiple pipeline interconnections into several larger markets within its distribution system. Multiple pipeline interconnections create competition among pipeline suppliers for transportation capacity to serve those markets, thus reducing costs. In addition, multiple pipeline interconnections increase delivery reliability and give MidAmerican Energy the ability to optimize delivery of the lowest cost supply from the various production areas and liquid market centers into these markets. Benefits to MidAmerican Energy's distribution system customers are shared among all jurisdictions through a consolidated PGA.

At times, the natural gas pipeline capacity available through MidAmerican Energy's firm capacity portfolio may exceed the requirements of retail customers on MidAmerican Energy's distribution system. Firm capacity in excess of MidAmerican Energy's system needs can be released to other companies to achieve optimum use of the available capacity. Past IUB and South Dakota Public Utilities Commission ("SDPUC") rulings have allowed MidAmerican Energy to retain 30% of the respective jurisdictional revenue on the resold capacity, with the remaining 70% being returned to customers through the PGAs.

MidAmerican Energy utilizes interstate pipeline natural gas storage services to meet retail customer requirements, manage fluctuations in demand due to changes in weather and other usage factors and manage variation in seasonal natural gas pricing. MidAmerican Energy typically withdraws natural gas from storage during the heating season when customer demand is historically at its peak and injects natural gas into storage during off-peak months when customer demand is historically lower. MidAmerican Energy also utilizes its three LNG facilities to meet peak day demands during the winter heating season. Interstate pipeline storage services and MidAmerican Energy's LNG facilities reduce dependence on natural gas purchases during the volatile winter heating season and can deliver a significant portion of MidAmerican Energy's anticipated retail sales requirements on a peak winter day. For MidAmerican Energy's 2019/2020 winter heating season preliminary peak-day of January 19, 2020, supply sources used to meet deliveries to traditional retail sales service customers included 66% from purchases delivered on interstate pipelines, 32% from interstate pipeline storage services and 2% from MidAmerican Energy's LNG facilities.

MidAmerican Energy attempts to optimize the value of its regulated transportation capacity, natural gas supply and leased storage arrangements by engaging in wholesale transactions. IUB and SDPUC rulings have allowed MidAmerican Energy to retain 50% of the respective jurisdictional margins earned on certain wholesale sales of natural gas, with the remaining 50% being returned to customers through the PGAs.

MidAmerican Energy is not aware of any factors that would cause material difficulties in meeting its anticipated retail customer demand for the foreseeable future.

Energy Efficiency Programs

MidAmerican Energy has provided a comprehensive set of demand- and energy-reduction programs to its Iowa electric and natural gas customers since 1990. The programs, collectively referred to as energy efficiency programs, are designed to reduce energy consumption and more effectively manage when energy is used, including management of seasonal peak loads. Current programs offer services to customers such as energy engineering audits and information on how to improve the efficiency of their homes and businesses. To assist customers in investing in energy efficiency, MidAmerican Energy offers rebates or incentives encouraging the purchase and installation of high-efficiency equipment such as lighting, heating and cooling equipment, weatherization, motors, process equipment and systems, as well as incentives for efficient construction. Incentives are also paid to residential customers who participate in the air conditioner load control program and nonresidential customers who participate in the nonresidential load management program. In Iowa, legislation passed in 2018 provides that projected cumulative average annual costs for a natural gas energy efficiency plan cannot exceed 1.5% of expected Iowa natural gas retail rate revenue and, for an electric demand response plan and separately for an electric energy efficiency plan other than demand response, cannot exceed 2.0% of expected annual Iowa electric retail rate revenue. Although subject to prudence reviews, state regulations allow for contemporaneous recovery of costs incurred for energy efficiency programs through state-specific energy efficiency service charges paid by all retail electric and natural gas customers. In 2019, $78 million was expensed for MidAmerican Energy's energy efficiency programs, which resulted in estimated first-year energy savings of 185,000 MWhs of electricity and 424,000 Dths of natural gas and an estimated peak load reduction of 316 MWs of electricity and 5,585 Dths per day of natural gas.

Employees

As of December 31, 2019, MidAmerican Funding and its subsidiaries, which includes MidAmerican Energy, had approximately 3,500 employees, of which approximately 1,500 were covered by union contracts. MidAmerican Energy has three separate contracts with locals of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union.

18



NV ENERGY (NEVADA POWER AND SIERRA PACIFIC)

General

NV Energy, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of BHE, is an energy holding company headquartered in Nevada whose principal subsidiaries are Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific. Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific are indirect consolidated subsidiaries of Berkshire Hathaway. Nevada Power is a United States regulated electric utility company serving 1.0 million retail customers primarily in the Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson and adjoining areas. Sierra Pacific is a United States regulated electric and natural gas utility company serving 0.4 million retail electric customers and 0.2 million retail and transportation natural gas customers in northern Nevada. The Nevada Utilities are principally engaged in the business of generating, transmitting, distributing and selling electricity and, in the case of Sierra Pacific, in distributing, selling and transporting natural gas. Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific have electric service territories covering approximately 4,500 square miles and 41,200 square miles, respectively. Sierra Pacific has a natural gas service territory covering approximately 900 square miles in Reno and Sparks. Principal industries served by the Nevada Utilities include gaming, recreation, warehousing, manufacturing and governmental services. Sierra Pacific also serves the mining industry. The Nevada Utilities buy and sell electricity on the wholesale market with other utilities, energy marketing companies, financial institutions and other market participants to balance and optimize economic benefits of electricity generation, retail customer loads and wholesale transactions.

The Nevada Utilities' electric and natural gas operations are conducted under numerous nonexclusive franchise agreements, revocable permits and licenses obtained from federal, state and local authorities. The expiration of these franchise agreements ranges from 2020 through 2032 for Nevada Power and 2020 through 2049 for Sierra Pacific. The Nevada Utilities operate under certificates of public convenience and necessity as regulated by the PUCN, and as such the Nevada Utilities have an obligation to provide electricity service to those customers within their service territory. In return, the PUCN has established rates on a cost-of-service basis, which are designed to allow the Nevada Utilities an opportunity to recover all prudently incurred costs of providing services and an opportunity to earn a reasonable return on their investment.

NV Energy's monthly net income is affected by the seasonal impact of weather on electricity and natural gas sales and seasonal retail electricity prices from the Nevada Utilities'. For 2019, 74% of NV Energy annual net income was recorded in the months of June through September.

Regulated electric utility operations is Nevada Power's only segment while regulated electric utility operations and regulated natural gas operations are the two segments of Sierra Pacific.

The percentages of Sierra Pacific's operating revenue and operating income derived from the following business activities for the years ended December 31 were as follows:
 2019 2018 2017
Operating revenue:     
Electric87% 88% 88%
Gas13
 12
 12
 100% 100% 100%
      
Operating income:     
Electric88% 89% 88%
Gas12
 11
 12
 100% 100% 100%

Nevada Power was incorporated under the laws of the state of Nevada in 1929 and its principal executive offices are located at 6226 West Sahara Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada 89146, its telephone number is (702) 402-5000 and its internet address is www.nvenergy.com.

Sierra Pacific was incorporated under the laws of the state of Nevada in 1912 and its principal executive offices are located at 6100 Neil Road, Reno, Nevada 89511, its telephone number is (775) 834-4011 and its internet address is www.nvenergy.com.


19


Regulated Electric Operations

Customers

The Nevada Utilities' sell electricity to retail customers in a single state jurisdiction. Electricity sold to the Nevada Utilities' retail and wholesale customers by class of customer and the average number of retail customers for the years ended December 31 were as follows:
 2019 2018 2017
Nevada Power:           
GWhs sold:           
Residential9,311
 41% 9,970
 43% 9,501
 42%
Commercial4,657
 20
 4,778
 20
 4,656
 20
Industrial5,344
 24
 5,534
 24
 6,201
 28
Other193
 1
 214
 1
 212
 1
Total fully bundled19,505
 86
 20,496
 88
 20,570
 91
Distribution only service2,613
 12
 2,521
 11
 1,830
 8
Total retail22,118
 98
 23,017
 99
 22,400
 99
Wholesale527
 2
 274
 1
 314
 1
Total GWhs sold22,645
 100% 23,291
 100% 22,714
 100%
            
Average number of retail customers (in thousands):           
Residential840
 88% 825
 88% 810
 88%
Commercial109
 12
 108
 12
 106
 12
Industrial2
 
 2
 
 2
 
Total951
 100% 935
 100% 918
 100%
            
Sierra Pacific:           
GWhs sold:           
Residential2,491
 22% 2,483
 23% 2,492
 24%
Commercial2,973
 26
 2,998
 27
 2,954
 28
Industrial3,716
 32
 3,387
 31
 3,176
 30
Other16
 
 16
 
 16
 
Total fully bundled9,196
 80
 8,884
 81
 8,638
 82
Distribution only service1,629
 14
 1,516
 14
 1,394
 13
Total retail10,825
 94
 10,400
 95
 10,032
 95
Wholesale662
 6
 558
 5
 561
 5
Total GWhs sold11,487
 100% 10,958
 100% 10,593
 100%
            
Average number of retail customers (in thousands):           
Residential304
 86% 300
 86% 295
 86%
Commercial48
 14
 47
 14
 47
 14
Total352
 100% 347
 100% 342
 100%

Variations in weather, economic conditions, particularly for gaming, mining and wholesale customers and various conservation, energy efficiency and private generation measures and programs can impact customer usage. Wholesale sales are impacted by market prices for energy relative to the incremental cost to generate power.

There are seasonal variations in the Nevada Utilities' electric business that are principally related to weather and the related use of electricity for air conditioning. Typically, 48-50% of Nevada Power's and 36-38% of Sierra Pacific's regulated electric revenue is reported in the months of June through September.


20


The annual hourly peak customer demand on the Nevada Utilities' electric systems occurs as a result of air conditioning use during the cooling season. Peak demand represents the highest demand on a given day and at a given hour. On July 29, 2019, customer usage of electricity caused an hourly peak demand of 5,611 MWs on Nevada Power's electric system, which is 513 MWs less than the record hourly peak demand of 6,124 MWs set July 28, 2016. On August 28, 2019, customer usage of electricity caused an hourly peak demand of 1,808 MWs on Sierra Pacific's electric system, which is 52 MWs less than the record hourly peak demand of 1,860 MWs set July 19, 2018.

Generating Facilities and Fuel Supply

The Nevada Utilities have ownership interest in a diverse portfolio of generating facilities. The following table presents certain information regarding the Nevada Utilities' owned generating facilities as of December 31, 2019:
        Facility Net Owned
        Net Capacity Capacity
Generating Facility Location Energy Source Installed 
(MWs)(1)
 
(MWs)(1)
Nevada Power:          
NATURAL GAS:          
Clark Las Vegas, NV Natural gas 1973-2008 1,102
 1,102
Lenzie Las Vegas, NV Natural gas 2006 1,102
 1,102
Harry Allen Las Vegas, NV Natural gas 1995-2011 628
 628
Higgins Primm, NV Natural gas 2004 530
 530
Silverhawk Las Vegas, NV Natural gas 2004 520
 520
Las Vegas Las Vegas, NV Natural gas 1994-2003 272
 272
Sun Peak Las Vegas, NVNatural gas/oil 1991 210
 210
        4,364
 4,364

          
RENEWABLES:          
Nellis Las Vegas, NV Solar 2015 15
 15
Goodsprings Goodsprings, NV Waste heat 2010 5
 5
        20
 20
           
Total Nevada Power       4,384
 4,384
           
Sierra Pacific:          
NATURAL GAS:          
Tracy Sparks, NV Natural gas 1974-2008 753
 753
Ft. Churchill Yerington, NVNatural gas 1968-1971 226
 226
Clark Mountain Sparks, NV Natural gas 1994 132
 132
        1,111
 1,111
COAL:          
Valmy Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Valmy, NV Coal 1981-1985 522
 261
           
Total Sierra Pacific       1,633
 1,372
           
Total NV Energy       6,017
 5,756

(1)Facility Net Capacity represents the lesser of nominal ratings or any limitations under applicable interconnection, power purchase, or other agreements for intermittent resources and the total net dependable capability available during summer conditions for all other units. An intermittent resource's nominal rating is the manufacturer's contractually specified capability (in MWs) under specified conditions. Net Owned Capacity indicates Nevada Power or Sierra Pacific's ownership of Facility Net Capacity.



21


The following table shows the percentages of the Nevada Utilities' total energy supplied by energy source for the years ended December 31:
 2019 2018 2017
      
Nevada Power:     
Natural gas65% 64% 61%
Coal5
 6
 7
Total energy generated70
 70
 68
Energy purchased - long-term contracts (non-renewable)11
 10
 15
Energy purchased - long-term contracts (renewable)(1)
17
 16
 15
Energy purchased - short-term contracts and other2
 4
 2
 100% 100% 100%
      
Sierra Pacific:     
Natural gas46% 48% 44%
Coal11
 8
 5
Total energy generated57
 56
 49
Energy purchased - long-term contracts (non-renewable)27
 29
 38
Energy purchased - long-term contracts (renewable)(1)
13
 12
 11
Energy purchased - short-term contracts and other3
 3
 2
 100% 100% 100%

(1)All or some of the renewable energy attributes associated with generation from these sources may be: (a) used in future years to comply with RPS or other regulatory requirements, (b) sold to third parties in the form of RECs or other environmental commodities, or (c) excluded from energy purchased.

The Nevada Utilities are required to have resources available to continuously meet their customer needs and reliably operate their electric systems. The percentage of the Nevada Utilities' energy supplied by energy source varies from year-to-year and is subject to numerous operational and economic factors such as planned and unplanned outages; fuel commodity prices; fuel transportation costs; weather; environmental considerations; transmission constraints; and wholesale market prices of electricity. The Nevada Utilities evaluate these factors continuously in order to facilitate economical dispatch of their generating facilities. When factors for one energy source are less favorable, the Nevada Utilities place more reliance on other energy sources. As long as the Nevada Utilities' purchases are deemed prudent by the PUCN, through their annual prudency review, the Nevada Utilities are permitted to recover the cost of fuel and purchased power. The Nevada Utilities also have the ability to reset quarterly the BTERs, with PUCN approval, based on the last twelve months fuel costs and purchased power and to reset quarterly DEAA.

The Nevada Utilities have adopted an approach to managing the energy supply function that has three primary elements. The first element is a set of management guidelines for procuring and optimizing the supply portfolio that is consistent with the requirements of a load serving entity with a full requirements obligation, and with the growth of private generation serving a small but growing group of customers with partial requirements. The second element is an energy risk management and control approach that ensures clear separation of roles between the day-to-day management of risks and compliance monitoring and control and ensures clear distinction between policy setting (or planning) and execution. Lastly, the Nevada Utilities pursue a process of ongoing regulatory involvement and acknowledgment of the resource portfolio management plans.

The Nevada Utilities have entered into multiple long-term power purchase contracts (three or more years) with suppliers that generate electricity utilizing renewable resources, natural gas and coal. Nevada Power has entered into contracts with a total capacity of 3,284 MWs with contract termination dates ranging from 2022 to 2067. Included in these contracts are 3,024 MWs of capacity of renewable energy, of which 1,815 MWs of capacity are under development or construction and not currently available. Sierra Pacific has entered into contracts with a total capacity of 1,184 MWs with contract termination dates ranging from 2022 to 2046. Included in these contracts are 998 MWs of capacity of renewable energy, of which 476 MWs of capacity are under development or construction and not currently available.


22


The Nevada Utilities manage certain risks relating to their supply of electricity and fuel requirements by entering into various contracts, which may be accounted for as derivatives, including forwards, futures, options, swaps and other agreements. Refer to NV Energy's "General Regulation" section in Item 1 of this Form 10-K for a discussion of energy cost recovery by jurisdiction and Nevada Power's Item 7A and Sierra Pacific's Item 7A in this Form 10-K for a discussion of commodity price risk and derivative contracts.

Natural Gas

The Nevada Utilities rely on first-of-the-month indexed physical gas purchases for the majority of natural gas needed to operate their generating facilities. To secure natural gas supplies for the generating facilities, the Nevada Utilities execute purchases pursuant to a PUCN approved four season laddering strategy. In 2019, natural gas supply net purchases averaged 310,683 and 167,283 Dths per day with the winter period contracts averaging 250,432 and 193,767 Dths per day and the summer period contracts averaging 353,197 and 148,595 Dths per day for Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific, respectively. The Nevada Utilities believe supplies from these sources are presently adequate and available to meet its needs.

The Nevada Utilities contract for firm natural gas pipeline capacity to transport natural gas from production areas to their service territory through direct interconnects to the pipeline systems of several interstate natural gas pipeline systems, including Nevada Power who contracts with Kern River, an affiliated company. Sierra Pacific utilizes natural gas storage contracted from interstate pipelines to meet retail customer requirements and to manage the daily changes in demand due to changes in weather and other usage factors. The stored natural gas is typically replaced during off-peak months when the demand for natural gas is historically lower than during the heating season.

Coal

Sierra Pacific relies on spot market solicitations for coal supplies and will regularly monitor the western coal market for opportunities to meet these needs. Sierra Pacific has a transportation services contract with Union Pacific Railroad Company to ship coal from various origins in central Utah, western Colorado and Wyoming that expires December 31, 2025. Sierra Pacific has no commitments to purchase coal for 2020 or beyond. The Navajo Generating Station was shut down in November 2019 and Nevada Power has no coal requirements going forward.

Energy Imbalance Market

The Nevada Utilities participate in the EIM operated by the California ISO, which reduces costs to serve customers through more efficient dispatch of a larger and more diverse pool of resources, more effectively integrates renewables and enhances reliability through improved situational awareness and responsiveness. The EIM expands the real-time component of the California ISO's market technology to optimize and balance electricity supply and demand every five minutes across the EIM footprint. The EIM is voluntary and available to all balancing authorities in the western United States. EIM market participants submit bids to the California ISO market operator before each hour for each generating resource they choose to be dispatched by the market. Each bid is comprised of a dispatchable operating range, ramp rate and prices across the operating range. The California ISO market operator uses sophisticated technology to select the least-cost resources to meet demand and send simultaneous dispatch signals to every participating generator across the EIM footprint every five minutes. In addition to generation resource bids, the California ISO market operator also receives continuous real-time updates of the transmission grid network, meteorological and load forecast information that it uses to optimize dispatch instructions. Outside the EIM footprint, utilities in the western United States do not utilize comparable technology and are largely limited to transactions within the borders of their balancing authority area to balance supply and demand intra-hour using a combination of manual and automated dispatch. The EIM delivers customer benefits by leveraging automation and resource diversity to result in more efficient dispatch, more effective integration of renewables and improved situational awareness. Benefits are expected to increase further with renewable resource expansion and as more entities join the EIM bringing incremental diversity.

The Nevada Utilities will continue to monitor regional market expansion efforts, including creation of a regional Independent System Operator ("ISO"). California Senate Bill No. 350, which was passed in October 2015, authorized the California legislature to consider making changes to current laws that would create an independent governance structure for a regional ISO during the 2017 legislative session. The California legislature did not pass any legislation related to a regional ISO during its 2019 legislative session, which adjourned September 13, 2019.

23



Transmission and Distribution

The Nevada Utilities' transmission system is part of the Western Interconnection, a regional grid in the United States. The Western Interconnection includes the interconnected transmission systems of 14 western states, two Canadian provinces and parts of Mexico. The Nevada Utilities' transmission system, together with contractual rights on other transmission systems, enables the Nevada Utilities to integrate and access generation resources to meet their customer load requirements. Nevada Power's transmission and distribution systems included approximately 2,200 miles of transmission lines, 26,400 miles of distribution lines and 210 substations as of December 31, 2019. Sierra Pacific's transmission and distribution systems included approximately 2,300 miles of transmission lines, 17,900 miles of distribution lines and 200 substations as of December 31, 2019.

ON Line is a 231-mile, 500-kV transmission line connecting Nevada Power's and Sierra Pacific's service territories. ON Line provides the ability to jointly dispatch energy throughout Nevada and provide access to renewable energy resources in parts of northern and eastern Nevada, which enhances the Nevada Utilities' ability to manage and optimize their generating facilities. ON Line provides between 600 and 900 MWs of transfer capability with interconnection between the Robinson Summit substation on the Sierra Pacific system and the Harry Allen substation on the Nevada Power system. ON Line was a joint project between the Nevada Utilities and Great Basin Transmission, LLC. The Nevada Utilities own a 25% interest in ON Line and have entered into a long-term transmission use agreement with Great Basin Transmission, LLC for its 75% interest in ON Line until 2054. The Nevada Utilities share of its 25% interest in ON Line and the long-term transmission use agreement is split 95% for Nevada Power and 5% for Sierra Pacific. In December 2019, the PUCN approved an order to update the split starting January 1, 2020 to 75% for Nevada Power and 25% for Sierra Pacific to more accurately reflect the benefits obtained from the transmission line.

Future Generation, Conservation and Energy Efficiency

Energy Supply Planning

Within the energy supply planning process, there are four key components covering different time frames:

IRPs are filed by the Nevada Utilities for approval by the PUCN every three years and the Nevada Utilities may, as necessary, file amendments to their IRPs. IRPs are prepared in compliance with Nevada laws and regulations and cover a 20-year period. Nevada law governing the IRP process was modified in 2017 and now requires joint filings by Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific. IRPs develop a comprehensive, integrated plan that considers customer energy requirements and propose the resources to meet those requirements in a manner that is consistent with prevailing market fundamentals. The ultimate goal of the IRPs is to balance the objectives of minimizing costs and reducing volatility while reliably meeting the electric needs of the Nevada Utilities' customers. Costs incurred to complete projects approved through the IRP process still remain subject to review for reasonableness by the PUCN.
Energy Supply Plans ("ESP") are filed with the PUCN for approval and operate in conjunction with the PUCN-approved 20-year IRP. The ESP has a one- to three-year planning horizon and is an intermediate-term resource procurement and risk management plan that establishes the supply portfolio strategies within which intermediate-term resource requirements will be met with PUCN approval required for executing contracts of longer than three years.
Distributed Resource Plans ("DRP") are filed with the PUCN for approval and operate in conjunction with the PUCN-approved 20-year IRP. The DRP establishes a formal process to aid in the cost-effective integration of distributed resources into the Nevada Utilities' distribution and transmission process and ultimately the NV Energy utilities' electricity grid.
Action plans are filed with the PUCN for approval and operate in conjunction with the PUCN-approved 20-year IRP and PUCN-approved ESP. The action plan establishes tactical execution activities with a one-month to twelve-month focus.

In April 2019, in compliance with Senate Bill No. 146, the Nevada Utilities filed their first DRP which was the first amendment to the 2019-2038 triennial IRP. In May 2019, the Nevada Utilities filed their second amendment to the IRP requesting approval for a change to the Demand-Side Action Plan to achieve a 1.25% annual energy savings target, additions to the generation portion of the Supply-Side Action Plan including a new agreement with Idaho Power Company for the orderly retirement of the North Valmy Station and updates to the Transmission Action Plan including several new transmission projects needed to serve growing distribution and transmission load. In June 2019, the Nevada Utilities filed their third amendment to the IRP requesting approval to proceed with system investments primarily related to transmission interconnections for renewable energy projects and approval for three power purchase agreements totaling 1,190-MWs of solar photovoltaic generation. The PUCN issued orders in August 2019 and December 2019 approving the significant elements of all three amendments.


24


There is the potential for continued price volatility in the Nevada Utilities' service territories, particularly during peak periods. Dependence on generation from the wholesale market can lead to power price volatilities depending on available power supply and prevailing natural gas prices. The Nevada Utilities face load obligation uncertainty due to the potential for customer switching. Some counterparties in these areas have significant credit difficulties, representing credit risk to the Nevada Utilities. Finally, the Nevada Utilities' own credit situation can have an impact on its ability to enter into transactions.

Emissions Reduction and Capacity Replacement Plan

In compliance with Senate Bill No. 123, Nevada Power retired 255 MWs of coal-fueled generation in 2019 in addition to the 557 MWs of coal-fueled generation retired in 2017. Consistent with the Emissions Reduction and Capacity Replacement Plan ("ERCR Plan"), between 2014 and 2016, Nevada Power acquired 536 MWs of natural gas generating resources, executed long-term power purchase agreements for 200 MWs of nameplate renewable energy capacity and constructed a 15-MW solar photovoltaic facility. Nevada Power has the option to acquire 35 MWs of nameplate renewable energy capacity in the future under the ERCR Plan, subject to PUCN approval.

Energy Efficiency Programs

The Nevada Utilities have provided a comprehensive set of energy efficiency, demand response and conservation programs to their Nevada electric customers. The programs are designed to reduce energy consumption and more effectively manage when energy is used, including management of seasonal peak loads. Current programs offer services to customers such as energy audits and customer education and awareness efforts that provide information on how to improve the efficiency of their homes and businesses. To assist customers in investing in energy efficiency, the Nevada Utilities have offered rebates or incentives encouraging the purchase and installation of high-efficiency equipment such as lighting, heating and cooling equipment, weatherization, motors, process equipment and systems, as well as incentives for efficient construction. Incentives are also paid to residential customers who participate in the air conditioner load control program and nonresidential customers who participate in the nonresidential load management program. Energy efficiency program costs are recovered through annual rates set by the PUCN, and adjusted based on the Nevada Utilities' annual filing to recover current program costs and any over or under collections from the prior filing, subject to prudence review. During 2019, Nevada Power spent $33 million on energy efficiency programs, resulting in an estimated 231,756 MWhs of electric energy savings and an estimated 195 MWs of electric peak load management. During 2019, Sierra Pacific spent $11 million on energy efficiency programs, resulting in an estimated 100,339 MWhs of electric energy savings and an estimated 23 MWs of electric peak load management.

Regulated Natural Gas Operations

Sierra Pacific is engaged in the distribution of natural gas to customers in its service territory and the related procurement, transportation and storage of natural gas for the benefit of those customers. Sierra Pacific purchases natural gas from various suppliers and contracts with interstate natural gas pipelines for transportation of the natural gas from the production areas to Sierra Pacific's service territory and for storage services to manage fluctuations in system demand and seasonal pricing. Sierra Pacific sells natural gas and delivery services to end-use customers on its distribution system; sells natural gas to other utilities, municipalities and energy marketing companies; and transports natural gas through its distribution system for a number of end-use customers who have independently secured their supply of natural gas. During 2019, 10% of the total natural gas delivered through Sierra Pacific's distribution system was for transportation service.

Natural gas property consists primarily of natural gas mains and service lines, meters, and related distribution equipment, including feeder lines to communities served from natural gas pipelines owned by others. The natural gas distribution facilities of Sierra Pacific included 3,460 miles of natural gas mains and service lines as of December 31, 2019.


25


Customer Usage and Seasonality

The percentages of natural gas sold to Sierra Pacific's retail and wholesale customers by class of customer, total Dths of natural gas sold, total Dths of transportation service and the average number of retail customers for the years ended December 31 were as follows:
 2019 2018 2017
      
Residential57% 55% 53%
Commercial(1)
29
 28
 27
Industrial(1)
10
 11
 9
Total retail96
 94
 89
Wholesale(2)
4
 6
 11
 100% 100% 100%
      
Total Dths of natural gas sold (in thousands)19,846
 18,334
 19,313
Total Dths of transportation service (in thousands)2,217
 2,250
 1,977
Total average number of retail customers (in thousands)170
 167
 165

(1)Commercial and industrial customers are classified primarily based on the nature of their business and natural gas usage. Commercial customers are non-residential customers with monthly gas usage less than 12,000 therms during five consecutive winter months. Industrial customers are non-residential customers that use natural gas in excess of 12,000 therms during one or more winter months.

(2)Wholesale sales are generally made to other utilities, municipalities and energy marketing companies for eventual resale to end-use customers.

There are seasonal variations in Sierra Pacific's regulated natural gas business that are principally due to the use of natural gas for heating. Typically, 47-56% of Sierra Pacific's regulated natural gas revenue is reported in the months of December through March.

On February 21, 2019, Sierra Pacific recorded its highest peak-day natural gas delivery of 140,287 Dths, which is 23,287 Dths less than the record peak-day delivery of 163,574 Dths set on December 9, 2013. This peak-day delivery consisted of 94% traditional retail sales service and 6% transportation service.

Fuel Supply and Capacity

The purchase of natural gas for Sierra Pacific's regulated natural gas operations is done in combination with the purchase of natural gas for Sierra Pacific's regulated electric operations. In response to energy supply challenges, Sierra Pacific has adopted an approach to managing the energy supply function that has three primary elements, as discussed earlier under Generating Facilities and Fuel Supply. Similar to Sierra Pacific's regulated electric operations, as long as Sierra Pacific's purchases of natural gas are deemed prudent by the PUCN, through its annual prudency review, Sierra Pacific is permitted to recover the cost of natural gas. Sierra Pacific also has the ability, with PUCN approval, to reset quarterly the BTERs, based on the last twelve months fuel costs, and to reset quarterly DEAA.

Employees

As of December 31, 2019, Nevada Power had approximately 1,400 employees, of which approximately 700 were covered by a union contract with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.

As of December 31, 2019, Sierra Pacific had approximately 1,000 employees, of which approximately 500 were covered by a union contract with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.


26


NORTHERN POWERGRID

Northern Powergrid, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of BHE, is a holding company which owns two companies that distribute electricity in Great Britain, Northern Powergrid (Northeast) Limited and Northern Powergrid (Yorkshire) plc. In addition to the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies, Northern Powergrid also owns a meter asset rental business that leases meters to energy suppliers in the United Kingdom and Ireland, an engineering contracting business that provides electrical infrastructure contracting services primarily to third parties and a hydrocarbon exploration and development business that is focused on developing integrated upstream gas projects in Europe and Australia.

The Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies serve 3.9 million end-users and operate in the north-east of England from North Northumberland through Tyne and Wear, County Durham and Yorkshire to North Lincolnshire, an area covering 10,000 square miles. The principal function of the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies is to build, maintain and operate the electricity distribution network through which the end-user receives a supply of electricity.

The Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies receive electricity from the national grid transmission system and from generators that are directly connected to the distribution network and distribute it to end-users' premises using their networks of transformers, switchgear and distribution lines and cables. Substantially all of the end-users in the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies' distribution service areas are directly or indirectly connected to the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies' networks and electricity can only be delivered to these end-users through their distribution systems, thus providing the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies with distribution volumes that are relatively stable from year to year. The Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies charge fees for the use of their distribution systems to the suppliers of electricity.

The suppliers purchase electricity from generators, sell the electricity to end-user customers and use the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies' distribution networks pursuant to an industry standard "Distribution Connection and Use of System Agreement." During 2019, RWE Npower PLC and certain of its affiliates and British Gas Trading Limited represented 17% and 12%, respectively, of the total combined distribution revenue of the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies. Variations in demand from end-users can affect the revenues that are received by the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies in any year, but such variations have no effect on the total revenue that the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies are allowed to recover in a price control period. Under- or over-recoveries against price-controlled revenues are carried forward into prices for future years.

The Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies' combined service territory features a diverse economy with no dominant sector. The mix of rural, agricultural, urban and industrial areas covers a broad customer base ranging from domestic usage through farming and retail to major industry including automotives, chemicals, mining, steelmaking and offshore marine construction. The industry within the area is concentrated around the principal centers of Newcastle, Middlesbrough, Sheffield and Leeds.

The price controlled revenue of the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies is set out in the special conditions of the licenses of those companies. The licenses are enforced by the regulator, GEMA, through the Ofgem and limit increases to allowed revenues (or may require decreases) based upon the rate of inflation, other specified factors and other regulatory action. Changes to the price controls can be made by the regulator, but if a licensee disagrees with a change to its license it can appeal the matter to the United Kingdom's Competition and Markets Authority ("CMA"). It has been the convention in Great Britain for regulators to conduct periodic regulatory reviews before making proposals for any changes to the price controls. The current electricity distribution price control became effective April 1, 2015 and will continue through March 31, 2023.


27


GWhs and percentages of electricity distributed to the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies' end-users and the total number of end-users as of and for the years ended December 31 were as follows:
 2019 2018 2017
Northern Powergrid (Northeast) Limited:           
Residential4,982
 36% 5,125
 36% 5,227
 36%
Commercial(1)
1,644
 12
 1,782
 13
 2,222
 15
Industrial(1)
7,097
 51
 7,134
 50
 6,963
 48
Other156
 1
 198
 1
 214
 1
 13,879
 100% 14,239
 100% 14,626
 100%
            
Northern Powergrid (Yorkshire) plc:           
Residential7,311
 35% 7,509
 36% 7,612
 36%
Commercial(1)
2,391
 12
 2,558
 12
 3,116
 15
Industrial(1)
10,722
 52
 10,716
 51
 10,275
 48
Other236
 1
 268
 1
 290
 1
 20,660
 100% 21,051
 100% 21,293
 100%
            
Total electricity distributed34,539
   35,290
   35,919
  
            
Number of end-users (in thousands):           
Northern Powergrid (Northeast) Limited1,612
   1,603
   1,602
  
Northern Powergrid (Yorkshire) plc2,314
   2,301
   2,301
  
 3,926
   3,904
   3,903
  

(1)The increase in industrial and decrease in commercial is largely due to the Great Britain-wide customer reclassifications which are in progress (as a result of Ofgem approved industry changes), negatively impacting commercial volumes by 100 GWhs in 2018 compared to 2017.

As of December 31, 2019, the combined electricity distribution network of the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies included approximately 17,400 miles of overhead lines, 42,300 miles of underground cables and 770 major substations.

BHE PIPELINE GROUP

Northern Natural Gas

Northern Natural Gas, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of BHE, owns the largest interstate natural gas pipeline system in the United States, as measured by pipeline miles, which reaches from west Texas to Michigan's Upper Peninsula. Northern Natural Gas primarily transports and stores natural gas for utilities, municipalities, gas marketing companies and industrial and commercial users. Northern Natural Gas' pipeline system consists of two commercial segments. Its traditional end-use and distribution market area in the northern part of its system, referred to as the Market Area, includes points in Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, South Dakota, Michigan and Illinois. Its natural gas supply and delivery service area in the southern part of its system, referred to as the Field Area, includes points in Kansas, Texas, Oklahoma and New Mexico. The Market Area and Field Area are separated at a Demarcation Point ("Demarc"). Northern Natural Gas' pipeline system consists of 14,600 miles of natural gas pipelines, including 6,100 miles of mainline transmission pipelines and 8,500 miles of branch and lateral pipelines, with a Market Area design capacity of 6.3 Bcf per day, a Field Area delivery capacity of 1.7 Bcf per day to the Market Area and 1.4 Bcf per day to the West Texas area and over 79 Bcf of firm service and operational storage cycle capacity in five storage facilities. Northern Natural Gas' pipeline system is configured with approximately 2,250 active receipt and delivery points which are integrated with the facilities of LDCs. Many of Northern Natural Gas' LDC customers are part of combined utilities that also use natural gas as a fuel source for electric generation. Northern Natural Gas delivered over 1.4 trillion cubic feet ("Tcf") of natural gas to its customers in 2019.

Northern Natural Gas' transportation rates and most of its storage rates are cost-based. These rates are designed to provide Northern Natural Gas with an opportunity to recover its costs of providing services and earn a reasonable return on its investments. In addition, Northern Natural Gas has fixed rates that are market-based for certain of its firm storage contracts with contract terms that expire in 2028.


28


Northern Natural Gas' operating revenue for the years ended December 31 was as follows (in millions):
 2019 2018 2017
Transportation:        
Market Area$544
64% $518
58% $504
73%
Field Area - deliveries to Demarc106
12
 102
11
 36
5
Field Area - other deliveries95
11
 71
9
 50
8
Total transportation745
87
 691
78
 590
86
Storage65
8
 68
8
 71
10
Total transportation and storage revenue810
95
 759
86
 661
96
Gas, liquids and other sales42
5
 128
14
 28
4
Total operating revenue$852
100% $887
100% $689
100%

Substantially all of Northern Natural Gas' Market Area transportation revenue is generated from reservation charges, with the balance from usage charges. Northern Natural Gas transports natural gas primarily to local distribution markets and end-users in the Market Area. Northern Natural Gas provides service to 80 utilities, including MidAmerican Energy, an affiliate company, which serve numerous residential, commercial and industrial customers. Most of Northern Natural Gas' transportation capacity in the Market Area is committed to customers under firm transportation contracts, where customers pay Northern Natural Gas a monthly reservation charge for the right to transport natural gas through Northern Natural Gas' system. Reservation charges are required to be paid regardless of volumes transported or stored. As of December 31, 2019, approximately 85% of Northern Natural Gas' customers' entitlement in the Market Area have terms beyond 2021 and approximately 55% beyond 2023. As of December 31, 2019, the weighted average remaining contract term for Northern Natural Gas' Market Area firm transportation contracts is over seven years.

Northern Natural Gas' Field Area customers consist primarily of energy marketing companies and midstream companies, which take advantage of the price spread opportunities created between Field Area supply points and Demarc. In addition, there are a growing number of midstream customers that are delivering gas south in the Field Area to the Waha Hub market. The remaining Field Area transportation service is sold to power generators connected to Northern Natural Gas' system in Texas and New Mexico that are contracted on a long-term basis with a weighted average remaining contract term of six years, and various LDCs, energy marketing companies and midstream companies for both connected and off-system markets.

Northern Natural Gas' storage services are provided through the operation of one underground natural gas storage field in Iowa and two underground natural gas storage facilities in Kansas. Additionally, Northern Natural Gas has two LNG storage peaking units, one in Iowa and one in Minnesota, that support its transportation service. The three underground natural gas storage facilities and two LNG storage peaking units have a total firm service and operational storage cycle capacity of over 79 Bcf and over 2.2 Bcf per day of peak delivery capability. These storage facilities provide operational flexibility for the daily balancing of Northern Natural Gas' system and provide services to customers for their winter peaking and year-round load swing requirements. Northern Natural Gas has 65.1 Bcf of firm storage contracts with cost-based and market-based rates. Firm storage contracts with cost-based rates, representing 57.1 Bcf, have an average remaining contract term of six years and are contracted at maximum tariff rates. The remaining firm storage contracts with market-based rates, representing 8.0 Bcf, have an average remaining contract term of eight years.

Except for quantities of natural gas owned and managed for operational and system balancing purposes, Northern Natural Gas does not own the natural gas that is transported through its system. The sale of natural gas for operational and system balancing purposes accounts for the majority of the remaining operating revenue.

During 2019, Northern Natural Gas had two customers that each accounted for greater than 10% of its transportation and storage revenue and its ten largest customers accounted for 61% of its system-wide transportation and storage revenue. Northern Natural Gas has agreements with terms through 2027 and 2034 to retain the majority of its two largest customers' volumes. The loss of any of these significant customers, if not replaced, could have a material adverse effect on Northern Natural Gas.


29


Northern Natural Gas' extensive pipeline system, which is interconnected with many interstate and intrastate pipelines in the national grid system, has access to multiple major supply basins. Direct access is available from producers in the Anadarko, Permian and Hugoton basins, some of which have recently experienced increased production from shale and tight sands formations adjacent to Northern Natural Gas' pipeline. Since 2011, the pipeline has connected 2,395,000 Dths per day of supply access from the Wolfberry shale formation in west Texas and from the Granite Wash tight sands formations in the Texas panhandle and in Oklahoma. Additionally, Northern Natural Gas has interconnections with several interstate pipelines and several intrastate pipelines with receipt, delivery, or bi-directional capabilities. Because of Northern Natural Gas' location and multiple interconnections it is able to access natural gas from other key production areas, such as the Rocky Mountain, Williston, including the Bakken formation, and western Canadian basins. The Rocky Mountain basins are accessed through interconnects with Trailblazer Pipeline Company, Tallgrass Interstate Gas Transmission, LLC, Cheyenne Plains Gas Pipeline Company, LLC, Colorado Interstate Gas Company and Rockies Express Pipeline, LLC ("REX"). The western Canadian basins are accessed through interconnects with Northern Border Pipeline Company ("Northern Border"), Great Lakes Gas Transmission Limited Partnership ("Great Lakes") and Viking Gas Transmission Company ("Viking"). This supply diversity and access to both stable and growing production areas provides significant flexibility to Northern Natural Gas' system and customers.

Northern Natural Gas' system experiences significant seasonal swings in demand and revenue typically with approximately 60% of transportation revenue occurring during the months of November through March. This seasonality provides Northern Natural Gas with opportunities to deliver additional value-added services, such as firm and interruptible storage services. As a result of Northern Natural Gas' geographic location in the middle of the United States and its many interconnections with other pipelines, Northern Natural Gas has the opportunity to augment its steady end user and LDC revenue by capitalizing on opportunities for shippers to reach additional markets, such as Chicago, Illinois, other parts of the Midwest, and Texas, through interconnects.

Kern River

Kern River, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of BHE, owns an interstate natural gas pipeline system that extends from supply areas in the Rocky Mountains to consuming markets in Utah, Nevada and California. Kern River's pipeline system consists of 1,700 miles of natural gas pipelines, including 1,400 miles of mainline section and 300 miles of common facilities, with a design capacity of 2,166,575 Dths, or 2.2 Bcf, per day. Kern River owns the entire mainline section, which extends from the system's point of origination near Opal, Wyoming, through the Central Rocky Mountains to Daggett, California. The mainline section consists of 1,300 miles of 36-inch diameter pipeline and 100 miles of various laterals that connect to the mainline. The common facilities are jointly owned by Kern River and Mojave Pipeline Company ("Mojave") as tenants-in-common. Except for quantities of natural gas owned for operational purposes, Kern River does not own the natural gas that is transported through its system. Kern River's transportation rates are cost-based. The rates are designed to provide Kern River with an opportunity to recover its costs of providing services and earn a reasonable return on its investments.

Kern River's rates are based on a levelized rate design with recovery of 70% of the original investment during the initial long-term contracts ("Period One rates"). After expiration of the initial term, eligible customers have the option to elect service at rates ("Period Two rates") that are lower than Period One rates because they are designed to recover the remaining 30% of the original investment. To the extent that eligible customers do not contract for service at Period Two rates, the volumes are turned back and sold at market rates for varying terms. As of December 31, 2019, initial Period One contracts total 331,921 Dths per day. Period Two contracts total 1,054,029 Dths per day and 606,112 Dths per day of total turned back volume has an average remaining contract term of more than two years. The remaining capacity is sold on a short-term basis at market rates.

As of December 31, 2019, approximately 83% of Kern River's design capacity of 2,166,575 Dths per day is contracted pursuant to long-term firm natural gas transportation service agreements, whereby Kern River receives natural gas on behalf of customers at designated receipt points and transports the natural gas on a firm basis to designated delivery points. In return for this service, each customer pays Kern River a fixed monthly reservation fee based on each customer's maximum daily quantity, which represents nearly 84% of total operating revenue, and a commodity charge based on the actual amount of natural gas transported pursuant to its long-term firm natural gas transportation service agreements and Kern River's tariff.

These long-term firm natural gas transportation service agreements expire between March 2021 and April 2033 and have a weighted-average remaining contract term of over eight years. Kern River's customers include electric and natural gas distribution utilities, major oil and natural gas companies or affiliates of such companies, electric generating companies, energy marketing and trading companies and financial institutions. As of December 31, 2019, 73% of the firm capacity under contract has primary delivery points in California, with the flexibility to access secondary delivery points in Nevada and Utah. Historically, Kern River has provided approximately 22% of California's demand for natural gas.


30


During 2019, Kern River had two customers, including Nevada Power Company, d/b/a NV Energy, that each accounted for greater than 10% of its revenue. The loss of these significant customers, if not replaced, could have a material adverse effect on Kern River.

Competition

The Pipeline Companies compete with other pipelines on the basis of cost, flexibility, reliability of service and overall customer service, with the customer's decision being made primarily on the basis of delivered price, which includes both the natural gas commodity cost and its transportation cost. Natural gas also competes with alternative energy sources, including coal, nuclear energy, wind, geothermal, solar and fuel oil. Legislation and governmental regulations, the weather, the futures market, production costs and other factors beyond the control of the Pipeline Companies influence the price of the natural gas commodity.

The tremendous increase in production from unconventional sources, such as shale gas, has reduced volatility and decreased natural gas prices across North America. This overall reduction in commodity prices has been beneficial as it reduces overall costs for Northern Natural Gas' customers and for their end-use businesses. The dramatic increase in production has also affected the supply patterns and flows. The impact has varied among pipelines according to the location and the number of competitors attached to these new supply sources. For example, the significant increase in production in the Permian area has dramatically increased short-term transportation and revenue for Northern Natural Gas by transporting excess production from the Permian area to Demarc. This increase is expected to subside as additional pipelines are constructed out of the Permian area to alleviate the current short-term constraints.

Electric power generation has been the source of most of the growth in demand for natural gas over the last 10 years, and this trend is expected to continue in the future. The growth of natural gas in this sector is influenced by regulation, new sources of natural gas, competition with other energy sources, primarily coal and renewables, and increased consumption of electricity as a result of economic growth. Short-term market shifts have been driven by relative costs of coal-fueled generation versus natural gas-fueled generation. A long-term market shift away from the use of coal in power generation could be driven by environmental regulations. The future demand for natural gas could be increased by regulations limiting or discouraging coal use. However, natural gas demand could potentially be adversely affected by laws mandating or encouraging renewable power sources that produce fewer GHG emissions than natural gas.

The Pipeline Companies' ability to extend existing customer contracts, remarket expiring contracted capacity or market new capacity is dependent on competitive alternatives, the regulatory environment and the market supply and demand factors at the relevant dates these contracts are eligible to be renewed or extended. The duration of new or renegotiated contracts will be affected by current commodity and transportation prices, competitive conditions and customers' judgments concerning future market trends and volatility.

Subject to regulatory requirements, the Pipeline Companies attempt to recontract or remarket capacity at the maximum rates allowed under their tariffs, although at times the Pipeline Companies discount these rates to remain competitive. The Pipeline Companies' existing contracts mature at various times and in varying amounts of entitlement. The Pipeline Companies manage the recontracting process to mitigate the risk of a significant negative impact on operating revenue.

Historically, the Pipeline Companies have been able to provide competitively priced services because of access to a variety of relatively low cost supply basins, cost control measures and the relatively high level of firm entitlement that is sold on a seasonal and annual basis, which lowers the per unit cost of transportation. To date, the Pipeline Companies have avoided significant pipeline system bypasses.

Northern Natural Gas needs to compete aggressively to serve existing load and add new load. Northern Natural Gas has been successful in competing for a significant amount of the increased demand related to residential and commercial needs and the construction of new power plants and new fertilizer or other industrial plants. The growth related to utilities has historically been driven by population growth and increased commercial and industrial needs. Northern Natural Gas has been generally successful in negotiating increased transportation rates for customers who received discounted service when such contract terms are renegotiated and extended.

Northern Natural Gas' major competitors in the Market Area include ANR Pipeline Company, Northern Border, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC, Great Lakes and Viking. In the Field Area, where the majority of Northern Natural Gas' capacity is used for transportation services provided on a short-term firm basis, Northern Natural Gas competes with a large number of interstate and intrastate pipeline companies.


31


Northern Natural Gas' attractive competitive position relative to other pipelines in the upper Midwest is reinforced each winter as customers expect, and receive, reliable deliveries of natural gas for their critical markets. Northern Natural Gas provides customers access to multiple supply basins that allow customers to obtain reliable supplies at competitive prices, not subject to the natural gas grid dynamics from pipeline competition that would limit customers to a singular supply source. Northern Natural Gas' Field Area has access to diverse Mid-Continent, Permian and Rockies supplies delivered to Market Area customers at Demarc at significantly lower prices than their alternative supply source. The benefits of Northern Natural Gas' system is particularly demonstrated during extreme winter conditions such as the polar vortex of 2013-2014 and severe cold weather that impacted Northern Natural Gas' Market Area in January 2019. During these periods of high market demand, customers have received all of their scheduled deliveries, without interruption, due to Northern Natural Gas' extensive, reticulated pipeline system.

Other than the short-term transportation associated with the Permian business, Northern Natural Gas expects the current level of Field Area contracting to Demarc to continue in the foreseeable future, as Market Area customers presently need to purchase competitively-priced supplies from the Field Area to support their existing and growth demand requirements. However, the revenue received from these Field Area contracts is expected to vary in relationship to the difference, or "spread," in natural gas prices between the MidContinent and Permian Regions and the price of the alternative supplies that are available to Northern Natural Gas' Market Area. This spread affects the value of the Field Area transportation capacity because natural gas from the MidContinent and Permian Regions that is transported through Northern Natural Gas' Field Area competes directly with natural gas delivered directly into the Market Area from Canada and other supply areas, including new shale gas producing areas outside of the Field Area.

Kern River competes with various interstate pipelines in developing expansion projects and entering into long-term agreements to serve market growth in Southern California; Las Vegas, Nevada; and Salt Lake City, Utah. Kern River also competes with various interstate pipelines and their customers to market unutilized capacity under shorter term transactions. Kern River provides its customers with supply diversity through interconnections with pipelines such as Northwest Pipeline LLC, Colorado Interstate Gas Company, Overland Trails Transmission, LLC, Dominion Energy Questar Pipeline LLC and Dominion Energy Questar Overthrust Pipeline LLC; and storage facilities such as Spire Storage West LLC and Clear Creek Storage Company, LLC. These interconnections, in addition to the direct interconnections to natural gas processing facilities in Wyoming and California, allow Kern River to access natural gas reserves in Colorado, northwestern New Mexico, Wyoming, Utah, California and the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin.

Kern River is the only interstate pipeline that presently delivers natural gas directly from the Rocky Mountain gas supply region to end-users in the Southern California market. This enables direct connect customers to avoid paying a "rate stack" (i.e., additional transportation costs attributable to the movement from one or more interstate pipeline systems to an intrastate system within California). Kern River's levelized rate structure and access to upstream pipelines, storage facilities and economic Rocky Mountain gas reserves increases its competitiveness and attractiveness to end-users. Kern River believes it has an advantage relative to other interstate pipelines serving Southern California because its relatively new pipeline can be economically expanded and has required significantly less capital expenditures and ongoing maintenance than other systems to comply with the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002.

BHE TRANSMISSION

BHE Canada

BHE Canada, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of BHE, primarily owns AltaLink, a regulated electric transmission-only utility company headquartered in Alberta, Canada serving approximately 85% of Alberta's population. AltaLink's high voltage transmission lines and related facilities transmit electricity from generating facilities to major load centers, cities and large industrial plants throughout its 87,000 square mile service territory, which covers a diverse geographic area including most major urban centers in central and southern Alberta. AltaLink's transmission facilities, consisting of approximately 8,200 miles of transmission lines and 310 substations as of December 31, 2019, are an integral part of the Alberta Integrated Electric System ("AIES").

The AIES is a network or grid of transmission facilities operating at high voltages ranging from 69 kVs to 500 kVs. The grid delivers electricity from generating units across Alberta, Canada through approximately 16,000 miles of transmission. The AIES is interconnected to British Columbia's transmission system that links Alberta with the North American western interconnected system.

AltaLink is a transmission facility owner within the electricity industry in Alberta and is permitted to charge a tariff rate for the use of its transmission facilities. Such tariff rates are established on a cost-of-service basis, which are designed to allow AltaLink an opportunity to recover its costs of providing services and to earn a reasonable return on its investments. Transmission tariffs are approved by the AUC and are collected from the AESO.

32



The electricity industry in Alberta consists of four principal segments. Generators sell wholesale power into the power pool operated by the AESO and through direct contractual arrangements. Alberta's transmission system or grid is composed of high voltage power lines and related facilities that transmit electricity from generating facilities to distribution networks and directly connected end-users. Distribution facility owners are regulated by the AUC and are responsible for arranging for, or providing, regulated rate and regulated default supply services to convey electricity from transmission systems and distribution-connected generators to end-use customers. Retailers can procure energy through the power pool, through direct contractual arrangements with energy suppliers or ownership of generation facilities and arrange for its distribution to end-use customers.

The AESO mandate is defined in the Electric Utilities Act and its regulations, and requires the AESO to assess both current and future needs of Alberta's interconnected electrical system. In September 2019, the AESO released the 2019 Long-Term Outlook (LTO), which is the AESO's forecast of Alberta's load and generation over the next 20 years, and is used as one input to guide the AESO in planning Alberta's transmission system. The 2019 LTO includes a Reference Case Scenario, which is the AESO's main corporate forecast for long-term load growth and generation development in Alberta, and a set of alternative scenarios that are developed to understand future uncertainties. The Reference Case Scenario forecasts Alberta's electricity demand to grow at an annual rate of 0.9 percent over the next 20 years and a total of approximately 13 gigawatts of new generation capacity to be added for the same period. Other scenarios are developed based on modifying assumptions used in the Reference Case Scenario to reflect higher cogeneration development, alternative renewable policy, higher economic growth, lower economic growth, and a more diversified Alberta economy. The AESO indicates that it will continue monitoring economic, policy and industry development and if a scenario becomes more likely, the AESO may adopt it as its main forecast. The AESO is presently developing the Long-Term Plan which is expected to be released in the first quarter of 2020.

BHE U.S. Transmission

BHE U.S. Transmission, a wholly owned subsidiary of BHE, is engaged in various joint ventures to develop, own and operate transmission assets and is pursuing additional investment opportunities in the United States. Currently, BHE U.S. Transmission has two joint ventures with transmission assets that are operational.

BHE U.S. Transmission indirectly owns a 50% interest in ETT, along with subsidiaries of American Electric Power Company, Inc. ("AEP"). ETT owns and operates electric transmission assets in the ERCOT and, as of December 31, 2019, had total assets of $3.1 billion. ETT's transmission system includes approximately 1,200 miles of transmission lines and 36 substations as of December 31, 2019.

BHE U.S. Transmission also indirectly owns a 25% interest in Prairie Wind Transmission, LLC, a joint venture with AEP and Westar Energy, Inc., to build, own and operate a 108-mile, 345-kV transmission project in Kansas. The project had total assets of $143 million as of December 31, 2019.


33


BHE RENEWABLES

The subsidiaries comprising the BHE Renewables reportable segment own interests in several independent power projects in the United States and one in the Philippines. The following table presents certain information concerning these independent power projects as of December 31, 2019:
        Power   Facility Net
        Purchase   Net Owned
    Energy Year Agreement Power Capacity Capacity
Generating Facility Location Source Installed Expiration 
Purchaser(1)
 
(MWs)(2)
 
(MWs)(2)
WIND:              
Grande Prairie Nebraska Wind 2016 2036 OPPD 400
 400
Jumbo Road Texas Wind 2015 2033 AE 300
 300
Santa Rita Texas Wind 2018 2025-2038 KC, CODTX, MES 300
 300
Walnut Ridge Illinois Wind 2018 2028 USGSA 212
 212
Pinyon Pines I California Wind 2012 2,035 SCE 168
 168
Pinyon Pines II California Wind 2012 2,035 SCE 132
 132
Bishop Hill II Illinois Wind 2012 2,032 Ameren 81
 81
Marshall Kansas Wind 2016 2036 MJMEC, KPP, KMEA & COIMO 72
 72
            1,665
 1,665
SOLAR:              
Topaz California Solar 2013-2014 2039 PG&E 550
 550
Solar Star 1 California Solar 2013-2015 2035 SCE 310
 310
Solar Star 2 California Solar 2013-2015 2035 SCE 276
 276
Agua Caliente Arizona Solar 2012-2013 2039 PG&E 290
 142
Alamo 6 Texas Solar 2017 2042 CPS 110
 110
Community Solar Gardens(6)
 Minnesota Solar 2016-2018 2041-2043 (5) 98
 98
Pearl Texas Solar 2017 2042 CPS 50
 50
            1,684
 1,536
NATURAL GAS:              
Cordova Illinois Natural Gas 2001 NA NA 512
 512
Power Resources Texas Natural Gas 1988 NA NA 212
 212
Saranac New York Natural Gas 1994 NA NA 245
 196
Yuma Arizona Natural Gas 1994 2024 SDG&E 50
 50
            1,019
 970
GEOTHERMAL:              
Imperial Valley Projects California Geothermal 1982-2000 (3) (3) 345
 345
            345
 345
HYDROELECTRIC:              
Casecnan Project(4)
 Philippines Hydroelectric 2001 2021 NIA 150
 128
Wailuku Hawaii Hydroelectric 1993 2023 HELCO 10
 10
            160
 138
               
Total Available Generating Capacity           4,873
 4,654


34


(1)
Arizona Public Service ("APS"); NextEra Energy Marketing, LLC ("NEM"); City of Riverside, CA ("CORCA"); Imperial Irrigation District ("IID"); Sacramento Municipal Utility District ("SMUD"); Salt River Project ("SRP"); San Diego Gas & Electric Company ("SDG&E"); Pacific Gas and Electric Company ("PG&E"), Ameren Illinois Company ("Ameren"), Southern California Edison ("SCE"), the Philippine National Irrigation Administration ("NIA"); Hawaii Electric Light Company, Inc. ("HELCO"); Austin Energy ("AE"); Omaha Public Power District ("OPPD"); Kimberly-Clark Corporation ("KC"); City of Denton, TX ("CODTX"); MidAmerican Energy Services, LLC ("MES"); U.S. General Services Administration ("USGSA"); Missouri Joint Municipal Electric Commission ("MJMEC"); Kansas Power Pool ("KPP"); Kansas Municipal Energy Agency ("KMEA"); City of Independence, MO ("COIMO"); and CPS Energy ("CPS").
(2)
Facility Net Capacity represents the lesser of nominal ratings or any limitations under applicable interconnection, power purchase, or other agreements for intermittent resources and the total net dependable capability available during summer conditions for all other units. An intermittent resource's nominal rating is the manufacturer's contractually specified capability (in MWs) under specified conditions. Net Owned Capacity indicates BHE Renewables' ownership of Facility Net Capacity.
(3)
Approximately 17% of the Company's interests in the Imperial Valley Projects' Contract Capacity are currently sold to Southern California Edison Company under long-term power purchase agreements expiring in 2020 through 2026. Certain long-term power purchase agreement renewals for 252 MWs have been entered into with other parties at fixed prices that expire from 2028 to 2039, of which 202 MWs mature in 2039.
(4)Under the terms of the agreement with the NIA, CalEnergy Philippines will own and operate the Casecnan project for a 20-year cooperation period which ends December 11, 2021, after which ownership and operation of the project will be transferred to the NIA at no cost on an "as-is" basis. NIA also pays CalEnergy Philippines for delivery of water pursuant to the agreement.
(5)The power purchasers are commercial, industrial and not-for-profit organizations.
(6)The community solar gardens project is consolidated in the table above for convenience as it consists of 98 distinct entities that each own an approximately 1-MW solar garden with independent but substantially similar terms and conditions.

Additionally, BHE Renewables has invested $3.5 billion in twenty-one wind projects sponsored by third parties, commonly referred to as tax equity investments.

The percentages of BHE Renewables' operating revenue derived from the following business activities for the years ended December 31 were as follows:
 2019 2018 2017
      
Solar48% 51% 52%
Wind21
 18
 17
Geothermal19
 19
 19
Hydro2
 5
 6
Natural gas10
 7
 6
Total operating revenue100% 100% 100%

HOMESERVICES

HomeServices, a majority-owned subsidiary of BHE, is the largest residential real estate brokerage firm in the United States. In addition to providing traditional residential real estate brokerage services, HomeServices offers other integrated real estate services, including mortgage originations and mortgage banking; title and closing services; property and casualty insurance; home warranties; relocation services; and other home-related services. HomeServices' real estate brokerage business is subject to seasonal fluctuations because more home sale transactions tend to close during the second and third quarters of the year. As a result, HomeServices' operating results and profitability are typically higher in the second and third quarters relative to the remainder of the year. HomeServices' owned brokerages currently operate in over 900 offices in 30 states and the District of Columbia with over 43,000 real estate agents under 47 brand names. The United States residential real estate brokerage business is subject to the general real estate market conditions, is highly competitive and consists of numerous local brokers and agents in each market seeking to represent sellers and buyers in residential real estate transactions.

In October 2012, HomeServices acquired a 66.7% interest in one of the largest residential real estate brokerage franchise networks in the United States, which offers and sells independently owned and operated residential real estate brokerage franchises. In April 2018, HomeServices acquired the remaining 33.3% interest.

HomeServices' franchise network currently includes approximately 380 franchisees primarily in the United States and internationally in over 1,600 brokerage offices with nearly 53,000 real estate agents under two brand names. In exchange for certain fees, HomeServices provides the right to use the Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices or Real Living brand names and other related service marks, as well as providing orientation programs, training and consultation services, advertising programs and other services.

35



OTHER ENERGY BUSINESSES

Effective January 1, 2016, MidAmerican Energy Company transferred its nonregulated energy operations to MidAmerican Energy Services, LLC ("MES"), a subsidiary of BHE. MES is a nonregulated energy business consisting of competitive electricity and natural gas retail sales. MES' electric operations predominantly include sales to retail customers in Illinois, Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania, Maryland and other states that allow customers to choose their energy supplier. MES' natural gas operations predominantly include sales to retail customers in Iowa and Illinois. Electricity and natural gas are purchased from producers and third party energy marketing companies and sold directly to commercial, industrial and governmental end-users. MES does not own electricity or natural gas production assets but hedges its contracted sales obligations either with physical supply arrangements or financial products. As of December 31, 2019, MES' contracts in place for the sale of electricity totaled 18,571 GWhs with an average term of 2.4 years and for the sale of natural gas totaled 25,717,425 Dths with an average term of 1.3 years. In addition, MES manages natural gas supplies for a number of smaller commercial end-users, which includes the sale of natural gas to these customers to meet their supply requirements. Refer to Item 7A in this Form 10-K for a discussion of commodity price risk and derivative contracts.

GENERAL REGULATION

BHE's regulated subsidiaries and certain affiliates are subject to comprehensive governmental regulation, which significantly influences their operating environment, prices charged to customers, capital structure, costs and, ultimately, their ability to recover costs and earn a reasonable return on invested capital. In addition to the discussion contained herein regarding general regulation, refer to "Regulatory Matters" in Item 1 of this Form 10-K for further discussion regarding certain regulatory matters.

Domestic Regulated Public Utility Subsidiaries

The Utilities are subject to comprehensive regulation by various state, federal and local agencies. The more significant aspects of this regulatory framework are described below.

State Regulation

Historically, state regulatory commissions have established retail electric and natural gas rates on a cost-of-service basis, which are designed to allow a utility the opportunity to recover what each state regulatory commission deems to be the utility's reasonable costs of providing services, including a fair opportunity to earn a reasonable return on its investments based on its cost of debt and equity. In addition to return on investment, a utility's cost of service generally reflects a representative level of prudent expenses, including cost of sales, operating expense, depreciation and amortization and income and other tax expense, reduced by wholesale electricity and other revenue. The allowed operating expenses are typically based on actual historical costs adjusted for known and measurable or forecasted changes. State regulatory commissions may adjust cost of service for various reasons, including pursuant to a review of: (a) the utility's revenue and expenses during a defined test period, (b) the utility's level of investment and (c) changes in income tax laws. State regulatory commissions typically have the authority to review and change rates on their own initiative; however, they may also initiate reviews at the request of a utility, utility customers or organizations representing groups of customers. In certain jurisdictions, the utility and such parties, however, may agree with one another not to request a review of or changes to rates for a specified period of time.

The retail electric rates of the Utilities are generally based on the cost of providing traditional bundled services, including generation, transmission and distribution services. The Utilities have established energy cost adjustment mechanisms and other cost recovery mechanisms in certain states, which help mitigate their exposure to changes in costs from those assumed in establishing base rates.


36


With certain limited exceptions, the Utilities have an exclusive right to serve retail customers within their service territories and, in turn, have an obligation to provide service to those customers. In some jurisdictions, certain classes of customers may choose to purchase all or a portion of their energy from alternative energy suppliers, and in some jurisdictions retail customers can generate all or a portion of their own energy. Under Oregon law, PacifiCorp has the exclusive right and obligation to provide electricity distribution services to all residential and nonresidential customers within its allocated service territory; however, nonresidential customers have the right to choose an alternative provider of energy supply. The impact of this right on PacifiCorp's consolidated financial results has not been material. In Washington, state law does not provide for exclusive service territory allocation. PacifiCorp's service territory in Washington is surrounded by other public utilities with whom PacifiCorp has from time to time entered into service area agreements under the jurisdiction of the WUTC. Under California law, PacifiCorp has the exclusive right and obligation to provide electricity distribution services to all residential and nonresidential customers within its allocated service territory; however, cities, counties and certain other public agencies have the right to choose to generate energy supply or elect an alternative provider of energy supply through the formation of a Community Choice Aggregator ("CCA"). To date, no CCA activity has occurred in PacifiCorp's California service territory. If a CCA is formed, PacifiCorp would continue to provide CCA customers transmission, distribution, metering and billing services and the CCA would provide generation supply. In addition, PacifiCorp would likely be able to collect costs from CCA customers for the generation-related costs that PacifiCorp incurred while they were customers of PacifiCorp. PacifiCorp would remain the electricity provider of last resort for these customers. In Illinois, state law has established a competitive environment so that all Illinois customers are free to choose their retail service supplier. For customers that choose an alternative retail energy supplier, MidAmerican Energy continues to have an ongoing obligation to deliver the supplier's energy to the retail customer. MidAmerican Energy bills the retail customer for such delivery services. MidAmerican Energy also has an obligation to serve customers at regulated cost-based rates and has a continuing obligation to serve customers who have not selected a competitive electricity provider. The impact of this right on MidAmerican Energy's financial results has not been material. In Nevada, Chapter 704B of the Nevada Revised Statutes allows retail electric customers with an average annual load of one MW or more to file a letter of intent and application with the PUCN to acquire electric energy and ancillary services from another energy supplier. The law requires customers wishing to choose a new supplier to receive the approval of the PUCN to meet public interest standards. In particular, departing customers must secure new energy resources that are not under contract to the Nevada Utilities, the departure must not burden the Nevada Utilities with increased costs or cause any remaining customers to pay increased costs and the departing customers must pay their portion of any deferred energy balances, all as determined by the PUCN. Also, the Utilities and the state regulatory commissions are individually evaluating how best to integrate private generation resources into their service and rate design, including considering such factors as maintaining high levels of customer safety and service reliability, minimizing adverse cost impacts and fairly allocating costs among all customers.

In Nevada, large natural gas customers using 12,000 therms per month with fuel switching capability are allowed to participate in the incentive natural gas rate tariff. Once a service agreement has been executed, a customer can compare natural gas prices under this tariff to alternative energy sources and choose its source of natural gas. In addition, natural gas customers using greater than 1,000 therms per day have the ability to secure their own natural gas supplies under the gas transportation tariff.

PacifiCorp

Rate Filings

Under Utah law, the UPSC must issue a written order within 240 days of a public utility’s application for a general rate change, absent an order, the proposed rates go into effect as filed and are not subject to refund; the UPSC may allow interim rates to take effect within 45 days of an application, subject to refund or surcharge, if an adequate prima facie showing is established in hearing that the interim rate change is justified.

The OPUC has the authority to suspend proposed new rates for a period not to exceed more than six months, with an additional three-month extension, beyond the 30-day time period when the new rates would otherwise go into effect. Absent suspension or other action from the OPUC, new rates automatically go into effect 30 days from filing by the utility. Upon suspension by the OPUC, the OPUC is authorized to allow collection of an interim rate, subject to refund, during the pendency of the OPUC’s review of the rate request.

In Wyoming, the WPSC can allow interim rates to go into effect 30 days after the initial application but may require a bond to secure a refund for the amount. The WPSC may suspend the rates for final approval for a period not to exceed 10 months.

The WUTC has the authority to suspend proposed new rates, subject to hearing, for a period not to exceed 10 months beyond the 30-day time period when the new rate would otherwise go into effect.

Under Idaho law, the IPUC can suspend a filing for an initial period not to exceed five months, and an additional extension of 60 days with a showing of good cause.

37



The CPUC has the authority to suspend proposed new rates, subject to hearing, for a period not to exceed 18 months. The CPUC may extend the suspension period on a case-by-case period.

Adjustment Mechanisms

In addition to recovery through base rates, PacifiCorp also achieves recovery of certain costs through various adjustment mechanisms as summarized below.
State Regulator Base Rate Test Period Adjustment Mechanism
UPSC 
Forecasted or historical with known and measurable changes(1)
 EBA under which 100% of the difference between base net power costs set during a general rate case and actual net power costs is deferred and reflected in future rates. Wheeling revenue is also included in the mechanism.
     
    Balancing account to provide for 100% recovery or refund of the difference between the level of REC revenues included in base rates and actual REC revenues after adjusting for a REC incentive authorized by the UPSC.
     
    Recovery mechanism for single capital investments that in total exceed 1% of existing rate base when a general rate case has occurred within the preceding 18 months.
     
OPUC Forecasted PCAM under which 90% of the difference between forecasted net variable power costs and PTCs established under the annual TAM and actual net variable power costs and PTCs is deferred and reflected in future rates. The difference between the forecasted and actual net variable power costs and PTCs must fall outside of an established asymmetrical deadband, with a negative annual power cost variance deadband of $15 million, and a positive annual power cost variance deadband of $30 million and is subject to an earnings test of +/- 1% on PacifiCorp's allowed return on equity.
     
    Annual TAM based on forecasted net variable power costs and PTCs.
     
    RAC to recover the revenue requirement of new renewable resources and associated transmission costs that are not reflected in general rates.
     
    Balancing account for proceeds from the sale of RECs.
     
WPSC 
Forecasted or historical with known and measurable changes(1)
 ECAM under which 70% of the difference between base net power costs set during a general rate case and actual net power costs is deferred and reflected in future rates. Chemical costs and start-up fuel costs are also included in the mechanism.
     
    REC and sulfur dioxide revenue adjustment mechanism to provide for recovery or refund of 100% of any difference between actual REC and sulfur dioxide revenues and the level in rates.
     
WUTC Historical with known and measurable changes PCAM under which the difference between base net power costs set during a general rate case and actual net power costs is deferred and reflected in future rates after applying a $4 million deadband for positive or negative net power cost variances. For net power cost variances between $4 million and $10 million, amounts to be recovered from customers are allocated 50/50 and amounts to be credited to customers are allocated 75/25 (customers/PacifiCorp). Positive or negative net power cost variances in excess of $10 million are allocated 90/10 (customers/PacifiCorp).
     
    Deferral mechanism of costs for up to 24 months of new base load generation resources and eligible renewable resources and related transmission that qualify under the state's emissions performance standard and are not reflected in base rates.
     
    REC revenue tracking mechanism to provide credit of 100% of REC revenues to customers.
     
    
Decoupling mechanism under which the difference between actual annual revenues and authorized revenues per customer is deferred and reflected in future rates, subject to an earnings test. Under the earnings test, 50% of any excess earnings over PacifiCorp's authorized return on equity is returned to customers in addition to any surcharge or surcredit related to the revenue variance. The earnings test is asymmetrical and adjustments are not made when PacifiCorp earns at or below authorized returns on equity. To trigger a rate adjustment, the deferral balance must exceed plus or minus 2.5% of the authorized revenue at the end of each deferral period by rate class. Rate adjustments must not exceed a surcharge of 5% of the actual normalized revenue by class.

     
IPUC Historical with known and measurable changes ECAM under which 90% of the difference between base net power costs set during a general rate case and actual net power costs is deferred and reflected in future rates. Also provides for recovery or refund of 100% of the difference between the level of REC revenues included in base rates and actual REC revenues and differences in actual PTCs compared to the amount in base rates.
     

38


CPUC Forecasted PTAM for major capital additions that allows for rate adjustments outside of the context of a traditional general rate case for the revenue requirement associated with capital additions exceeding $50 million on a total-company basis. Filed as eligible capital additions are placed into service.
     
    ECAC that allows for an annual update to actual and forecasted net power costs.
     
    PTAM for attrition, a mechanism that allows for an annual adjustment to costs other than net power costs.
     
    
CEMA for catastrophic events, allows for deferral and cost recovery of reasonable costs incurred as the result of catastrophic events, which are events for which a state or federal agency has declared a state of emergency.


(1)PacifiCorp has relied on both historical test periods with known and measurable adjustments, as well as forecasted test periods.

MidAmerican Energy

Rate Filings

Under Iowa law, there are two options for temporary collection of higher rates following the filing of a request for a base rate increase. Collection can begin, subject to refund, either (1) within 10 days of filing, without IUB review, or (2) 90 days after filing, with approval by the IUB, depending upon the ratemaking principles and precedents utilized. In either case, if the IUB has not issued a final order within ten months after the filing date, the temporary rates become final and any difference between the requested rate increase and the temporary rates may then be collected subject to refund until receipt of a final order. Under Illinois law, new base rates may become effective 45 days after the filing of a request with the ICC, or earlier with ICC approval. The ICC has authority to suspend the proposed new rates, subject to hearing, for a period not to exceed approximately eleven months after filing. South Dakota law authorizes the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission to suspend new base rates for up to six months during the pendency of rate proceedings; however, a utility may implement all or a portion of the proposed new rates six months after the filing of a request for a rate increase subject to refund pending a final order in the proceeding.

Iowa law also permits rate-regulated utilities to seek ratemaking principles with the IUB prior to the construction of certain types of new generating facilities. Pursuant to this law, MidAmerican Energy has applied for and obtained IUB ratemaking principles orders for a 484-MW (MidAmerican Energy's share) coal-fueled generating facility, a 495-MW combined cycle natural gas-fueled generating facility and 6,639 MWs (nominal ratings) of wind-powered generating facilities, including 421 MWs (nominal ratings) under construction, as of December 31, 2019. These ratemaking principles established cost caps for the projects, below which such costs are deemed prudent by the IUB, and authorized a fixed rate of return on equity for the respective generating facilities over the regulatory life of the facilities in any future Iowa rate proceeding. As of December 31, 2019, the generating facilities in service totaled $8.1 billion, or 44%, of MidAmerican Energy's regulated property, plant and equipment, net and were subject to these ratemaking principles at a weighted average return on equity of 11.5% with a weighted average remaining life of 33 years.

Ratemaking principles for several wind-powered generation projects have established mechanisms in Iowa where electric rate base may be reduced. The current revenue sharing mechanism originates from Wind XI and Wind XII ratemaking principles proceedings and reduces rate base for Iowa electric returns on equity exceeding an established benchmark. For 2018, sharing was triggered by MidAmerican Energy's actual equity return being above a threshold calculated annually in accordance with the IUB’s 2016 Wind XI order. The threshold, not to exceed 11%, was the weighted average equity return of rate base with returns authorized via ratemaking principles proceedings and all other rate base. For all other rate base, the return is based on interest rates on 30-year A-rated utility bond yields plus 400 basis points, with a minimum return of 9.5%. In 2018 pursuant to this mechanism, MidAmerican Energy shared with customers 100% of the revenue in excess of the trigger. In December 2018, the IUB issued an order approving ratemaking principles related to MidAmerican Energy's Wind XII project. The ratemaking principles continued the revenue sharing mechanism for 2019 and beyond, maintaining the return on equity threshold for sharing and reducing the customer sharing percentage from 100% to 90%. A second mechanism, the retail customer benefit mechanism, reduces electric rate base for the value of higher cost retail energy displaced by covered wind-powered production and applies to the wind-powered generating facilities placed in-service in 2016 under the Wind X project and facilities to be constructed under the Wind XII project approved by the IUB in 2018.


39


Adjustment Mechanisms

Under its current Iowa, Illinois and South Dakota electric tariffs, MidAmerican Energy is allowed to recover fluctuations in electric energy costs for its retail electric sales through fuel, or energy, cost adjustment mechanisms. The Iowa mechanism also includes PTCs associated with wind-powered generating facilities placed in-service prior to 2013, except for PTCs earned by repowered facilities. Eligibility for PTCs associated with MidAmerican Energy's earliest projects began expiring in 2014. Facilities currently earning PTCs that benefit customers through the Iowa energy adjustment clause totaled 1,000 MWs (nominal ratings) as of December 31, 2019, with the eligibility of those facilities to earn PTCs expiring by the end of 2022. Additionally, MidAmerican Energy has transmission adjustment clauses to recover certain transmission charges related to retail customers in all jurisdictions. The transmission adjustment mechanisms recover costs billed by the MISO for regional transmission service. The Illinois adjustment mechanism additionally recovers MidAmerican Energy's entire transmission revenue requirement attributable to Illinois. The adjustment mechanisms reduce the regulatory lag for the recovery of energy and transmission costs related to retail electric customers in these jurisdictions and accomplish, with limited timing differences, a pass-through of the related costs to these customers. Recoveries through these adjustment mechanisms are reflected in operating revenue, and the related costs are reflected in cost of fuel and energy, operations and maintenance expense or income tax benefit, as applicable.

Of the wind-powered generating facilities placed in-service as of December 31, 2019, 3,933 MWs (nominal ratings) have not been included in the determination of MidAmerican Energy's Iowa retail electric base rates. In accordance with the related ratemaking principles, until such time as these generation assets are reflected in base rates and ceasing thereafter, MidAmerican Energy will continue to reduce its revenue from Iowa energy adjustment clause recoveries by $12 million each calendar year.

MidAmerican Energy's cost of natural gas purchased for resale is collected for each jurisdiction through a uniform PGA, which is updated monthly to reflect changes in actual costs. Subject to prudence reviews, the PGA accomplishes a pass-through of MidAmerican Energy's cost of natural gas purchased for resale to its customers and, accordingly, has no direct effect on net income.

MidAmerican Energy's electric and natural gas energy efficiency program costs are collected through bill riders that are adjusted annually based on actual and expected costs in accordance with the energy efficiency plans filed with and approved by the respective state regulatory commission. As such, the energy efficiency program costs, which are reflected in operations and maintenance expense, and related recoveries, which are reflected in operating revenue, have no direct impact on net income.

MidAmerican Energy has income tax rider mechanisms in Iowa and Illinois that were established in response to 2017 Tax Reform, which enacted significant changes to the Internal Revenue Code, including, among other things, a reduction in the United States federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%. South Dakota implemented changes to base rates in response to 2017 Tax Reform. As a result of 2017 Tax Reform, MidAmerican Energy re-measured its accumulated deferred income tax balances at the 21% rate and increased regulatory liabilities pursuant to the approved mechanisms. In December 2018, the IUB approved in final form a tax expense revision mechanism that reduces customer electric rates for the impact of the lower income tax rate on current operations, as calculated annually, and defers the amortization of excess accumulated deferred income taxes created by their re-measurement at the 21% income tax rate to a regulatory liability, the disposition of which will be determined in MidAmerican Energy's next rate case. In 2018, Iowa Senate File 2417 was signed into law, which, among other items, reduces the state of Iowa corporate tax rate from 12% to 9.8% effective in 2021. The impacts of Iowa Senate File 2417 will be included in the Iowa tax expense revision mechanism.

NV Energy (Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific)

Rate Filings

Nevada statutes require the Nevada Utilities to file electric general rate cases at least once every three years with the PUCN. Sierra Pacific may also file natural gas general rate cases with the PUCN. The Nevada Utilities are also subject to a two-part fuel and purchased power adjustment mechanism. The Nevada Utilities make quarterly filings to reset the BTERs, based on the last 12 months of fuel and purchased power costs. The difference between actual fuel and purchased power costs and the revenue collected in the BTERs is deferred into a balancing account. The DEAA rate clears amounts deferred into the balancing account. Nevada regulations allow an electric or natural gas utility that adjusts its BTERs on a quarterly basis to request PUCN approval to make quarterly changes to its DEAA rate if the request is in the public interest. During required annual DEAA proceedings, the prudence of fuel and purchased power costs is reviewed, and if any costs are disallowed on such grounds, the disallowances will be incorporated into the next quarterly BTERs change. Also, on an annual basis, the Nevada Utilities (a) seek a determination that energy efficiency program expenditures were reasonable, (b) request that the PUCN reset base and amortization EEPR, and (c) request that the PUCN reset base and amortization EEIR.


40


EEPR and EEIR

EEPR was established to allow the Nevada Utilities to recover the costs of implementing energy efficiency programs and EEIR was established to offset the negative impacts on revenue associated with the successful implementation of energy efficiency programs. These rates change once a year in the utility's annual DEAA application based on energy efficiency program budgets prepared by the Nevada Utilities and approved by the PUCN in the integrated resource plan proceedings. When the Nevada Utilities' regulatory earned rate of return for a calendar year exceeds the regulatory rate of return used to set base tariff general rates, they are obligated to refund energy efficiency implementation revenue previously collected for that year.

Net Metering

Nevada enacted Assembly Bill 405 ("AB 405") on June 15, 2017. The legislation, among other things, established net metering crediting rates for private generation customers with installed net metering systems less than 25 kilowatts. Under AB 405, private generation customers will be compensated at 95% of the rate the customer would have paid for a kilowatt-hour of electricity supplied by the Nevada Utilities for the first 80 MWs of cumulative installed capacity of all net metering systems in Nevada, 88% of the rate for the next 80 MWs, 81% of the rate for the next 80 MWs and 75% of the rate for any additional private generation capacity. As of December 31, 2019, the cumulative installed and applied-for capacity of net metering systems under AB 405 in Nevada was 206 MWs.

Natural Disaster Mitigation Measures

Senate Bill 329 ("SB 329"), Natural Disaster Mitigation Measures, was signed into law on May 22, 2019. The legislation requires the Nevada Utilities to submit a natural disaster protection plan to the PUCN. The PUCN adopted natural disaster protection plan regulations on January 29, 2020, that require the Nevada Utilities to file their natural disaster protection plan for approval on or before March 1 of every third year, with the first filing due on March 1, 2020. The regulations also require annual updates to be filed on or before September 1 of the second and third years of the plan. The plan must include procedures, protocols and other certain information as it relates to the efforts of the Nevada Utilities to prevent or respond to a fire or other natural disaster. The expenditures incurred by the Nevada Utilities in developing and implementing the natural disaster protection plan are required to be held in a regulatory asset account, with the Nevada Utilities filing an application for recovery on or before March 1 of each year. The Nevada Utilities are required to submit their initial natural disaster protection plan to the PUCN on or before March 1, 2020 and file their first application seeking recovery of 2019 expenditures on March 1, 2020.            

Federal Regulation

The FERC is an independent agency with broad authority to implement provisions of the Federal Power Act, the Natural Gas Act ("NGA"), the Energy Policy Act of 2005 ("Energy Policy Act") and other federal statutes. The FERC regulates rates for wholesale sales of electricity; transmission of electricity, including pricing and regional planning for the expansion of transmission systems; electric system reliability; utility holding companies; accounting and records retention; securities issuances; construction and operation of hydroelectric facilities; and other matters. The FERC also has the enforcement authority to assess civil penalties of up to $1.3 million per day per violation of rules, regulations and orders issued under the Federal Power Act. The Utilities have implemented programs and procedures that facilitate and monitor compliance with the FERC's regulations described below. MidAmerican Energy is also subject to regulation by the NRC pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended ("Atomic Energy Act"), with respect to its ownership interest in the Quad Cities Station.

Wholesale Electricity and Capacity

The FERC regulates the Utilities' rates charged to wholesale customers for electricity and transmission capacity and related services. Much of the Utilities' wholesale electricity sales and purchases occur under market-based pricing allowed by the FERC and are therefore subject to market volatility. The Utilities are precluded from selling at market-based rates in the PacifiCorp-East, PacifiCorp-West, Nevada Utilities, Idaho Power Company and NorthWestern Energy balancing authority areas. Wholesale electricity sales in those specific balancing authority areas are permitted at cost-based rates. PacifiCorp and the Nevada Utilities have been granted the authority to bid into the California EIM at market-based rates.


41


The Utilities' authority to sell electricity in wholesale electricity markets at market-based rates is subject to triennial reviews conducted by the FERC. Accordingly, the Utilities are required to submit triennial filings to the FERC that demonstrate a lack of market power over sales of wholesale electricity and electric generation capacity in their respective market areas. PacifiCorp, the Nevada Utilities and certain affiliates, representing the BHE Northwest Companies, file together for market power study purposes. The BHE Northwest Companies' most recent triennial filing was made in June 2019 and is under review by the FERC. MidAmerican Energy and certain affiliates file together for market power study purposes of the FERC-defined Northeast Region. The most recent triennial filing for the Northeast Region was made in June 2017 and an order accepting it was issued in January 2018. MidAmerican Energy and certain affiliates file together for market power study purposes of the FERC-defined Central Region. The most recent triennial filing for the Central Region was made in December 2017 and an order accepting it was issued in November 2018. Under the FERC's market-based rules, the Utilities must also file with the FERC a notice of change in status when there is a change in the conditions that the FERC relied upon in granting market-based rate authority.

Transmission

PacifiCorp's and the Nevada Utilities' wholesale transmission services are regulated by the FERC under cost-based regulation subject to PacifiCorp's and the Nevada Utilities' OATT, respectively. These services are offered on a non-discriminatory basis, which means that all potential customers are provided an equal opportunity to access the transmission system. PacifiCorp's and the Nevada Utilities' transmission business is managed and operated independently from its wholesale marketing business in accordance with the FERC's Standards of Conduct. PacifiCorp and the Nevada Utilities have made several required compliance filings in accordance with these rules.

In December 2011, PacifiCorp adopted a cost-based formula rate under its OATT for its transmission services. Cost-based formula rates are intended to be an effective means of recovering PacifiCorp's investments and associated costs of its transmission system without the need to file rate cases with the FERC, although the formula rate results are subject to discovery and challenges by the FERC and intervenors. A significant portion of these services are provided to PacifiCorp's energy supply management function.

MidAmerican Energy participates in the MISO as a transmission-owning member. Accordingly, the MISO is the transmission provider under its FERC-approved OATT. While the MISO is responsible for directing the operation of MidAmerican Energy's transmission system, MidAmerican Energy retains ownership of its transmission assets and, therefore, is subject to the FERC's reliability standards discussed below. MidAmerican Energy's transmission business is managed and operated independently from its wholesale marketing business in accordance with the FERC Standards of Conduct.

MidAmerican Energy constructed and owns four Multi-Value Projects ("MVPs") located in Iowa and Illinois that added approximately 250 miles of 345-kV transmission line to MidAmerican Energy's transmission system since 2012. The MISO OATT allows for broad cost allocation for MidAmerican Energy's MVPs, including similar MVPs of other MISO participants. Accordingly, a significant portion of the revenue requirement associated with MidAmerican Energy's MVP investments is shared with other MISO participants based on the MISO's cost allocation methodology, and a portion of the revenue requirement of the other participants' MVPs is allocated to MidAmerican Energy. The transmission assets and financial results of MidAmerican Energy's MVPs are excluded from the determination of its retail electric rates.

The FERC has established an extensive number of mandatory reliability standards developed by the NERC and the WECC, including planning and operations, critical infrastructure protection and regional standards. Compliance, enforcement and monitoring oversight of these standards is carried out by the FERC; the NERC; and the WECC for PacifiCorp, Nevada Power, and Sierra Pacific; and the Midwest Reliability Organization for MidAmerican Energy.

Hydroelectric

The FERC licenses and regulates the operation of hydroelectric systems, including license compliance and dam safety programs. Most of PacifiCorp's hydroelectric generating facilities are licensed by the FERC as major systems under the Federal Power Act, and certain of these systems are licensed under the Oregon Hydroelectric Act. Under the Federal Power Act, 18 developments associated with PacifiCorp's hydroelectric generating facilities licensed with the FERC are classified as "high hazard potential," meaning it is probable in the event of a dam failure that loss of human life in the downstream population could occur. The FERC provides guidelines utilized by PacifiCorp in development of public safety programs consisting of a dam safety program and emergency action plans.

PacifiCorp's Klamath River hydroelectric system is the only significant hydroelectric system for which PacifiCorp has a pending relicensing process with the FERC. Refer to Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of Berkshire Hathaway Energy in Item 8 of this Form 10-K and Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of PacifiCorp in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for an update regarding hydroelectric relicensing for PacifiCorp's Klamath River hydroelectric system.

42



Nuclear Regulatory Commission

General

MidAmerican Energy is subject to the jurisdiction of the NRC with respect to its license and 25% ownership interest in Quad Cities Station. Exelon Generation, the operator and 75% owner of Quad Cities Station, is under contract with MidAmerican Energy to secure and keep in effect all necessary NRC licenses and authorizations.

The NRC regulates the granting of permits and licenses for the construction and operation of nuclear generating stations and regularly inspects such stations for compliance with applicable laws, regulations and license terms. Current licenses for Quad Cities Station provide for operation until December 14, 2032. The NRC review and regulatory process covers, among other things, operations, maintenance and environmental and radiological aspects of such stations. The NRC may modify, suspend or revoke licenses and impose civil penalties for failure to comply with the Atomic Energy Act, the regulations under such Act or the terms of such licenses.

Federal regulations provide that any nuclear operating facility may be required to cease operation if the NRC determines there are deficiencies in state, local or utility emergency preparedness plans relating to such facility, and the deficiencies are not corrected. Exelon Generation has advised MidAmerican Energy that an emergency preparedness plan for Quad Cities Station has been approved by the NRC. Exelon Generation has also advised MidAmerican Energy that state and local plans relating to Quad Cities Station have been approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The NRC also regulates the decommissioning of nuclear-powered generating facilities, including the planning and funding for the eventual decommissioning of the facilities. In accordance with these regulations, MidAmerican Energy submits a biennial report to the NRC providing reasonable assurance that funds will be available to pay its share of the costs of decommissioning Quad Cities Station. MidAmerican Energy has established a trust for the investment of funds collected for nuclear decommissioning of Quad Cities Station.

Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 ("NWPA"), the United States Department of Energy ("DOE") is responsible for the selection and development of repositories for, and the permanent disposal of, spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive wastes. Exelon Generation, as required by the NWPA, signed a contract with the DOE under which the DOE was to receive spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste for disposal beginning not later than January 1998. The DOE did not begin receiving spent nuclear fuel on the scheduled date and remains unable to receive such fuel and waste. The costs to be incurred by the DOE for disposal activities were previously being financed by fees charged to owners and generators of the waste. In accordance with a 2013 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ("D.C. Circuit"), the DOE, in May 2014, provided notice that, effective May 16, 2014, the spent nuclear fuel disposal fee would be zero. In 2004, Exelon Generation, reached a settlement with the DOE concerning the DOE's failure to begin accepting spent nuclear fuel in 1998. As a result, Quad Cities Station has been billing the DOE, and the DOE is obligated to reimburse the station for all station costs incurred due to the DOE's delay. Exelon Generation has constructed an interim spent fuel storage installation ("ISFSI") at Quad Cities Station consisting of two pads to store spent nuclear fuel in dry casks in order to free space in the storage pool. The first dry cask was placed in-service in 2005. The first pad at the ISFSI is expected to be full and the second pad placed into operation during 2020. The first and second pads at the ISFSI are expected to facilitate storage of casks to support operations at Quad Cities Station through the end of its operating licenses.    
    
Nuclear Insurance

MidAmerican Energy maintains financial protection against catastrophic loss associated with its interest in Quad Cities Station through a combination of insurance purchased by Exelon Generation, insurance purchased directly by MidAmerican Energy, and the mandatory industry-wide loss funding mechanism afforded under the Price-Anderson Amendments Act of 1988 ("Price-Anderson"), which was amended and extended by the Energy Policy Act. The general types of coverage maintained are: nuclear liability, property damage or loss and nuclear worker liability, as discussed below.

Exelon Generation purchases private market nuclear liability insurance for Quad Cities Station in the maximum available amount of $450 million, which includes coverage for MidAmerican Energy's ownership. In accordance with Price-Anderson, excess liability protection above that amount is provided by a mandatory industry-wide Secondary Financial Protection program under which the licensees of nuclear generating facilities could be assessed for liability incurred due to a serious nuclear incident at any commercial nuclear reactor in the United States. Currently, MidAmerican Energy's aggregate maximum potential share of an assessment for Quad Cities Station is approximately $69 million per incident, payable in installments not to exceed $10 million annually.

43



The insurance for nuclear property damage losses covers property damage, stabilization and decontamination of the facility, disposal of the decontaminated material and premature decommissioning arising out of a covered loss. For Quad Cities Station, Exelon Generation purchases primary and excess property insurance protection for the combined interests in Quad Cities Station, with coverage limits for nuclear damage losses up to $1.5 billion. MidAmerican Energy also directly purchases extra expense coverage for its share of replacement power and other extra expenses in the event of a covered accidental outage at Quad Cities Station. The property and related coverages purchased directly by MidAmerican Energy and by Exelon Generation, which includes the interests of MidAmerican Energy, are underwritten by an industry mutual insurance company and contain provisions for retrospective premium assessments to be called upon based on the industry mutual board of directors' discretion for adverse loss experience. Currently, the maximum retrospective amounts that could be assessed against MidAmerican Energy from industry mutual policies for its obligations associated with Quad Cities Station total $9 million.

The master nuclear worker liability coverage, which is purchased by Exelon Generation for Quad Cities Station, is an industry-wide guaranteed-cost policy with an aggregate limit of $450 million for the nuclear industry as a whole, which is in effect to cover tort claims of workers in nuclear-related industries.

United States Mine Safety

PacifiCorp's mining operations are regulated by the Federal Mine Safety and Health Administration, which administers federal mine safety and health laws and regulations, and state regulatory agencies. The Federal Mine Safety and Health Administration has the statutory authority to institute a civil action for relief, including a temporary or permanent injunction, restraining order or other appropriate order against a mine operator who fails to pay penalties or fines for violations of federal mine safety standards. Federal law requires PacifiCorp to have a written emergency response plan specific to each underground mine it operates, which is reviewed by the Federal Mine Safety and Health Administration every six months, and to have at least two mine rescue teams located within one hour of each mine. Information regarding PacifiCorp's mine safety violations and other legal matters disclosed in accordance with Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Reform Act is included in Exhibit 95 to this Form 10-K.

Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline Subsidiaries

The Pipeline Companies are regulated by the FERC, pursuant to the NGA and the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978. Under this authority, the FERC regulates, among other items, (a) rates, charges, terms and conditions of service and (b) the construction and operation of interstate pipelines, storage and related facilities, including the extension, expansion or abandonment of such facilities. The Pipeline Companies hold certificates of public convenience and necessity issued by the FERC, which authorize them to construct, operate and maintain their pipeline and related facilities and services.

FERC regulations and the Pipeline Companies' tariffs allow each of the Pipeline Companies to charge approved rates for the services set forth in their respective tariff. Generally, these rates are a function of the cost of providing services to their customers, including prudently incurred operations and maintenance expenses, taxes, depreciation and amortization and a reasonable return on their invested capital. Both Northern Natural Gas' and Kern River's tariff rates have been developed under a rate design methodology whereby substantially all of their fixed costs, including a return on invested capital and income taxes, are collected through reservation charges, which are paid by firm transportation and storage customers regardless of volumes shipped. Commodity charges, which are paid only with respect to volumes actually shipped, are designed to recover the remaining, primarily variable, costs. Kern River's reservation rates have historically been approved using a "levelized" cost-of-service methodology so that the rate remains constant over the levelization period. This levelized cost of service has been achieved by using a FERC-approved depreciation schedule in which depreciation increases as the cost of capital decreases on declining rate base.

Both Northern Natural Gas' and Kern River's rates are subject to change in future general rate proceedings. Rates for natural gas pipelines are changed by filings under either Section 5 or Section 4 of the Natural Gas Act. Section 5 proceedings are initiated by the FERC or the pipeline's customers for a potential reduction to rates that the FERC finds are no longer just and reasonable. In a Section 5 proceeding, the FERC has the burden of demonstrating that the currently effective rates of the pipeline are no longer just and reasonable, and of establishing just and reasonable rates. Any rate decrease as a result of a Section 5 proceeding would be implemented prospectively upon the issuance of a final FERC order calculating the new just and reasonable rates. Section 4 rate proceedings are initiated by the natural gas pipeline, who must demonstrate that the new proposed rates are just and reasonable. The new rates as a result of a Section 4 proceeding are typically implemented six months after the Section 4 filing and are subject to refund upon issuance of a final order by the FERC.

Natural gas transportation companies may not grant any undue preference to any customer. FERC regulations also restrict each pipeline's marketing affiliates' access to certain non-public information regarding their affiliated interstate natural gas transmission pipelines.

44



Interstate natural gas pipelines are also subject to regulations administered by the Office of Pipeline Safety within the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, an agency within the United States Department of Transportation ("DOT"). Federal pipeline safety regulations are issued pursuant to the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968, as amended ("NGPSA"), which establishes safety requirements in the design, construction, operation and maintenance of interstate natural gas facilities, and requires an entity that owns or operates pipeline facilities to comply with such plans. Major amendments to the NGPSA include the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 ("2002 Act"), the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement and Safety Act of 2006 ("2006 Act"), the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 ("2011 Act") and the Protecting Our Infrastructure Of Pipelines And Enhancing Safety Act Of 2016 ("2016 Act").

The 2002 Act established additional safety and pipeline integrity regulations for all natural gas pipelines in high-consequence areas. The 2002 Act imposed major new requirements in the areas of operator qualifications, risk analysis and integrity management. The 2002 Act mandated more frequent periodic inspection or testing of natural gas pipelines in high-consequence areas, which are locations where the potential consequences of a natural gas pipeline accident may be significant or may do considerable harm to persons or property. Pursuant to the 2002 Act, the DOT promulgated regulations that require natural gas pipeline operators to develop comprehensive integrity management programs, to identify applicable threats to natural gas pipeline segments that could impact high-consequence areas, to assess these segments and to provide ongoing mitigation and monitoring. The regulations require recurring inspections of high-consequence area segments every seven years after the initial baseline assessment which was completed by Kern River in early 2011 and Northern Natural Gas in 2012.

The 2006 Act required pipeline operators to institute human factors management plans for personnel employed in pipeline control centers. DOT regulations published pursuant to the 2006 Act required development and implementation of written control room management procedures.

The 2011 Act was a response to natural gas pipeline incidents, most notably the San Bruno natural gas pipeline explosion that occurred in September 2010 in California. The 2011 Act increased the maximum allowable civil penalties for violations, directs operator assistance for Federal authorities conducting investigations and authorized the DOT to hire additional inspection and enforcement personnel. The 2011 Act also directed the DOT to study several topics, including the definition of high-consequence areas, the use of automatic shutoff valves in high-consequence areas, expansion of integrity management requirements beyond high-consequence areas and cast iron pipe replacement. The studies are complete, and a number of notices of proposed rulemaking have been issued. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration issued the Safety of Gas Transmission Pipelines: MAOP Reconfirmation, Expansion of Assessment Requirements and Other Related Amendments final rule in October 2019. The primary change is the expansion of the pipeline integrity assessment requirements to cover moderate-consequence areas and reconfirming maximum allowable operating pressures. Pipeline operators must develop procedures to address assessment requirements and define and map locations by mid-2021 and complete 50% of the required integrity testing by 2028 and the remaining testing by 2034. The BHE Pipeline Group is assessing the impact of the rule. This is the first of three parts of the anticipated new rules. Additional final rules are expected in 2020.

The 2016 Act required the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to set federal minimum safety standards for underground natural gas storage facilities and authorized emergency order authority. In January 2020, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration issued a final rule regarding underground natural gas storage facilities that incorporates by reference the American Petroleum Institute's Recommended Practice 1171, "Functional Integrity of Natural Gas Storage in Depleted Hydrocarbon Reservoirs and Aquifer Reservoirs", clarifies certain aspects of the mandatory nature of the standard and defines regulatory completion dates for underground storage facility risk assessments. Northern Natural Gas has three underground natural gas storage fields which fall under this regulation and does not expect the impact of complying with the final rule to be significant. Kern River does not have underground natural gas storage facilities.

The DOT and related state agencies routinely audit and inspect the pipeline facilities for compliance with their regulations. The Pipeline Companies conduct internal audits of their facilities every four years with more frequent reviews of those deemed higher risk. The Pipeline Companies also conduct preliminary audits in advance of agency audits. Compliance issues that arise during these audits or during the normal course of business are addressed on a timely basis. The Pipeline Companies believe their pipeline systems comply in all material respects with the NGPSA and with DOT regulations issued pursuant to the NGPSA.


45


Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies

The Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies, as holders of electricity distribution licenses, are subject to regulation by GEMA. GEMA regulates distribution network operators ("DNOs") within the terms of the Electricity Act 1989 and the terms of DNO licenses, which are revocable with 25 years notice. Under the Electricity Act 1989, GEMA has a duty to ensure that DNOs can finance their regulated activities and DNOs have a duty to maintain an investment grade credit rating. GEMA discharges certain of its duties through its staff within Ofgem. Each of fourteen licensed DNOs distributes electricity from the national grid transmission system and distribution-connected generators to end users within its respective distribution services area.

DNOs are subject to price controls, enforced by Ofgem, that limit the revenue that may be recovered and retained from their electricity distribution activities. The regulatory regime that has been applied to electricity distributors in Great Britain encourages companies to look for efficiency gains in order to improve profits. The distribution price control formula also adjusts the revenue received by DNOs to reflect a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the rate of inflation (as measured by the United Kingdom's Retail Prices Index) and the quality of service delivered by the licensee's distribution system. The current price control, Electricity Distribution 1 ("ED1"), has been set for a period of eight years, starting April 1, 2015, although the formula has been, and may be, reviewed by the regulator following public consultation. The procedure and methodology adopted at a price control review are at the reasonable discretion of Ofgem. Ofgem's judgment of the future allowed revenue of licensees is likely to take into account, among other things:
the actual operating and capital costs of each of the licensees;
the operating and capital costs that each of the licensees would incur if it were as efficient as, in Ofgem's judgment, the more efficient licensees;
the actual value of certain costs which are judged to be beyond the control of the licensees;
the taxes that each licensee is expected to pay;
the regulatory value ascribed to the expenditures that have been incurred in the past and the efficient expenditures that are to be incurred in the forthcoming regulatory period;
the rate of return to be allowed on expenditures that make up the regulatory asset value;
the financial ratios of each of the licensees and the license requirement for each licensee to maintain investment grade status;
an allowance in respect of the repair of the pension deficits in the defined benefit pension schemes sponsored by each of the licensees; and
any under- or over-recoveries of revenues, relative to allowed revenues, in the previous price control period.

A number of incentive schemes also operate within the current price control period to encourage DNOs to provide an appropriate quality of service to end users. This includes specified payments to be made for failures to meet prescribed standards of service. The aggregate of these guaranteed standards payments is uncapped, but may be excused in certain prescribed circumstances that are generally beyond the control of the DNOs.

A new price control can be implemented by GEMA without the consent of the DNOs, but if a licensee disagrees with a change to its license it can appeal the matter to the United Kingdom's CMA, as can certain other parties. Any appeals must be notified within 20 working days of the license modification by GEMA. If the CMA determines that the appellant has relevant standing, then the statute requires that the CMA complete its process within six months, or in some exceptional circumstances seven months. The Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies appealed Ofgem's proposals for the resetting of the formula that commenced April 1, 2015, as did one other party, and the CMA subsequently revised GEMA's decision.

The current eight-year electricity distribution price control period runs from April 1, 2015 through March 31, 2023. The current price control was the first to be set for electricity distribution in Great Britain since Ofgem completed its review of network regulation (known as the RPI-X @ 20 project). The key changes to the price control calculations, compared to those used in previous price controls are that:
the period over which new regulatory assets are depreciated is being gradually lengthened, from 20 years to 45 years, with the change being phased over eight years;
allowed revenues will be adjusted during the price control period, rather than at the next price control review, to partially reflect cost variances relative to cost allowances;

46


the allowed cost of debt will be updated within the price control period by reference to a long-run trailing average based on external benchmarks of utility debt costs;
allowed revenues will be adjusted in relation to some new service standard incentives, principally relating to speed and service standards for new connections to the network; and
there was scope for a mid-period review and adjustment to revenues in the latter half of the period for any changes in the outputs required of licensees for certain specified reasons, although GEMA made no adjustments under this provision.

Under the current price control, as revised by the CMA, and excluding the effects of incentive schemes and any deferred revenues from the prior price control, the base allowed revenue of Northern Powergrid (Northeast) Limited and Northern Powergrid (Yorkshire) plc remains constant in all subsequent years within the price control period (ED1) through 2022-23, before the addition of inflation. Nominal base allowed revenues will increase in line with inflation.

Ofgem also monitors DNO compliance with license conditions and enforces the remedies resulting from any breach of condition. License conditions include the prices and terms of service, financial strength of the DNO, the provision of information to Ofgem and the public, as well as maintaining transparency, non-discrimination and avoidance of cross-subsidy in the provision of such services. Ofgem also monitors and enforces certain duties of a DNO set out in the Electricity Act 1989, including the duty to develop and maintain an efficient, coordinated and economical system of electricity distribution. Under changes to the Electricity Act 1989 introduced by the Utilities Act 2000, GEMA is able to impose financial penalties on DNOs that contravene any of their license duties or certain of their duties under the Electricity Act 1989, as amended, or that are failing to achieve a satisfactory performance in relation to the individual standards prescribed by GEMA. Any penalty imposed must be reasonable and may not exceed 10% of the licensee's revenue.

AltaLink

AltaLink is regulated by the AUC, pursuant to the Electric Utilities Act (Alberta), the Public Utilities Act (Alberta), the Alberta Utilities Commission Act (Alberta) and the Hydro and Electric Energy Act (Alberta). The AUC is an independent, quasi-judicial agency established by the province of Alberta, Canada, which is responsible for, among other things, approving the tariffs of transmission facility owners, including AltaLink, and distribution utilities, acquisitions of such transmission facility owners or utilities, and construction and operation of new transmission projects in Alberta. The AUC also investigates and rules on regulated rate disputes and system access problems. The AUC regulates and oversees Alberta's electricity transmission sector with broad authority that may impact many of AltaLink's activities, including its tariffs, rates, construction, operations and financing.

The AUC has various core functions in regulating the Alberta electricity transmission sector, including the following:
regulating and adjudicating issues related to the operation of electric utilities within Alberta;
processing and approving general tariff applications relating to revenue requirements and rates of return including deemed capital structure for regulated utilities while ensuring that utility rates are just and reasonable and approval of the transmission tariff rates of regulated transmission providers paid by the AESO, which is the independent transmission system operator in Alberta, Canada that controls the operation of AltaLink's transmission system;
approving the need for new electricity transmission facilities and permits to build and licenses to operate electricity transmission facilities;
reviewing operations and accounts from electric utilities and conducting on-site inspections to ensure compliance with industry regulation and standards;
adjudicating enforcement issues including the imposition of administrative penalties that arise when market participants violate the rules of the AESO; and
collecting, storing, analyzing, appraising and disseminating information to effectively fulfill its duties as an industry regulator.

AltaLink's tariffs are regulated by the AUC under the provisions of the Electric Utilities Act in respect of rates and terms and conditions of service. The Electric Utilities Act and related regulations require the AUC to consider that it is in the public interest to provide consumers the benefit of unconstrained transmission access to competitive generation and the wholesale electricity market. In regulating transmission tariffs, the AUC must facilitate sufficient investment to ensure the timely upgrade, enhancement or expansion of transmission facilities, and foster a stable investment climate and a continued stream of capital investment for the transmission system.


47


Under the Electric Utilities Act, AltaLink prepares and files applications with the AUC for approval of tariffs to be paid by the AESO for the use of its transmission facilities, and the terms and conditions governing the use of those facilities. The AUC reviews and approves such tariff applications based on a cost-of-service regulatory model under a forward test year basis. Under this model, the AUC provides AltaLink with a reasonable opportunity to (i) recover the net book value of assets and all prudently incurred costs; (ii) earn a fair return on equity; and (iii) recover its forecast costs, including operating expenses, depreciation, borrowing costs and taxes associated with its regulated transmission business. The AUC must approve tariffs that are just, reasonable and not unduly preferential, arbitrary or unjustly discriminatory. AltaLink's transmission tariffs are not dependent on the price or volume of electricity transported through its transmission system.

The AESO is an independent system operator in Alberta, Canada that oversees the AIES and wholesale electricity market. The AESO is responsible for directing the safe, reliable and economic operation of the AIES, including long-term transmission system planning. AltaLink and the other transmission facility owners receive substantially all of their transmission tariff revenues from the AESO. The AESO, in turn, charges wholesale tariffs, approved by the AUC, in a manner that promotes fair and open access to the AIES and facilitates a competitive market for the purchase and sale of electricity. The AESO monitors compliance with approved reliability standards, which are enforced by the Market Surveillance Administrator, which may impose penalties on transmission facility owners for non-compliance with the approved reliability standards.

The AESO determines the need and plans for the expansion and enhancement of a congestion free transmission system in Alberta in accordance with applicable law and reliability standards. The AESO's responsibilities include long-term transmission planning and management, including assessing and planning for the current and future transmission system capacity needs of the AESO market participants. When the AESO determines an expansion or enhancement of the transmission system is needed, with limited exceptions, it submits an application to the AUC for approval of the proposed expansion or enhancement. The AESO then determines which transmission provider should submit an application to the AUC for a permit and license to construct and operate the designated transmission facilities. Generally the transmission provider operating in the geographic area where the transmission facilities expansion or enhancement is to be located is selected by the AESO to build, own and operate the transmission facilities. In addition, Alberta law provides that certain transmission projects may be subject to a competitive process open to qualified bidders.

Independent Power Projects

The Yuma, Cordova, Saranac, Power Resources, Topaz, Agua Caliente, Solar Star, Bishop Hill II, Jumbo Road, Marshall, Grande Prairie, Walnut Ridge, Pinyon Pines, Santa Rita, Alamo 6 and Pearl independent power projects are Exempt Wholesale Generators ("EWG") under the Energy Policy Act, while the Community Solar Gardens, Imperial Valley and Wailuku independent power projects are currently certified as Qualifying Facilities ("QF") under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978. Both EWGs and QFs are generally exempt from compliance with extensive federal and state regulations that control the financial structure of an electric generating plant and the prices and terms at which electricity may be sold by the facilities.

The Yuma, Cordova, Saranac, Imperial Valley, Topaz, Agua Caliente, Solar Star, Bishop Hill II, Marshall, Grande Prairie, Walnut Ridge and Pinyon Pines independent power projects have obtained authority from the FERC to sell their power using market-based rates. This authority to sell electricity in wholesale electricity markets at market-based rates is subject to triennial reviews conducted by the FERC. Accordingly, the respective independent power projects are required to submit triennial filings to the FERC that demonstrate a lack of market power over sales of wholesale electricity and electric generation capacity in their respective market areas. The Pinyon Pines, Solar Star, Topaz and Yuma independent power projects and power marketer CalEnergy, LLC file together for market power study purposes of the FERC-defined Southwest Region. The most recent triennial filing for the Southwest Region was made in June 2019 and is awaiting FERC action. The Cordova and Saranac independent power projects and power marketer CalEnergy, LLC file together with MidAmerican Energy and certain affiliates for market power study purposes of the FERC-defined Northeast Region. The most recent triennial filing for the Northeast Region was made in June 2017 and an order accepting it was issued in January 2018. The Bishop Hill II and Walnut Ridge independent power projects and power marketer CalEnergy, LLC file together with MidAmerican Energy and certain affiliates for market power study purposes of the FERC-defined Central Region. The most recent triennial filing for the Central Region was made in December 2017 and an order accepting it was issued in November 2018. The Marshall and Grande Prairie independent power projects and power marketer CalEnergy, LLC file together for market power study purposes in the FERC-defined Southwest Power Pool Region. The most recent triennial filing for the Southwest Power Pool Region was made in December 2018 and an order accepting it was issued July 2019.


48


The entire output of Jumbo Road, Santa Rita, Alamo 6, Pearl and Power Resources is within the Electric Reliability Council of Texas ("ERCOT") and market-based authority is not required for such sales solely within ERCOT as the ERCOT market is not a FERC-jurisdictional market. Similarly, Wailuku sells its output solely to the Hawaii Electric Light Company within the Hawaii electric grid, which is not a FERC-jurisdictional market and therefore, Wailuku does not require market-based rate authority.

EWGs are permitted to sell capacity and electricity only in the wholesale markets, not to end users. Additionally, utilities are required to purchase electricity produced by QFs at a price that does not exceed the purchasing utility's "avoided cost" and to sell back-up power to the QFs on a non-discriminatory basis, unless they have successfully petitioned the FERC for an exemption from this purchase requirement. Avoided cost is defined generally as the price at which the utility could purchase or produce the same amount of power from sources other than the QF on a long-term basis. The Energy Policy Act eliminated the purchase requirement for utilities with respect to new contracts under certain conditions. New QF contracts are also subject to FERC rate filing requirements, unlike QF contracts entered into prior to the Energy Policy Act. FERC regulations also permit QFs and utilities to negotiate agreements for utility purchases of power at rates other than the utilities' avoided cost.

The Philippine Congress has passed the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 ("EPIRA"), which is aimed at restructuring the Philippine power industry, privatizing the National Power Corporation ("NPC") and introducing a competitive electricity market, among other initiatives. Under the EPIRA, Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corporation ("PSALM") is tasked, among others, to dispose of and privatize the assets of NPC. PSALM recently issued statements that public bidding of the administration and management of the contracted energy of the Casecnan Project's energy conversion and power purchase agreement to interested parties will be made in 2021. It is still not known what impact, if any, the implementation of this change in independent power producer administrator may have on the Casecnan Project's future operations.

Residential Real Estate Brokerage Company

HomeServices is regulated by the United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which enforces the Truth In Lending Act ("TILA") and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA"); the United States Federal Trade Commission with respect to certain franchising activities; and by state agencies where it operates. TILA regulates lending practices. RESPA regulates real estate settlement services including real estate closing practices, lender servicing and escrow account practices and business relationships among settlement service providers and third parties to the transaction.


49



REGULATORY MATTERS

In addition to the discussion contained herein regarding regulatory matters, refer to "General Regulation" in Item 1 of this Form 10-K for further discussion regarding the general regulatory framework.

PacifiCorp

Multi-State Process

In November 2019, PacifiCorp completed negotiations with the Multi-State Process Workgroup, resulting in a new cost allocation agreement, the 2020 Protocol. The agreement establishes a common allocation method to be used in Utah, Oregon, Wyoming, Idaho and California through 2023, and a separate method for Washington during the same time period that is based on a system approach for cost allocations and provides a path forward for Washington to achieve compliance with Washington's newly-enacted Clean Energy Transformation Act. The agreement establishes a process for the 2020 Protocol signatories to resolve remaining outstanding cost-allocations to be implemented in a new, permanent and long-term allocation method at the end of the four years. In December 2019, PacifiCorp submitted the 2020 Protocol to the UPSC, the OPUC, the WPSC and the IPUC for approval. WUTC approval of the agreement is being sought in the general rate case filing submitted in December 2019, and CPUC approval will be requested in a future rate case. In January 2020, the OPUC issued an order adopting the 2020 Protocol.

Retirement Plan Settlement Charge

During 2018, the PacifiCorp Retirement Plan incurred a settlement charge of $22 million as a result of excess lump sum distributions over the defined threshold for the year ended December 31, 2018. In December 2018, PacifiCorp submitted filings with the UPSC, the OPUC, the WPSC and the WUTC seeking approval to defer the settlement charge. Also in December 2018, an advice letter was filed with the CPUC requesting a memorandum account to track the costs associated with pension and postretirement settlements and curtailments. In April 2019, the WUTC approved PacifiCorp's requested deferral. In May 2019, the UPSC denied PacifiCorp's request. In October 2019, the request for a memorandum account was re-filed as an application with the CPUC. A hearing was held before the WPSC in October 2019 and in November 2019 the WPSC denied PacifiCorp's request. In January 2020, the OPUC issued an order denying PacifiCorp's request.

2017 Tax Reform

2017 Tax Reform enacted significant changes to the Internal Revenue Code, including, among other things, a reduction in the United States federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%. In 2018, PacifiCorp agreed to refund or defer the impact of the tax law change with each of its state regulatory commissions. The status of the remaining 2017 Tax Reform proceedings is noted in the applicable state sections below.

Utah

In March 2018, PacifiCorp filed its annual EBA with the UPSC seeking approval to recover $3 million, or 0.1%, in deferred net power costs from customers for the period January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017, reflecting the difference between base and actual net power costs in the 2017 deferral period. The rate change was approved by the UPSC effective May 1, 2018 on an interim basis. A hearing was held in February 2019, and final approval was issued in March 2019.

In March 2019, PacifiCorp filed its annual EBA with the UPSC seeking approval to recover $24 million, or 1.1%, in deferred net power costs from customers for the period January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018, reflecting the difference between base and actual net power costs in the 2018 deferral period. The rate change was approved by the UPSC effective May 1, 2019 on an interim basis. Following a decision from the Utah Supreme Court in June 2019 that found the UPSC did not have authority to approve interim rates in conjunction with the EBA, the UPSC directed PacifiCorp to terminate the interim rate change pending final approval in the proceeding. The hearing on final approval was held in February 2020, and a final decision from the UPSC is pending.

The EBA was originally implemented as a pilot program that was designed to terminate at the end of 2019. In November 2019, the UPSC issued an order that determined continuing the EBA is in the public interest, making the EBA a permanent cost recovery mechanism.


50


In May 2019, Utah House Bill 411 went into effect. The legislation, among other things, authorizes the UPSC to approve a renewable energy program for communities seeking 100% renewable electricity. Participating cities were required to adopt a resolution with a goal to be on 100% renewable electricity by 2030 before December 31, 2019. Customers within a participating community may opt out of the program and maintain existing rates. Rates approved for the program may not result in any shift of costs or benefits to nonparticipating customers. Several communities in Utah, including Salt Lake City, have either recently set renewable goals or are actively considering them.

Oregon

In December 2018, PacifiCorp proposed to reduce customer rates to reflect the lower annual current income tax expense in Oregon resulting from 2017 Tax Reform. PacifiCorp reached an all-party settlement on the amortization of the current income tax expense benefits and the deferral of the decision regarding the ratemaking treatment of excess deferred income tax balances until no later than PacifiCorp's next general rate proceeding. The settlement, which resulted in a rate reduction of $48 million, or 3.7%, effective February 1, 2019, was approved by the OPUC in January 2019.

In December 2018, PacifiCorp filed a 2019 RAC application requesting recovery of $37 million, or a 2.8% increase in rates, associated with repowering of approximately 900 MWs of company-owned and installed wind facilities expected to be completed in 2019. In March 2019, the application was updated to request recovery of $32 million, or a 2.5% increase in rates. In August 2019, PacifiCorp filed an all-party settlement for the 2019 RAC that was approved by the OPUC in September 2019, providing for a total rate increase of $24 million, or 1.8%, subject to final cost updates. The settlement agreement provides for rates to be increased as the repowering projects are completed. Based on the in-service dates and final cost updates, the first rate increase of $9 million or 0.7% was effective October 1, 2019, for four repowered facilities, the second rate increase of $1 million, or 0.1%, was effective December 1, 2019, for one repowered facility and the third rate increase of $5 million or 0.4%, was effective January 1, 2020, for two repowered facilities. A final rate increase under the settlement agreement is expected to be effective March 1, 2020 for the final two remaining repowered facilities that are expected to be placed in service by the end of February 2020.

As part of the commission-approved RAC settlement, parties agreed that the Oregon-allocated net book value of certain undepreciated equipment replaced as a result of those repowerings captured in the 2019 RAC will be depreciated and offset with excess deferred income taxes resulting from 2017 Tax Reform. In 2019, accelerated depreciation of $120 million and offsetting amortization of excess deferred income taxes was recognized based on repowering activities completed through December 31, 2019.

In April 2019, PacifiCorp submitted its annual TAM filing in Oregon requesting a decrease of $15 million, or an average rate decrease of 1.2%, based on forecast net power costs and loads for calendar year 2020. The filing includes the customer benefits of repowering, including an increase in PTC. In September 2019, PacifiCorp filed an all-party settlement for the 2020 TAM. The settlement provides for a rate decrease of $20 million from the 2019 TAM, or an average rate decrease of 1.6%, effective January 1, 2020. In October 2019, the OPUC approved the all-party settlement.

In May 2019, PacifiCorp filed an application for deferral of incremental costs associated with implementing wildfire mitigation measures in Oregon. Operations and maintenance costs associated with the implementation measures are estimated to be $5 million in 2019.

In November 2019, PacifiCorp filed a 2020 RAC application requesting an annual increase in rates of $1 million, or 0.1%, associated with repowering the Glenrock III wind facility effective April 1, 2020 and an annual increase in rates of $3 million, or 0.3%, associated with repowering the Dunlap wind facility effective October 15, 2020. As part of its application, PacifiCorp proposed to offset the Oregon-allocated net book value of the replaced undepreciated wind equipment in this filing with revenues related to PacifiCorp's OATT deferral from 2017 through 2019. An all-party settlement was filed in January 2020 supporting the filed request, and a final decision from the OPUC is pending.

In November 2019 PacifiCorp requested authorization to establish an automatic adjustment clause and rate schedule for the costs and revenues related to the Oregon Corporate Activity Tax ("OCAT") that applies to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2020. Concurrent with this filing, PacifiCorp also requested authorization to defer the OCAT tax expense. In January, 2020, the OPUC authorized the automatic adjustment clause, rate schedule and application for deferral. PacifiCorp is authorized to begin recovering the estimated OCAT expense effective February 1, 2020. The recovery adjustment for 2020 is 0.41%. The rate will be applied as a percentage surcharge on customers' bills.


51


In February 2020, PacifiCorp filed a general rate case in Oregon requesting an increase in base rates of $78 million, or 6.0%, effective January 1, 2021, a separate tariff rider to recover costs associated with the early retirement of Cholla Unit 4 for an increase of $17 million annually from January 2021 through April 2025 and an annual credit to customers of $25 million for amortization of remaining deferred income tax benefits associated with 2017 Tax Reform over a three-year period beginning January 2021. The request for the increase in base rates reflects recovery of Energy Vision 2020 investments, updated depreciation rates and rate design modernization proposals. 

In February 2020, PacifiCorp submitted its annual TAM filing in Oregon requesting a decrease of $49 million, or 3.7%, effective January 1, 2021, based on forecast net power costs and loads for the calendar year 2021. The filing includes the customer benefits of repowering, including an increase in PTCs.

Wyoming

In April 2018, PacifiCorp filed a partial settlement related to the impact of 2017 Tax Reform with the WPSC that provided a rate reduction of $23 million, or 3.3%, effective July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019, with the remaining tax savings to be deferred with offsets to other costs. In June 2018, PacifiCorp filed reports with the WPSC with the calculation of the full impact of the tax law change on revenue requirement of $28 million annually, comprised of $20 million in current tax savings and $8 million for the amortization of excess deferred income tax balances. In March 2019, the WPSC issued a written order approving the continued annual rate reduction of $23 million until base rates are reset in the next general rate proceeding and a $4 million offset to PacifiCorp's 2018 ECAM rates. The order reflected $20 million of current tax savings and was updated to reflect a projection of $7 million for amortization of excess deferred income tax balances. In April 2019, PacifiCorp filed a new application updating the amount of benefits being returned to customers. PacifiCorp continued the interim rate reduction that includes the previously approved $23 million and an additional $4 million reduction to offset the 2019 ECAM, effective June 15, 2019. A settlement agreement was filed in November 2019 in which the parties agreed to an additional rate reduction of $9 million effective December 1, 2019 through the end of calendar year 2020. The WPSC approved the settlement agreement at its hearing held in November 2019.

In April 2019, PacifiCorp submitted a compliance filing to the WPSC regarding bonus tax depreciation resulting in a $2 million rate reduction for the period June 15, 2019 through June 14, 2020.

In February 2019, PacifiCorp filed a certificate of public convenience and necessity application with the WPSC requesting to repower the existing Foote Creek I wind facility, which was approved without conditions in April 2019. In connection with the repowering of Foote Creek, PacifiCorp acquired the joint owner's 21% interest in the facility in June 2019.

In April 2019, PacifiCorp filed its annual ECAM and RRA application with the WPSC. The filing requests approval to recover from customers $7 million, or approximately 1.0%, in deferred net power costs for the period January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. The rate change went into effect on an interim basis June 15, 2019. In August, a joint notice of no contest was filed with the WPSC on behalf of PacifiCorp and the Wyoming Industrial Energy Consumers, the only intervenor in the proceeding. Interim rates were approved by the WPSC as final in November 2019. PacifiCorp offset this increase with other rate credits that went into effect on June 15, 2019.

In July 2019, Wyoming Senate Enrolled Act No. 74 went into effect. The legislation, among other things, requires electric utilities to make a good faith effort to sell a coal-fired generation facility in Wyoming before it can receive recovery in rates for capital costs associated with new generation facilities built, in whole or in part, to replace the retiring coal-fueled generation facility. The electric utility is obligated to purchase the electricity from the facility through a power purchase agreement at a price that is no greater than the utility's avoided cost as determined by the WPSC. Costs associated with an approved power purchase agreement are expected to be recoverable in rates from Wyoming customers. PacifiCorp is working with the WPSC and other stakeholders on rules to implement the legislation. The overall impacts of this legislation cannot be determined at this time.

Washington

In June 2019, PacifiCorp submitted its 2018 PCAM filing with the WUTC seeking approval to credit $7 million to the PCAM balancing account. No rate changes were requested.

In November 2019, PacifiCorp submitted its 2019 decoupling filing with the WUTC for the twelve months ended June 30, 2019. In January 2020, the WUTC approved PacifiCorp's 2019 decoupling filing, which resulted in a $12 million surcredit to customers effective February 1, 2020.


52


In December 2019, PacifiCorp submitted its 2021 Washington general rate case requesting an overall decrease to rates of approximately $4 million, or 1.1%, effective January 1, 2021. The case includes an increase in revenue requirement of $3 million, offset by a proposed ten-year annual surcredit of $7 million, including interest, to customers primarily associated with the amortization of excess deferred income taxes from 2017 Tax Reform. The case includes a request for approval of a new cost allocation methodology, updated depreciation rates, recovery of Energy Vision 2020 investments, and rate design modernization proposals.

Idaho

In May 2018, the IPUC approved a rate reduction of $6 million, or 2.2%, effective June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019, to pass back a portion of the current tax benefits associated with 2017 Tax Reform. In March 2019, an all-party settlement resolving the treatment of the remaining tax savings was filed with the IPUC. In May 2019, the IPUC approved the all-party settlement resulting in the rate reduction for current tax savings being adjusted to $8 million per year, effective June 1, 2019, and $3 million related to amortization of excess deferred income taxes from 2017 Tax Reform being applied as an offset to the 2019 ECAM.

In March 2019, PacifiCorp filed its annual ECAM application with the IPUC requesting recovery of $15 million, or 0.4%, for deferred costs in 2018. This filing includes recovery of the difference in actual net power costs to the base level in rates, an adder for recovery of the Lake Side 2 resource, recovery of Deer Creek Mine investment and changes in PTCs and RECs. In May 2019, the IPUC approved recovery of the $15 million, effective June 1, 2019, to be offset by the $3 million related to amortization of excess deferred income taxes stemming from the all-party settlement related to 2017 Tax Reform.

California

In April 2018, PacifiCorp filed a general rate case with the CPUC for an overall rate increase of $1 million, or 0.9%, effective January 1, 2019. A CPUC decision was issued in February 2020, resulting in an approximate $6 million, or 6%, rate decrease effective February 6, 2020.

On September 21, 2018, California's governor signed legislation to strengthen California's ability to prevent and recover from catastrophic wildfires, including California Senate Bill 901 ("SB 901"). SB 901 requires electric utilities to prepare and submit wildfire mitigation plans that describe the utilities' plans to prevent, combat and respond to wildfires affecting their service territories. PacifiCorp filed its wildfire mitigation plan with the CPUC on February 6, 2019. The wildfire mitigation plan incorporates the requirements outlined in SB 901, including situational awareness, system hardening, vegetation management and procedures for proactive de-energization in certain high risk areas during times of extreme danger.

SB 901 also authorized utilities, including PacifiCorp, to establish two memorandum accounts to track costs related to California Wildfire Mitigation. In March 2019, PacifiCorp received approval to establish a Fire Risk Mitigation Memorandum Account ("FRMMA"), effective January 1, 2019, to track a range of fire risk mitigation activities incremental to what is already included in PacifiCorp's rates. The CPUC also granted PacifiCorp the ability to track costs related to complying with the implementation of proactive safety power shut-off, or de-energization events, in the FRMMA.

In May 2019, the CPUC issued a decision approving PacifiCorp's 2019 Wildfire Mitigation Plan. In June 2019, following approval of its 2019 Wildfire Mitigation Plan, PacifiCorp filed to establish a second Wildfire Mitigation Plan Memorandum Account ("WMPMA") to track costs related to the implementation of its approved 2019 Plan. The WMPMA was approved effective June 4, 2019. Cost recovery is contingent on the CPUC's review of activities tracked in the memorandum accounts. In January 2020, the CPUC approved the resolution establishing procedural rules for the review and disposition of 2020 Wildfire Mitigation Plans. PacifiCorp submitted its 2020 Wildfire Mitigation Plan in February 2020.

SB 901 also required the CPUC to develop a financial stress test methodology to determine the maximum amount an electrical corporation's shareholders can pay for 2017 catastrophic wildfire damages without harming ratepayers or impacting the utility's ability to provide adequate and safe service. The CPUC's final decision in June 2019 regarding this test does not have an impact on PacifiCorp as its assets did not cause catastrophic wildfires in California in 2017.

In July 2019, California's governor signed California Assembly Bill ("AB 1054") into law. AB 1054 is comprehensive legislation addressing wildfire risk in the state of California. The new law authorizes a wildfire fund which would operate as an insurance fund to support the creditworthiness of electrical utilities, if certain utilities participate by making the required contributions, among other things. In August, PacifiCorp notified the CPUC that it will not participate in the wildfire fund.


53


AB 1054 also amends CPUC requirements for recovery of wildfire-related costs regardless of participation in the insurance fund. The CPUC must allow cost recovery of the costs and expenses of a "covered wildfire" which is defined as a fire ignited on or after July 12, 2019, if they are determined to be just and reasonable, meaning the electrical corporation's conduct related to the ignition was consistent with actions that a reasonable utility would have undertaken in good faith under similar circumstances, and based on the information available to the electrical corporation at the relevant point in time.

In December 2019, PacifiCorp filed an application notifying the CPUC of the early retirement of the Cholla Unit 4 generating facility and requesting authorization to establish a memorandum account associated with the retirement and decommissioning of Cholla Unit 4. The proposed memorandum account would track costs associated with the unrecovered plant balance, decommissioning and other closure-related costs. PacifiCorp requested an effective date of December 27, 2019 for the proposed memorandum account.

NV Energy (Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific)

Regulatory Rate Reviews

In June 2019, Sierra Pacific filed an electric regulatory rate review with the PUCN. The filing supported an annual revenue increase of $5 million but requested an annual revenue reduction of $5 million. In September 2019, Sierra Pacific filed an all-party settlement for the electric regulatory rate review. The settlement resolves all cost of capital and revenue requirement issues and provides for an annual revenue reduction of $5 million and requires Sierra Pacific to share 50% of regulatory earnings above 9.7% with its customers. The rate design portion of the regulatory rate review was not a part of the settlement and a hearing on rate design was held in November 2019. In December 2019, the PUCN issued an order approving the stipulation but made some adjustments to the methodology for the weather normalization component of historical sales in rates, which resulted in an additional annual revenue reduction of $3 million. The new rates were effective January 1, 2020. In January 2020, Sierra Pacific filed a petition for rehearing challenging the PUCN's adjustments to the weather normalization methodology. In February 2020, the PUCN issued an order granting the petition for rehearing.

In August 2019, as a part of the annual DEAA filing, the PUCN issued an order confirming the methodology of calculating the earnings sharing and directed Nevada Power, in its next regulatory rate review in June 2020, to address the return of the earnings sharing to customers.

2017 Tax Reform

In February 2018, the Nevada Utilities made filings with the PUCN proposing a tax rate reduction rider for the lower annual income tax expense anticipated to result from 2017 Tax Reform for 2018 and beyond. In March 2018, the PUCN issued an order approving the rate reduction proposed by the Nevada Utilities. The new rates were effective April 1, 2018. The order extended the procedural schedule to allow parties additional discovery relevant to 2017 Tax Reform and a hearing was held in July 2018. In September 2018, the PUCN issued an order directing the Nevada Utilities to record the amortization of any excess protected accumulated deferred income tax arising from the 2017 Tax Reform as a regulatory liability effective January 1, 2018. Subsequently, the Nevada Utilities filed a petition for reconsideration relating to the amortization of protected excess accumulated deferred income tax balances resulting from the 2017 Tax Reform. In November 2018, the PUCN issued an order granting reconsideration and reaffirming the September 2018 order. In December 2018, the Nevada Utilities filed a petition for judicial review. In January 2019, intervening parties filed statements of intent to participate in the petition for judicial review. The Nevada Utilities have filed opening briefs and the intervening parties have filed answering briefs. The hearing occurred in January 2020 and a ruling is expected in the first half of 2020.
 
In November 2019, FERC issued an order requiring public utilities with transmission formula rates under an OATT to include a mechanism in those transmission formula rates to deduct any excess accumulated deferred income taxes (“ADIT”) from, or add any deficient ADIT, to their rate base. Public utilities with transmission formula rates are also required to incorporate a mechanism to decrease or increase their income tax allowances by any amortized excess or deficient ADIT and to incorporate a new permanent worksheet into their transmission formula rates that will annually track information related to excess or deficient ADIT. Although the Nevada Utilities have a stated rate rather than a formula rate, they will need to demonstrate their compliance with these changes within their next FERC transmission rate proceeding.


54


EEPR and EEIR

In March 2019, the Nevada Utilities each filed an application to reset the EEIR and EEPR and to refund the EEIR revenue received in 2018, including carrying charges. In August 2019, the PUCN issued an order accepting a stipulation requiring the Nevada Utilities to refund the 2018 revenue and reset the rates as filed effective October 1, 2019. The current EEIR liability for Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific is $8 million and $2 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2019.

Price Stability Tariff (formerly the Optional Pricing Program)

In November 2018, the Nevada Utilities made filings with the PUCN to implement the Optional Pricing Program ("OPP"). The Nevada Utilities have designed the OPP to provide certain customers, namely those eligible to file an application pursuant to Chapter 704B of the Nevada Revised Statutes, with a market-based pricing option for renewable resources. The OPP provides for an energy rate that would replace the BTER and deferred energy accounting adjustment. The goal is to have an energy rate that yields an all-in effective rate that is competitive with market options available to such customers. In February 2019, the PUCN granted several intervenors the ability to participate in the proceeding. In June 2019, the Nevada Utilities withdrew their filings but currently plans to refile a modified tariff named the Price Stability Tariff in 2020 that responds to issues raised by intervenors.

Market Price Energy Program

In October 2019, the Nevada Utilities filed an application with the PUCN for approval of Market Price Energy Program ("MPE Program"). The MPE Program allows eligible customers to receive bundled electric service which reflects the market price of energy using energy resources that will not subject the customer to a potential impact fee, should the customer subsequently exercise its rights under Chapter 704B and elect an alternative energy supplier. In October 2019, the PUCN granted several intervenors the ability to participate in the proceeding. In January 2020, the Nevada Utilities filed a settlement stipulation, which was approved by the PUCN on January 29, 2020.

Chapter 704B Applications

Chapter 704B of the Nevada Revised Statutes allows retail electric customers with an average annual load of one MW or more to file with the PUCN an application to purchase energy from alternative providers of a new electric resource and become distribution only service customers. On a case-by-case basis, the PUCN will assess the application and may deny or grant the application subject to conditions, including paying an impact fee, paying on-going charges and receiving approval for specific alternative energy providers and terms. The impact fee and on-going charges are assessed to alleviate the burden on other Nevada customers for the applicant's share of previously committed investments and long-term renewable contracts and are set at a level designed such that the remaining customers are not subjected to increased costs. In June 2019, the Nevada Legislature passed Senate Bill 547 ("SB 547") which modifies the 704B process. The modifications outlined in SB 547, among others, require a utility to establish limits in their integrated resource plan on the amount of load that can take service under Chapter 704B, requires customers taking service under Chapter 704B continue to pay for public program costs and requires the alternative energy providers to be licensed by the PUCN. In addition, SB 547 requires customers to file a 704B application with the PUCN in January allowing for alignment with the capacity amount established in the integrated resource plan.

As of December 31, 2019, there were two PUCN-approved applications for two fully bundled retail customers whose total estimated peak demand is approximately 10 MWs, as of the date their applications were filed with the PUCN. One of these customers transitioned to distribution only service effective January 1, 2020, and the other customer has extended its transition to on or before September 1, 2020. As of December 31, 2019, there were no applications pending before the PUCN for approval.        

Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies

GEMA, through the Ofgem, published its RIIO-2 sector methodology decision in May 2019, continuing the process of developing the next set of price control arrangements that will be implemented for transmission and gas distribution networks in Great Britain. Ofgem explicitly stated that this decision did not apply for Northern Powergrid's next price control, ("ED2"), which will begin in April 2023. However, it also stated that some of the proposals may be capable of application to that price control and, in December 2019, published a decision on the framework for ED2 that confirmed the same overall approach will apply.

Regarding allowed return on capital, Ofgem has stated that it currently considers that a cost of equity of 4.3% (plus inflation calculated using the United Kingdom's consumer prices index including owner occupiers' housing costs) would be appropriate for energy networks, which is approximately 220 basis points lower than the current comparable cost of equity. This cost of equity assumption is based on a proposed debt capitalization assumption for the next price control of 60%, which is lower than the 65% debt capitalization assumption for the current price control.

55



In respect of ED1, in October 2019 GEMA published a decision to make allowance for certain additional costs totaling £12 million, plus RPI inflation from 2012-2013, that it judged to be beyond the control of the licensees, beyond the routine adjustments for such costs that occur annually. The adjustments, which reflect additional costs, for the licensees will flow into allowed revenues through the standard price control mechanisms and do not affect Northern Powergrid's overall financial position compared to when the current price control was set.

BHE Pipeline Group

Northern Natural Gas

In July 2018, FERC issued a final rule adopting procedures for determining whether natural gas pipelines were collecting unjust and unreasonable rates in light of the reduction in the federal corporate tax rate from 2017 Tax Reform. Pursuant to the final rule, in October 2018, Northern Natural Gas filed an informational filing on FERC Form No. 501-G and a Statement Demonstrating Why No Rate Adjustment is Necessary. In January 2019, FERC initiated a Section 5 investigation to determine whether the rates currently charged by Northern Natural Gas are just and reasonable. As required by the FERC Section 5 order, Northern Natural Gas filed a cost and revenue study in April 2019. In July 2019, Northern Natural Gas filed a Section 4 rate case requesting increases in its transportation and storage rates. In September 2019, FERC consolidated the Section 5 investigation and the Section 4 rate case into one procedural process set for hearing commencing June 2020. In January 2020, the FERC approved Northern Natural Gas' filing to implement its interim rates, including an increase of 77% from its current Market Area transmission reservation rate, subject to refund, effective January 1, 2020.
Kern River

In October 2018, Kern River filed an informational filing on FERC Form No. 501-G and a Statement Explaining Why No Rate Adjustment is Necessary, along with a Tax Reform Credit Rate Settlement in a companion docket. Kern River's Tax Reform Credit Rate Settlement offered an 11% rate credit against the Maximum Base Tariff Rates for firm service and any one-part rate that includes fixed costs which would result in an expected annual rate credit of $13 million. In November 2018, FERC approved Kern River's Tax Reform Credit effective November 15, 2018.

BHE Transmission

AltaLink

General Tariff Application

In August 2018, AltaLink filed its 2019-2021 GTA with the AUC, delivering on the first three years of its commitment to keep rates lower or flat at the approved 2018 revenue requirement of C$904 million for customers for the next five years. In addition, AltaLink proposes to provide a further tariff reduction over the three years by refunding previously collected accumulated depreciation surplus of an additional C$31 million. In November 2018, the AUC approved the 2019 interim refundable transmission tariff at C$74 million per month effective January 2019. In April 2019, AltaLink filed an update to its 2019-2021 GTA application primarily to reflect its 2018 actual results and the impact of the AUC’s decision on AltaLink's 2014-2015 Deferral Account Reconciliation Application. The application requests the approval of revised revenue requirements of C$879 million, C$882 million and C$885 million for 2019, 2020 and 2021, respectively. The forecast revenue requirement is based on an 8.5% return on equity and 37% deemed equity as approved by the AUC for 2019 and 2020.

In July 2019, AltaLink filed a 2019-2021 partial negotiated settlement application with the AUC. The application consisted of negotiated reductions totaling a C$38 million net decrease to the three-year total revenue requirement applied for in AltaLink's 2019-2021 GTA updated in April 2019. However, this may be partially offset by AltaLink's request for an additional C$20 million of forecast transmission line clearance capital as part of an excluded matter. The 2019-2021 negotiated settlement agreement excluded certain matters related to the new salvage study and salvage recovery approach, additional capital spending and incremental asset retirements. AltaLink's salvage proposal is estimated to save customers C$267 million between 2019 and 2023. Excluded matters were examined by the AUC in a hearing held in November 2019. If AltaLink is successful at hearing on the excluded matters and the negotiated settlement is approved, the revised revenue requirements will be C$873 million for 2019 and C$870 million for each of 2020 and 2021. In August 2019, AltaLink responded to information requests with respect to its 2019-2021 negotiated settlement application and the excluded matters as described above. In November 2019, a hearing to examine the excluded matters was completed with a briefing filed in January 2020. A decision from the AUC is expected in the second quarter of 2020.


56


2018 Generic Cost of Capital Proceeding

In July 2017, the AUC denied the utilities' request in the 2018 Generic Cost of Capital ("GCOC") proceeding that the interim determinations of 8.5% return on equity and deemed capital structures for 2018 be made final, by stating that it is not prepared to finalize 2018 values in the absence of an evidentiary process. In August 2018, the AUC issued its decision on the 2018 GCOC proceeding to set the deemed capital structure and generic return on equity for 2018, 2019 and 2020. In its decision, the AUC set the return on equity at 8.5% for 2018, 2019 and 2020, and AltaLink's common equity ratio at 37% for 2018, 2019 and 2020.

2021 Generic Cost of Capital Proceeding

In December 2018, the AUC initiated the 2021 GCOC proceeding to consider returning to a formula-based approach in determining the return on equity for a given year, starting with 2021. In April 2019, after receiving comments from interested parties, the AUC expanded the scope of the proceeding to include a traditional non-formulaic GCOC inquiry as well as the consideration of returning to a formula-based approach. The AUC also issued a process timeline for the proceeding to commence in January 2020, with a hearing scheduled in April 2020.

In January 2020, AltaLink filed company and expert evidence, recommending a range of 8.75% to 10.5% return on equity, on a recommended equity ratio of 40% for 2021 and 2022. The Consumers' Coalition of Alberta, the Utilities Consumer Advocate and the City of Calgary filed intervenor evidence recommending a range of 5.0% to 6.9% return on equity, and an AltaLink common equity ratio of 35% to 37% for 2021 and 2022.

2014-2015 Deferral Account Reconciliation Application

In April 2017, AltaLink filed its application with the AUC with respect to its 2014 projects and deferral accounts and specific 2015 projects. The application included approximately C$2.0 billion in net capital additions. In December 2017, AltaLink amended its application to include the remaining capital projects completed in 2015. The amended 2014 and 2015 Deferral Account Reconciliation Application includes 110 completed projects with total gross capital additions, including AFUDC, of C$4,017 million. A hearing was held in September 2018 after the completion of an extensive information request process earlier in the year.

In December 2018 and January 2019, the AUC issued decisions approving C$3,833 million out of the C$4,017 million capital project additions, included in the application. Project costs of C$155 million were deferred to a future hearing. The AUC disallowed capital additions of approximately C$29 million including applicable AFUDC, pending receipt of additional supporting documentation for certain items. In February 2019, AltaLink filed its 2014-2015 Deferral Account Reconciliation Application compliance filing to reflect the findings, conclusions and directions arising from these decisions. In addition, the AUC ruled that it will put in placeholder amounts for the approved costs of the assets in the 2014-2015 Deferral Account Reconciliation Application proceeding until the AUC-initiated proceeding to consider the issue of transmission asset utilization. In August 2019, the AUC issued its decision with respect to AltaLink's 2014-2015 Deferral Account Reconciliation Application compliance filing. The AUC ruled that AltaLink has complied with all significant directives from the December 2018 and January 2019 decisions In September 2019, AltaLink filed a second compliance filing reflecting the directives from the AUC's August 2019 decision and final AUC approval was received in November 2019.

2016-2018 Deferral Account Reconciliation Application

In July 2019, AltaLink filed its 2016-2018 Deferral Account Reconciliation Application with the AUC. The application includes 116 projects with total gross capital additions, including AFUDC, of C$976 million. In December 2019, the AUC announced a series of technical meetings to address AltaLink's responses to certain information requests. The balance of the process steps and related schedule will be established following the AUC's ruling on the disputed information requests, which is expected by March 2020.

57


Alberta Electric System Operator Tariff Decision

In September 2019, the AUC issued its decision with respect to the 2018 AESO tariff. As part of this decision, the AUC approved AltaLink's proposal to refund contributions made by distribution facility owners relative to transmission projects built and owned by transmission facility owners. The proposal will benefit distribution customers by flowing through the lower cost of capital of the transmission facility owner rather than the higher cost of capital of the distribution facility owner. As directed by the AUC, AltaLink would pay FortisAlberta the unamortized contribution balance of approximately C$375 million and add the amount to AltaLink's rate base if the decision is upheld. The AUC directed the AESO to consult with AltaLink to provide a joint proposal to implement AltaLink's contribution proposal. In September 2019, FortisAlberta filed a review and variance application with the AUC requesting the AUC re-evaluate its findings with respect to AltaLink's customer contribution proposal relative to distribution facility owners. In October 2019, the AUC granted FortisAlberta's request to proceed to a review and variance with the record closed in November 2019, after submissions from FortisAlberta, AltaLink, and other interested parties. FortisAlberta also filed for permission to appeal the decision with the Court of Appeal, which will not be heard until after the AUC’s review proceeding.

In December 2019, the AUC reopened the record of the review and variance proceeding and, in January 2020, issued specific information requests to each of FortisAlberta and AltaLink to clarify the evidence previously filed. AltaLink and FortisAlberta filed responses to the AUC information requests in January 2020. In February 2020, FortisAlberta filed a motion with the AUC requesting the appointment of a review panel to convene an oral hearing.

First Nations Asset Transfer Application

In November 2018, the AUC approved, with conditions, AltaLink's application filed in April 2017 to sell and transfer approximately C$100 million of transmission assets located on reserve lands to new limited partnerships with First Nations. The transfers are part of the agreement which allowed AltaLink to route the Southwest Project on reserve land. In June 2019, AltaLink closed the transaction with the Piikani Nation by transferring transmission assets of C$53 million to PiikaniLink, L.P. In January 2020, AltaLink closed the transaction with the Blood Tribe by transferring transmission assets of C$35 million to KainaiLink, L.P.

BHE U.S. Transmission

A significant portion of ETT's revenues are based on interim rate changes that can be filed twice annually and are subject to review and possible true-up in the next filed base regulatory rate review scheduled for no later than February 1, 2021. In January 2017, the PUCT approved ETT's request to suspend a base regulatory rate review filing scheduled for February 2017. Results of a base regulatory rate review would be prospective except for any deemed disallowance by the PUCT of the transmission investment since the initial base regulatory rate review in 2007. In June 2018, the PUCT approved ETT's application to reduce its transmission revenue by $28 million to reflect the lower federal income tax rate due to 2017 Tax Reform with the amortization of excess accumulated deferred federal income taxes expected to be addressed in the next base rate case.

ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS

Each Registrant is subject to federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations regarding climate change, RPS, air and water quality, emissions performance standards, coal combustion byproduct disposal, hazardous and solid waste disposal, protected species and other environmental matters that have the potential to impact each Registrant's current and future operations. In addition to imposing continuing compliance obligations, these laws and regulations provide regulators with the authority to levy substantial penalties for noncompliance, including fines, injunctive relief and other sanctions. These laws and regulations are administered by various federal, state, local and international agencies. Each Registrant believes it is in material compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, although many laws and regulations are subject to interpretation that may ultimately be resolved by the courts. The Company has cumulative investments in wind, solar, geothermal and biomass generating facilities of approximately $29 billion and plans to spend an additional $6 billion on the construction of wind-powered generating facilities, repowering certain existing wind-powered generating facilities and funding of wind tax equity investments through 2021. Refer to "Liquidity and Capital Resources" of each respective Registrant in Item 7 of this Form 10-K for discussion of each Registrant's renewable generation-related capital expenditures.


58


Climate Change

In December 2015, an international agreement was negotiated by 195 nations to create a universal framework for coordinated action on climate change in what is referred to as the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement reaffirms the goal of limiting global temperature increase well below 2 degrees Celsius, while urging efforts to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius; establishes commitments by all parties to make nationally determined contributions and pursue domestic measures aimed at achieving the commitments; commits all countries to submit emissions inventories and report regularly on their emissions and progress made in implementing and achieving their nationally determined commitments; and commits all countries to submit new commitments every five years, with the expectation that the commitments will get more aggressive. In the context of the Paris Agreement, the United States agreed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 26% to 28% by 2025 from 2005 levels. After more than 55 countries representing more than 55% of global greenhouse gas emissions submitted their ratification documents, the Paris Agreement became effective November 4, 2016. On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced the United States would begin the process of withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. Under the terms of the Paris Agreement, withdrawal cannot occur until four years after its effective date, making the United States' withdrawal effective in November 2020.

GHG Performance Standards

Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA may establish emissions standards that reflect the degree of emissions reductions achievable through the best technology that has been demonstrated, taking into consideration the cost of achieving those reductions and any non-air quality health and environmental impact and energy requirements. On August 3, 2015, the EPA issued final new source performance standards, establishing a standard of 1,000 pounds of carbon dioxide per MWh for large natural gas-fueled generating facilities and 1,400 pounds of carbon dioxide per MWh for new coal-fueled generating facilities with the "Best System of Emission Reduction" reflecting highly efficient supercritical pulverized coal facilities with partial carbon capture and sequestration or integrated gasification combined-cycle units that are co-fired with natural gas or pre-combustion slipstream capture of carbon dioxide. The new source performance standards were appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ("D.C. Circuit") and oral argument was scheduled for April 17, 2017. However, oral argument was deferred and the court held the case in abeyance for an indefinite period of time. On December 6, 2018, the EPA announced revisions to new source performance standards for new and reconstructed coal-fueled units. EPA proposes to revise carbon dioxide emission limits for new coal-fueled facilities to 1,900 pounds per MWh for small units and 2,000 pounds per MWh for large units. The EPA would define the best system of emission reduction for new and modified units as the most efficient demonstrated steam cycle, combined with best operating practices. The EPA accepted comments on the proposal through March 18, 2019. Until such time as the EPA undertakes further action on the proposed reconsideration or the court takes action, any new fossil-fueled generating facilities constructed by the relevant Registrants will be required to meet the GHG new source performance standards.
    
Affordable Clean Energy Rule

In June 2014, the EPA released proposed regulations to address GHG emissions from existing fossil-fueled generating facilities, referred to as the Clean Power Plan, under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. The EPA's proposal calculated state-specific emission rate targets to be achieved based on the "Best System of Emission Reduction." In August 2015, the final Clean Power Plan was released, which established the Best System of Emission Reduction as including: (a) heat rate improvements; (b) increased utilization of existing combined-cycle natural gas-fueled generating facilities; and (c) increased deployment of new and incremental non-carbon generation placed in-service after 2012. The Clean Power Plan was stayed by the United States Supreme Court in February 2016 while litigation proceeded. On October 10, 2017, the EPA issued a proposal to repeal the Clean Power Plan, which was intended to achieve an overall reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from existing fossil-fueled electric generating units of 32% below 2005 levels. On June 19, 2019, the EPA repealed the Clean Power Plan and issued the Affordable Clean Energy rule, which fully replaced the Clean Power Plan. In the Affordable Clean Energy rule, the EPA determined that the best system of emissions reduction for existing coal-fueled power plants is heat rate improvements and identified a set of candidate technologies and measures that could improve heat rates. Measures taken to meet the standards of performance must be achieved at the source itself. States have until July 2022 to submit compliance plans to the EPA. The Affordable Clean Energy rule is not expected to have a material impact on the Registrants. PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy, Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific have historically pursued cost-effective projects, including plant efficiency improvements, increased diversification of their generating fleets to include deployment of renewable and lower carbon generating resources, and advanced customer energy efficiency programs.

59



Regional and State Activities

Several states have promulgated or otherwise participate in state-specific or regional laws or initiatives to report or mitigate GHG emissions. These are expected to impact the relevant Registrant, and include:

In June 2013, Nevada Senate Bill 123 ("SB 123") was signed into law. Among other things, SB 123 and regulations thereunder required Nevada Power to file with the PUCN an emission reduction and capacity replacement plan by May 1, 2014. In May 2014, Nevada Power filed its emissions reduction capacity replacement plan. The plan provided for the retirement or elimination of 300 MWs of coal-fueled generating capacity by December 31, 2014, another 250 MWs of coal-fueled generating capacity by December 31, 2017, and another 250 MWs of coal generating capacity by December 31, 2019, along with replacement of such capacity with a mixture of constructed, acquired or contracted renewable and non-technology specific generating units. The plan also sets forth the expected timeline and costs associated with decommissioning coal-fueled generating units that will be retired or eliminated pursuant to the plan. The PUCN has the authority to approve or modify the emission reduction and capacity replacement plan filed by Nevada Power. The PUCN may approve variations to Nevada Power's resource plans relative to requirements under SB 123. Refer to Nevada Power's Note 13 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for additional information on the ERCR Plan.

Under the authority of California's Global Warming Solutions Act, which includes a series of policies aimed at returning California greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, the California Air Resources Board adopted a GHG cap-and-trade program with an effective date of January 1, 2012; compliance obligations were imposed on entities beginning in 2013. PacifiCorp is subject to the cap-and-trade program as a retail service provider in California and an importer of wholesale energy into California. In 2015, Governor Jerry Brown issued an executive order to reduce emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80% by 2050. In September 2016, California Senate Bill 32 was signed into law establishing greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets of 40% below 1990 levels by 2030.

The states of California, Washington and Oregon have adopted GHG emissions performance standards for base load electricity generating resources. Under the laws in California and Oregon, the emissions performance standards provide that emissions must not exceed 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide per MWh. In September 2018, the Washington Department of Commerce amended the emissions performance standards to provide that GHG emissions for base load electricity generating resources must not exceed 925 pounds of carbon dioxide per MWh. These GHG emissions performance standards generally prohibit electric utilities from entering into long-term financial commitments (e.g., new ownership investments, upgrades, or new or renewed contracts with a term of five or more years) unless any base load generation supplied under long-term financial commitments comply with the GHG emissions performance standards.

In September 2016, the Washington State Department of Ecology issued a final rule regulating GHG emissions from sources in Washington. The rule regulates greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride beginning in 2017 with three-year compliance periods thereafter (i.e., 2017-2019, 2020-2022, etc.). Under the rule, the Washington State Department of Ecology established GHG emissions reduction pathways for all covered entities. Covered entities may use emission reduction units, which may be traded with other covered entities, to meet their compliance requirements. PacifiCorp's resources that are covered under the rule include the Chehalis generating facility, which is a natural gas combined-cycle plant located in Washington state. PacifiCorp received its baseline emission order on December 17, 2017, which specified the emission reduction requirements for the Chehalis generating facility every three years beginning in 2017. The reduction requirements average 1.7% per year. However, the Washington State Department of Ecology suspended the compliance obligations of the Clean Air Rule after a Thurston County Superior Court judge ruled the state lacks authority to mandate reductions from indirect emitters. On January 16, 2020, the Washington Supreme Court affirmed that the rule limits the applicability of emission standards to actual emitters and cannot be expanded to non-emitters. The court also found that the rule itself is severable, so that the Department of Ecology may continue to enforce the rule as it applies to emitters. The case was remanded for further proceedings. Pending further action by the lower court, the rule itself remains suspended, but entities subject to the rule are required to continue reporting emissions.


60


The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a mandatory, market-based effort to reduce GHG emissions in ten Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states, required, beginning in 2009, the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector of 10% by 2018. In May 2011, New Jersey withdrew from participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Following a program review in 2012, the nine Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative states implemented a new 2014 cap which was approximately 45% lower than the 2012-2013 cap. The cap is reduced each year by 2.5% from 2015 to 2020. In December 2017, an updated model rule was released by the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative states which includes an additional 30% regional cap reduction between 2020 and 2030.

Renewable Portfolio Standards

Each state's RPS described below could significantly impact the relevant Registrant's consolidated financial results. Resources that meet the qualifying electricity requirements under each RPS vary from state to state. Each state's RPS requires some form of compliance reporting and the relevant Registrant can be subject to penalties in the event of noncompliance. Each Registrant believes it is in material compliance with all applicable RPS laws and regulations.

In 1983, Iowa became the first state in the United States to adopt a RPS requiring the state utilities to own or to contract for a combined total of 105 MWs of renewable generating capacity and associated energy production. The IUB allocated the 105-MW requirement between the two utilities in Iowa based on each utility's percentage of their combined estimated Iowa retail peak demand in 1990 resulting in MidAmerican Energy being allocated a RPS requirement of 55.2 MWs. The utility must meet its RPS obligation by either owning renewable energy production facilities located in Iowa or entering into long-term contracts to purchase or wheel electricity from renewable production facilities located in the utility's service area.

Since 1997, NV Energy has been required to comply with a RPS. Current law requires the Nevada Utilities to meet 18% of their energy requirements with renewable resources for 2014, 20% for 2015 through 2019, 22% for 2020 and 2024, and 25% for 2025 and thereafter. The RPS also requires 5% of the portfolio requirement come from solar resources through 2015 and increasing to 6% in 2016. Nevada law also permits energy efficiency measures to be used to satisfy a portion of the RPS through 2025, subject to certain limitations. In November 2018, Nevada voters approved a measure to increase the state's RPS to 50% by 2030; the measure must be voted on and approved a second time, in November 2020, in order to take effect.

Utah's Energy Resource and Carbon Emission Reduction Initiative provides that, beginning in the year 2025, 20% of adjusted retail electric sales of all Utah utilities be supplied by renewable energy, if it is cost effective. Retail electric sales will be adjusted by deducting the amount of generation from sources that produce zero or reduced carbon emissions, and for sales avoided as a result of energy efficiency and DSM programs. Qualifying renewable energy sources can be located anywhere within the WECC, and RECs can be used.

The Oregon Renewable Energy Act ("OREA") provides a comprehensive renewable energy policy and RPS for Oregon. Subject to certain exemptions and cost limitations established in the law, PacifiCorp and other qualifying electric utilities must meet minimum qualifying electricity requirements for electricity sold to retail customers of at least 5% in 2011 through 2014, 15% in 2015 through 2019, and 20% in 2020 through 2024. In March 2016, Oregon Senate Bill 1547-B ("SB 1547-B"), the Clean Electricity and Coal Transition Plan, was signed into law. SB 1547-B requires coal-fueled resources be eliminated from Oregon's allocation of electricity by January 1, 2030, and increases the current RPS target from 25% in 2025 to 50% by 2040. SB 1547-B also implements new REC banking provisions, as well as the following interim RPS targets: 27% in 2025 through 2029, 35% in 2030 through 2034, 45% in 2035 through 2039, and 50% by 2040 and subsequent years. As required by the OREA, the OPUC has approved an automatic adjustment clause to allow an electric utility, including PacifiCorp, to recover prudently incurred costs of its investments in renewable energy generating facilities and associated transmission costs.

Washington's Energy Independence Act establishes a renewable energy target for qualifying electric utilities, including PacifiCorp. The requirements are 3% of retail sales by January 1, 2012 through 2015, 9% of retail sales by January 1, 2016 through 2019 and 15% of retail sales by January 1, 2020 and each year thereafter. In April 2013, Washington State Senate Bill 5400 ("SB 5400") was signed into law. SB 5400 expands the geographic area in which eligible renewable resources may be located to beyond the Pacific Northwest, allowing renewable resources located in all states served by PacifiCorp to qualify. SB 5400 also provides PacifiCorp with additional flexibility and options to meet Washington's renewable mandates. In May 2019, the state of Washington enacted Senate Bill 5116, the Clean Energy Transformation Act. The legislation, among other things, requires Washington utilities to be carbon neutral by January 1, 2030 and institutes a planning target of 100% non-emitting generation by 2045. Electric utilities must also eliminate from rates coal-fired resources by December 31, 2025. PacifiCorp has begun discussions with regulators and other Washington investor-owned utilities regarding compliance obligations and implementation.


61


The California RPS required all California retail sellers to procure an average of 20% of retail load from renewable resources by December 31, 2013, 25% by December 31, 2016 and 33% by December 31, 2020. In October 2015, California Senate Bill No. 350 became law and increased the RPS target to 50% by December 31, 2030. The state's RPS was further expanded in September 2018, when California Senate Bill 100 ("SB 100"), the 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018 was signed into law. In addition to requiring retail sellers to meet a RPS target of 60% by 2030, SB 100 enabled a longer-term planning target for 100% of total California retail sales to come from eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources by December 31, 2045. In December 2011, the CPUC adopted a decision confirming that multi-jurisdictional utilities, such as PacifiCorp, are not subject to the percentage limits within the three product content categories of RPS-eligible resources established by the legislation that have been imposed on other California retail sellers.

Clean Air Act Regulations

The Clean Air Act is a federal law administered by the EPA that provides a framework for protecting and improving the nation's air quality and controlling sources of air emissions. The implementation of new standards is generally outlined in SIPs, which are a collection of regulations, programs and policies to be followed. SIPs vary by state and are subject to public hearings and EPA approval. Some states may adopt additional or more stringent requirements than those implemented by the EPA. The major Clean Air Act programs most directly affecting the Registrants' operations are described below.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Under the authority of the Clean Air Act, the EPA sets minimum national ambient air quality standards for six principal pollutants, consisting of carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, ozone and sulfur dioxide, considered harmful to public health and the environment. Areas that achieve the standards, as determined by ambient air quality monitoring, are characterized as being in attainment, while those that fail to meet the standards are designated as being nonattainment areas. Generally, sources of emissions in a nonattainment area that are determined to contribute to the nonattainment are required to reduce emissions. Most air quality standards require measurement over a defined period of time to determine the average concentration of the pollutant present. Currently, with the exceptions described in the following paragraphs, air quality monitoring data indicates that all counties where the relevant Registrant's major emission sources are located are in attainment of the current national ambient air quality standards.

On June 4, 2018, EPA published final designations for much of the United States. Relevant to the Registrants, these designations include classifying Yuma County, Arizona; Clark County, Nevada; and the Northern Wasatch Front, Southern Wasatch Front and Duchesne and Uintah counties in Utah as nonattainment-marginal. These areas will be required to meet the 2015 standard three years from the August 3, 2018, effective date. All other areas relevant to the Registrants were designated attainment/unclassifiable with this same action.

In January 2010, the EPA finalized a one-hour air quality standard for nitrogen dioxide at 100 parts per billion. In February 2012, the EPA published final designations indicating that based on air quality monitoring data, all areas of the country are designated as "unclassifiable/attainment" for the 2010 nitrogen dioxide national ambient air quality standard. On April 6, 2018, EPA issued a decision to retain the 2010 nitrogen dioxide national ambient air quality standard without revision.

In June 2010, the EPA finalized a new national ambient air quality standard for sulfur dioxide. Under the 2010 rule, areas must meet a one-hour standard of 75 parts per billion utilizing a three-year average. The rule utilizes source modeling in addition to the installation of ambient monitors where sulfur dioxide emissions impact populated areas. Attainment designations were due by June 2012; however, citing a lack of sufficient information to make the designations, the EPA did not issue its final designations until July 2013 and determined, at that date, that a portion of Muscatine County, Iowa was in nonattainment for the one-hour sulfur dioxide standard. MidAmerican Energy's Louisa coal-fueled generating facility is located just outside of Muscatine County, south of the violating monitor. In its final designation, the EPA indicated that it was not yet prepared to conclude that the emissions from the Louisa coal-fueled generating facility contribute to the monitored violation or to other possible violations, and that in a subsequent round of designations, the EPA will make decisions for areas and sources outside Muscatine County. MidAmerican Energy does not believe a subsequent nonattainment designation will have a material impact on the Louisa coal-fueled generating facility. Although the EPA's July 2013 designations did not impact PacifiCorp's nor the Nevada Utilities' generating facilities, the EPA's assessment of sulfur dioxide area designations will continue with the deployment of additional sulfur dioxide monitoring networks across the country. On February 25, 2019, EPA issued a decision to retain the 2010 sulfur dioxide national ambient air quality standard without revision.


62


The Sierra Club filed a lawsuit against the EPA in August 2013 with respect to the one-hour sulfur dioxide standards and its failure to make certain attainment designations in a timely manner. In March 2015, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California ("Northern District of California") accepted as an enforceable order an agreement between the EPA and Sierra Club to resolve litigation concerning the deadline for completing the designations. The Northern District of California's order directed the EPA to complete designations in three phases: the first phase by July 2, 2016; the second phase by December 31, 2017; and the final phase by December 31, 2020. The first phase of the designations require the EPA to designate two groups of areas: 1) areas that have newly monitored violations of the 2010 sulfur dioxide standard; and 2) areas that contain any stationary source that, according to the EPA's data, either emitted more than 16,000 tons of sulfur dioxide in 2012 or emitted more than 2,600 tons of sulfur dioxide and had an emission rate of at least 0.45 lbs/sulfur dioxide per million British thermal unit in 2012 and, as of March 2, 2015, had not been announced for retirement. MidAmerican Energy's George Neal Unit 4 and the Ottumwa Generating Station (in which MidAmerican Energy has a majority ownership interest, but does not operate), are included as units subject to the first phase of the designations, having emitted more than 2,600 tons of sulfur dioxide and having an emission rate of at least 0.45 lbs/sulfur dioxide per million British thermal unit in 2012. States may submit to the EPA updated recommendations and supporting information for the EPA to consider in making its determinations. Iowa submitted documentation to the EPA in April 2016 supporting its recommendation that Des Moines, Wapello and Woodbury Counties be designated as being in attainment of the standard. In July 2016, the EPA's final designations were published in the Federal Register indicating portions of Muscatine County, Iowa were in nonattainment with the 2010 sulfur dioxide standard, Woodbury County, Iowa was unclassifiable, and Des Moines and Wapello Counties were unclassifiable/attainment.

In December 2012, the EPA finalized more stringent fine particulate matter national ambient air quality standards, reducing the annual standard from 15 micrograms per cubic meter to 12 micrograms per cubic meter and retaining the 24-hour standard at 35 micrograms per cubic meter. The EPA did not set a separate secondary visibility standard, choosing to rely on the existing secondary 24-hour standard to protect against visibility impairment. In December 2014, the EPA issued final area designations for the 2012 fine particulate matter standard. Based on these designations, the areas in which the relevant Registrant operates generating facilities have been classified as "unclassifiable/attainment." Unless additional monitoring suggests otherwise, the relevant Registrant does not anticipate that any impacts of the revised standard will be significant.

In December 2014, the Utah SIP for fine particulate matter was adopted by the Utah Air Quality Board. PacifiCorp's Lake Side, Lake Side 2, Gadsby Steam and Gadsby Peakers generating facilities operate within nonattainment areas for fine particulate matter; however, the SIP did not impose significant new requirements on PacifiCorp's impacted generating facilities, nor did the EPA's comments on the Utah SIP identify requirements for PacifiCorp's existing generating facilities that would have a material impact on its consolidated financial results.

Mercury and Air Toxics Standards

In March 2011, the EPA proposed a rule that requires coal-fueled generating facilities to reduce mercury emissions and other hazardous air pollutants through the establishment of "Maximum Achievable Control Technology" standards. The final MATS became effective on April 16, 2012, and required that new and existing coal-fueled generating facilities achieve emission standards for mercury, acid gases and other non-mercury hazardous air pollutants. Existing sources were required to comply with the new standards by April 16, 2015 with the potential for individual sources to obtain an extension of up to one additional year, at the discretion of the Title V permitting authority, to complete installation of controls or for transmission system reliability reasons. The relevant Registrants have completed emission reduction projects to comply with the final rule's standards for acid gases and non-mercury metallic hazardous air pollutants.

MidAmerican Energy retired certain coal-fueled generating units as the least-cost alternative to comply with the MATS. Walter Scott, Jr. Energy Center Units 1 and 2 were retired in 2015, and George Neal Energy Center Units 1 and 2 were retired in April 2016. A fifth unit, Riverside Generating Station, was limited to natural gas combustion in March 2015.


63


Numerous lawsuits have been filed in the D.C. Circuit challenging the MATS. In April 2014, the D.C. Circuit upheld the MATS requirements. In November 2014, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the MATS appeal on the limited issue of whether the EPA unreasonably refused to consider costs in determining whether it is appropriate to regulate hazardous air pollutants emitted by electric utilities. Oral argument in the case was held before the United States Supreme Court in March 2015, and a decision was issued by the United States Supreme Court in June 2015, which reversed and remanded the MATS rule to the D.C. Circuit for further action. The United States Supreme Court held that the EPA had acted unreasonably when it deemed cost irrelevant to the decision to regulate generating facilities, and that cost, including costs of compliance, must be considered before deciding whether regulation is necessary and appropriate. The United States Supreme Court's decision did not vacate or stay implementation of the MATS rule. In December 2015, the D.C. Circuit issued an order remanding the rule to the EPA, without vacating the rule. As a result, the relevant Registrants continue to have a legal obligation under the MATS rule and the respective permits issued by the states in which each respective Registrant operates to comply with the MATS rule, including operating all emissions controls or otherwise complying with the MATS requirements.

On December 27, 2018, the EPA issued a proposed revised supplemental cost finding for the MATS, as well as the required risk and technology review under Clean Air Act Section 112. EPA proposes to determine that it is not appropriate and necessary to regulate hazardous air pollutant emissions from power plants under Section 112; however, EPA proposes to retain the emission standards and other requirements of the MATS rule, because EPA is not proposing to remove coal- and oil-fueled power plants from the list of sources regulated under Section 112. The public comment period on the proposal closes April 8, 2019. Until EPA takes final action on the rule, the relevant Registrants cannot fully determine the impacts of the proposed changes to the MATS rule.

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

The EPA promulgated an initial rule in March 2005 to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide, precursors of ozone and particulate matter, from down-wind sources in the eastern United States, including Iowa, to reduce emissions by implementing a plan based on a market-based cap-and-trade system, emissions reductions, or both. After numerous appeals, the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule ("CSAPR") was promulgated to address interstate transport of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides emissions in 27 eastern and Midwestern states.

The first phase of the rule was implemented January 1, 2015. In November 2015, the EPA released a proposed rule that would further reduce nitrogen oxides emissions in 2017. The final “CSAPR Update Rule” was published in the Federal Register in October 2016 and required additional reductions in nitrogen oxides emissions beginning in May 2017. On December 6, 2018, EPA finalized a rule to close out the CSAPR, having determined that the CSAPR Update for the 2008 ozone NAAQS fully addressed Clean Air Act interstate transport obligations of 20 eastern states. EPA determined that 2023 is an appropriate future analytic year to evaluate remaining good neighbor obligations and that there will be no remaining nonattainment or maintenance receptors with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the eastern United States in that year. Accordingly, the 20 CSAPR Update-affected states would not contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance of, any other state with regard to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Both the CSAPR Update and the CSAPR Close-Out rules were challenged in the D.C. Circuit Court. The D.C. Circuit ruled September 13, 2019, that because the EPA allowed upwind States to continue to significantly contribute to downwind air quality problems beyond statutory deadlines, the CSAPR Update Rule provided only a partial remedy that did not fully address interstate ozone transport, and remanded the CSAPR Update Rule back to the EPA. The D.C. Circuit Court issued an opinion October 1, 2019, finding that because the CSAPR Close-Out Rule relied on the same faulty reasoning as the CSAPR Update rule, the CSAPR Close-Out Rule must be vacated.

The CSAPR provisions are not anticipated to have a material impact on the Registrants. MidAmerican Energy operates natural gas-fueled generating facilities in Iowa and BHE Renewables operates natural gas-fueled generating facilities in Texas, Illinois and New York, which are subject to the CSAPR. MidAmerican Energy has installed emissions controls at its coal-fueled generating facilities to comply with the CSAPR and may purchase emissions allowances to meet a portion of its compliance obligations. The cost of these allowances is subject to market conditions at the time of purchase and historically has not been material. MidAmerican Energy believes that the controls installed to date are consistent with the reductions to be achieved from implementation of the rule. None of PacifiCorp's, Nevada Power's or Sierra Pacific's generating facilities are subject to the CSAPR. However, in a Notice of Data Availability published in the January 6, 2017, Federal Register, the EPA provided preliminary estimates of which upwind states may have linkages to downwind states experiencing ozone levels at or exceeding the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standard of 70 parts per billion, and, using similar methodology to that in the CSAPR, indicated that Utah and Wyoming could have an obligation under the "good neighbor" provisions of the Clean Air Act to reduce nitrogen oxides emissions. Until such time as a rule is finalized, the relevant Registrants cannot determine whether additional action may be required.


64


Regional Haze

The EPA's Regional Haze Rule, finalized in 1999, requires states to develop and implement plans to improve visibility in designated federally protected areas ("Class I areas"). Some of PacifiCorp's coal-fueled generating facilities in Utah, Wyoming, Arizona and Colorado and certain of Nevada Power's and Sierra Pacific's fossil-fueled generating facilities are subject to the Clean Air Visibility Rules. In accordance with the federal requirements, states are required to submit SIPs that address emissions from sources subject to best available retrofit technology ("BART") requirements and demonstrate progress towards achieving natural visibility requirements in Class I areas by 2064.

The state of Utah issued a regional haze SIP requiring the installation of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter controls on Hunter Units 1 and 2, and Huntington Units 1 and 2. In December 2012, the EPA approved the sulfur dioxide portion of the Utah regional haze SIP and disapproved the nitrogen oxides and particulate matter portions. Subsequently, the Utah Division of Air Quality completed an alternative BART analysis for Hunter Units 1 and 2, and Huntington Units 1 and 2. In January 2016, the EPA published two alternative proposals to either approve the Utah SIP as written or reject the Utah SIP relating to nitrogen oxides controls and require the installation of selective catalytic reduction ("SCR") controls at Hunter Units 1 and 2 and Huntington Units 1 and 2 within five years. EPA's final action on the Utah regional haze SIP was effective August 4, 2016. The EPA approved in part and disapproved in part the Utah regional haze SIP and issued a federal implementation plan ("FIP") requiring the installation of SCR controls at Hunter Units 1 and 2 and Huntington Units 1 and 2 within five years of the effective date of the rule. PacifiCorp and other parties filed requests with the EPA to reconsider and stay that decision, as well as filed motions for stay and petitions for review with the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ("Tenth Circuit") asking the court to overturn the EPA's actions. In July 2017, the EPA issued a letter indicating it would reconsider its FIP decision. In light of the EPA's grant of reconsideration and the EPA's position in the litigation, the Tenth Circuit held the litigation in abeyance and imposed a stay of the compliance obligations of the FIP for the number of days the stay is in effect while the EPA conducts its reconsideration process. To support the reconsideration, PacifiCorp undertook additional air quality modeling using the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions ("CAMX") dispersion model. On January 14, 2019, the state of Utah submitted a SIP revision to the EPA, which includes the updated modeling information and additional analysis. On June 24, 2019, the Utah Air Quality Board unanimously voted to approve the Utah regional haze state implementation plan revision, which incorporates a best available retrofit technology alternative into Utah's regional haze state implementation plan. The best available retrofit technology alternative makes the shutdown of PacifiCorp's carbon plant enforceable under the state implementation plan and removes the requirement to install selective catalytic reduction technology on Hunter Units 1 and 2 and Huntington Units 1 and 2. The Utah Division of Air Quality submitted the state implementation plan revision to the EPA for approval by the end of 2019.
 

65


The state of Wyoming issued two regional haze SIPs requiring the installation of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter controls on certain PacifiCorp coal-fueled generating facilities in Wyoming. The EPA approved the sulfur dioxide SIP in December 2012 and the EPA's approval was upheld on appeal by the Tenth Circuit in October 2014. In addition, the EPA initially proposed in June 2012 to disapprove portions of the nitrogen oxides and particulate matter SIP and instead issue a FIP. The EPA withdrew its initial proposed actions on the nitrogen oxides and particulate matter SIP and the proposed FIP, published a re-proposed rule in June 2013, and finalized its determination in January 2014, which aligns more closely with the SIP proposed by the state of Wyoming. The EPA's final action on the Wyoming SIP approved the state's plan to have PacifiCorp install low-nitrogen oxides burners at Naughton Units 1 and 2, SCR controls at Naughton Unit 3 by December 2014, SCR controls at Jim Bridger Units 1 through 4 between 2015 and 2022, and low-nitrogen oxides burners at Dave Johnston Unit 4. The EPA disapproved a portion of the Wyoming SIP and issued a FIP for Dave Johnston Unit 3, where it required the installation of SCR controls by 2019 or, in lieu of installing SCR controls, a commitment to shut down Dave Johnston Unit 3 by 2027, its currently approved depreciable life. The EPA also disapproved a portion of the Wyoming SIP and issued a FIP for the Wyodak coal-fueled generating facility, requiring the installation of SCR controls within five years (i.e., by 2019). The EPA action became final on March 3, 2014. PacifiCorp filed an appeal of the EPA's final action on Wyodak in March 2014. The state of Wyoming also filed an appeal of the EPA's final action, as did the Powder River Basin Resource Council, National Parks Conservation Association and Sierra Club. In September 2014, the Tenth Circuit issued a stay of the March 2019 compliance deadline for Wyodak, pending further action by the Tenth Circuit in the appeal. A stay remains in place and the case has not yet been set for oral argument. In June 2014, the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality issued a revised BART permit allowing Naughton Unit 3 to operate on coal through 2017 and providing for natural gas conversion of the unit in 2018. In 2017, the department approved an extension of the compliance date for Naughton Unit 3 to align with the requirements of the Wyoming SIP extending the requirement to cease coal firing to no later than January 30, 2019. The EPA issued final approval of the Wyoming SIP, including the Naughton Unit 3 gas conversion on March 21, 2019. PacifiCorp removed the unit from coal-fueled service on January 30, 2019, and its 2019 IRP Action Plan incorporates completion of the gas conversion, including all required regulatory notices and filings, by the end of 2020. On February 5, 2019, PacifiCorp submitted a reasonable progress reassessment permit application and reasonable progress determination for Jim Bridger Units 1 and 2, seeking a rescission of the December 2017 permit requiring the installation of selective catalytic reduction, to be replaced with permit imposing plant-wide emission limits to achieve better modeled visibility, fewer overall environmental impacts and lower costs of compliance. The proposal was issued for public comment in August 2019, and the state of Wyoming held a public hearing August 23, 2019 to consider the proposal and public input. The state of Wyoming is developing responses to public comment and is anticipated to submit the proposal to EPA in the first quarter 2020.

The state of Arizona issued a regional haze SIP requiring, among other things, the installation of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter controls on Cholla Unit 4. The EPA approved in part, and disapproved in part, the Arizona SIP and issued a FIP for the disapproved portions requiring SCR controls on Cholla Unit 4. PacifiCorp filed an appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ("Ninth Circuit") regarding the FIP as it relates to Cholla Unit 4, and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and other affected Arizona utilities filed separate appeals of the FIP as it relates to their interests. The Ninth Circuit issued an order in February 2015, holding the matter in abeyance while the parties pursued an alternate compliance approach for Cholla Unit 4. The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality's revision of the draft permit and revision to the Arizona regional haze SIP were approved by the EPA through final action published in the Federal Register on March 27, 2017, with an effective date of April 26, 2017. The final action allows Cholla Unit 4 to utilize coal until April 30, 2025 and convert to gas or otherwise cease burning coal by June 30, 2025. In December 2019, PacifiCorp initiated steps towards the early retirement of Unit 4 by December 31, 2020.

The state of Colorado regional haze SIP requires SCR controls at Craig Unit 2 and Hayden Units 1 and 2, in which PacifiCorp has ownership interests. Each of those regional haze compliance projects are either already in service or currently being constructed. In addition, in February 2015, the state of Colorado finalized an amendment to its regional haze SIP relating to Craig Unit 1, in which PacifiCorp has an ownership interest, to require the installation of SCR controls by 2021. In September 2016, the owners of Craig Units 1 and 2 reached an agreement with state and federal agencies and certain environmental groups that were parties to the previous settlement requiring SCR to retire Unit 1 by December 31, 2025, in lieu of SCR installation, or alternatively to remove the unit from coal-fueled service by August 31, 2021 with an option to convert the unit to natural gas by August 31, 2023, in lieu of SCR installation. The terms of the agreement were approved by the Colorado Air Quality Board in December 2016, incorporated into an amended Colorado regional haze SIP in 2017 and approved by the EPA in August 2018. PacifiCorp identified a December 31, 2025, retirement date for Craig Unit 1 in its 2017 and 2019 IRPs.

Until the EPA takes final action in each state and decisions have been made in the pending appeals, PacifiCorp cannot fully determine the impacts of the Regional Haze Rule on its respective generating facilities.


66


The Navajo Generating Station, in which Nevada Power is a joint owner with an 11.3% ownership share, is also a source that is subject to the regional haze BART requirements. In January 2013, the EPA announced a proposed FIP addressing BART and an alternative for the Navajo Generating Station that includes a flexible timeline for reducing nitrogen oxides emissions. The EPA issued a final FIP on August 8, 2014 adopting, with limited changes, the Navajo Generating Station proposal as a "better than BART" determination. Nevada Power filed the ERCR Plan in May 2014 that proposed to eliminate its ownership participation in the Navajo Generating Station in 2019, which was approved by the PUCN. In February 2017, the non-federal owners of the Navajo Generating Station announced the facility will shut down on or before December 23, 2019, unless new owners can be found. All current owners have since approved a lease extension with the Navajo Nation to allow operations to continue through 2019. On March 21, 2019, the Navajo Nation Council voted to end efforts to transition ownership and extend facility operations. The plant ceased operations at the end of 2019. Ownership transfer negotiations and closure preparations are ongoing and, until concluded, the relevant Registrant cannot determine whether additional action may be required.

Water Quality Standards

The federal Water Pollution Control Act ("Clean Water Act") establishes the framework for maintaining and improving water quality in the United States through a program that regulates, among other things, discharges to and withdrawals from waterways. The Clean Water Act requires that cooling water intake structures reflect the "best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact" to aquatic organisms. After significant litigation, the EPA released a proposed rule under §316(b) of the Clean Water Act to regulate cooling water intakes at existing facilities. The final rule was released in May 2014, and became effective in October 2014. Under the final rule, existing facilities that withdraw at least 25% of their water exclusively for cooling purposes and have a design intake flow of greater than two million gallons per day are required to reduce fish impingement (i.e., when fish and other aquatic organisms are trapped against screens when water is drawn into a facility's cooling system) by choosing one of seven options. Facilities that withdraw at least 125 million gallons of water per day from waters of the United States must also conduct studies to help their permitting authority determine what site-specific controls, if any, would be required to reduce entrainment of aquatic organisms (i.e., when organisms are drawn into the facility). PacifiCorp and MidAmerican Energy are assessing the options for compliance at their generating facilities impacted by the final rule and will complete impingement and entrainment studies. PacifiCorp's Dave Johnston generating facility and all of MidAmerican Energy's coal-fueled generating facilities, except Louisa, Ottumwa and Walter Scott, Jr. Unit 4, which have water cooling towers, withdraw more than 125 million gallons per day of water from waters of the United States for once-through cooling applications. PacifiCorp's Jim Bridger, Naughton, Gadsby, Hunter and Huntington generating facilities currently utilize closed cycle cooling towers but are designed to withdraw more than two million gallons of water per day. The standards are required to be met as soon as possible after the effective date of the final rule, but no later than eight years thereafter. The costs of compliance with the cooling water intake structure rule cannot be fully determined until the prescribed studies are conducted and the respective state environmental agencies review the studies to determine whether additional mitigation technologies should be applied. In the event that PacifiCorp's or MidAmerican Energy's existing intake structures require modification, the costs are not anticipated to be significant to the consolidated financial statements. Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific do not utilize once-through cooling water intake or discharge structures at any of their generating facilities. All of the Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific generating stations are designed to have either minimal or zero discharge; therefore, they are not impacted by the §316(b) final rule.


67


In November 2015, the EPA published final effluent limitation guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating sector which, among other things, regulate the discharge of bottom ash transport water, fly ash transport water, combustion residual leachate and non-chemical metal cleaning wastes. These guidelines, which had not been revised since 1982, were revised in response to the EPA's concerns that the addition of controls for air emissions has changed the effluent discharged from coal- and natural gas-fueled generating facilities. Under the originally-promulgated guidelines, permitting authorities were required to include the new limits in each impacted facility's discharge permit upon renewal with the new limits to be met as soon as possible, beginning November 1, 2018 and fully implemented by December 31, 2023. On April 5, 2017, a request for reconsideration and administrative stay of the guidelines was filed with the EPA. The EPA granted the request for reconsideration on April 12, 2017, imposed an immediate administrative stay of compliance dates in the rule that had not passed judicial review and requested the court stay the pending litigation over the rule until September 12, 2017. On June 6, 2017, the EPA proposed to extend many of the compliance deadlines that would otherwise occur in 2018 and on September 18, 2017, the EPA issued a final rule extending certain compliance dates for flue gas desulfurization wastewater and bottom ash transport water limits until November 1, 2020. In a separate action, on April 12, 2019, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated two aspects of the final effluent limitation guidelines, concerning discharge limits for (1) legacy wastewater from ash transport or treatment systems and (2) combustion residual leachate from landfills or settling ponds. The Fifth Circuit found that EPA's own data did not support the agency's conclusion that impoundments were the best technology available for these two waste streams. EPA must now complete a new effluent limitation guideline for these discharge limits. On November 22, 2019, the EPA proposed updates to the 2015 rule, specifically addressing flue gas desulfurization wastewater and bottom ash transport water. EPA proposes to ease selenium limits on flue gas desulfurization wastewater, ease the zero-discharge requirements on bottom ash transport water associated with blowdown of ash handling systems, allow a two-year extension to meet flue gas desulfurization wastewater requirements, and include additional subcategories to both wastewater categories. The proposal does not address the wastestreams at issue in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal's April 2019 decision. Comments on the proposed rule were accepted through January 21, 2020. While most of the issues raised by this rule are already being addressed through the coal combustion residuals rule and are not expected to impose significant additional requirements on the facilities, the impact of the rule cannot be fully determined until the reconsideration action is complete and any judicial review is conducted.

In April 2014, the EPA and the United States Army Corps of Engineers issued a joint proposal to address "waters of the United States" to clarify protection under the Clean Water Act for streams and wetlands. The proposed rule comes as a result of United States Supreme Court decisions in 2001 and 2006 that created confusion regarding jurisdictional waters that were subject to permitting under either nationwide or individual permitting requirements. The final rule was released in May 2015 but is currently under appeal in multiple courts and a nationwide stay on the implementation of the rule was issued in October 2015. On January 13, 2017, the United States Supreme Court granted a petition to address jurisdictional challenges to the rule. The EPA plans to undertake a two-step process, with the first step to repeal the 2015 rule and the second step to carry out a notice-and-comment rulemaking in which a substantive re-evaluation of the definition of the "waters of the United States" will be undertaken. On July 27, 2017, the EPA and the Corps of Engineers issued a proposal to repeal the final rule and recodify the pre-existing rules pending issuance of a new rule, which was finalized September 12, 2019. On January 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision related to the jurisdictional challenges to the rule, holding that federal district courts, rather than federal appeals courts, have proper jurisdiction to hear challenges to the rule and instructed the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss the petitions for review for lack of jurisdiction, clearing the way for imposition of the rule in certain states barring final action by the EPA to formalize the extension of the compliance deadline. On December 11, 2018, the EPA and the Corps of Engineers proposed a revised definition of "waters of the United States" that is intended to further clarify jurisdictional questions, eliminate case-by-case determinations and narrow Clean Water Act jurisdiction to align with Justice Scalia's 2006 opinion in Rapanos v. United States. On January 23, 2020, the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers signed the final rule narrowing the federal government's permitting authority under the Clean Water Act. The new Navigable Waters Protection Rule, which will take effect 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register, redefines what waters qualify as navigable waters of the U.S. and are under Clean Water Act jurisdiction. Under the new rule, the Clean Water Act will be considered to cover territorial seas and traditional navigable waters; tributaries that flow into jurisdictional waters; wetlands that are directly adjacent to jurisdictional waters; and lakes, ponds and impoundments of jurisdictional waters. The agency and corps originally proposed six categories, but in the final version they collapsed ditches and impoundments into other categories. There are also 12 categories of waters that the agencies highlighted as being excluded from coverage, including groundwater, ephemeral streams and pools, prior converted cropland and waste treatment systems. Until the rule is fully litigated and finalized, the Registrants cannot predict the impact on overall compliance obligations.


68


Coal Combustion Byproduct Disposal

In May 2010, the EPA released a proposed rule to regulate the management and disposal of coal combustion byproducts under the RCRA. The final rule was released by the EPA on December 19, 2014, was published in the Federal Register on April 17, 2015 and was effective on October 19, 2015. The final rule regulates coal combustion byproducts as non-hazardous waste under RCRA Subtitle D and establishes minimum nationwide standards for the disposal of coal combustion residuals. Under the final rule, surface impoundments and landfills utilized for coal combustion byproducts may need to be closed unless they can meet the more stringent regulatory requirements. The final rule requires regulated entities to post annual groundwater monitoring and corrective action reports. The first of these reports was posted to the respective Registrant's coal combustion rule compliance data and information websites in March 2018. Based on the results in those reports, additional action may be required under the rule.

At the time the rule was published in April 2015, PacifiCorp operated 18 surface impoundments and seven landfills that contained coal combustion byproducts. Prior to the effective date of the rule in October 2015, nine surface impoundments and three landfills were either closed or repurposed to no longer receive coal combustion byproducts and hence are not subject to the final rule. As PacifiCorp proceeded to implement the final coal combustion rule, it was determined that two surface impoundments located at the Dave Johnston generating facility were hydraulically connected and effectively constitute a single impoundment. In November 2017, a new surface impoundment was placed into service at the Naughton Generating Station. At the time the rule was published in April 2015, MidAmerican Energy owned or operated nine surface impoundments and four landfills that contain coal combustion byproducts. Prior to the effective date of the rule in October 2015, MidAmerican Energy closed or repurposed six surface impoundments to no longer receive coal combustion byproducts. Five of these surface impoundments were closed on or before December 21, 2017 and the sixth is undergoing closure. At the time the rule was published in April 2015, the Nevada Utilities operated ten evaporative surface impoundments and two landfills that contained coal combustion byproducts. Prior to the effective date of the rule in October 2015, the Nevada Utilities closed four of the surface impoundments, four impoundments discontinued receipt of coal combustion byproducts making them inactive and two surface impoundments remain active and subject to the final rule. The two landfills remain active and subject to the final rule.


69


Multiple parties filed challenges over various aspects of the final rule in the D.C. Circuit in 2015, resulting in settlement of some of the issues and subsequent regulatory action by the EPA, including subjecting inactive surface impoundments to regulation. Oral argument was held by the D.C. Circuit on November 20, 2017 over certain portions of the 2015 rule that had not been settled or otherwise remanded. On August 21, 2018, the D.C. Circuit issued its opinion in Utility Solid Waste Activities Group v. EPA, finding it was arbitrary and capricious for EPA to allow unlined ash ponds to continue operating until some unknown point in the future when groundwater contamination could be detected. The D.C. Circuit vacated the closure section of the CCR rule and remanded the issue of unlined ponds to EPA for reconsideration with specific instructions to consider harm to the environment, not just to human health. The D.C. Circuit also held EPA's decision to not regulate legacy ponds was arbitrary and capricious. While the D.C. Circuit's decision was pending, the EPA, on March 15, 2018, issued a proposal to address provisions of the final coal combustion residuals rule that were remanded back to the agency on June 14, 2016, by the D.C. Circuit. The proposal included provisions that establish alternative performance standards for owners and operators of coal combustion residuals units located in states that have approved permit programs or are otherwise subject to oversight through a permit program administered by the EPA. The EPA finalized the first phase of the coal combustion residuals rule amendments on July 30, 2018, with an effective date of August 28, 2018 (the "Phase 1, Part 1 rule"). In addition to adopting alternative performance standards and revising groundwater performance standards for certain constituents, EPA extended the deadline by which facilities must initiate closure of unlined ash ponds exceeding a groundwater protection standard and impoundments that do not meet the rule's aquifer location restrictions to October 31, 2020. Following submittal of competing motions from environmental groups and the EPA to stay or remand this deadline extension, on March 13, 2019, the D.C. Circuit granted EPA's request to remand the rule and left the October 31, 2020 deadline in place while the agency undertakes a new rulemaking establishing a new deadline for initiating closure. On August 14, 2019, the EPA released its "Phase 2" proposal, which contains targeted amendments to the coal combustion residuals rule in response to court remands and EPA settlement agreements, as well as issues raised in a rulemaking petition. The Phase 2 proposal modifies the definition of "beneficial use" by replacing a mass-based threshold with new location-based criteria for triggering the need to conduct an environmental demonstration; establishes a definition of "CCR storage pile" to address the temporary storage of coal combustion residuals on the ground, depending on whether the material is destined for disposal or beneficial use; makes certain changes to the rule's annual groundwater monitoring and corrective action reports to make it easier for the public to see and understand the data contained within the reports; modifies the requirements related to facilities' publicly available coal combustion residual rule websites to make the information more readily available; and establishes a risk-based groundwater monitoring protection standard for boron in the event the EPA decides to add boron to Appendix IV in the coal combustion residuals rule. The EPA accepted comments on the Phase 2 proposal through October 15, 2019. On December 2, 2019, the EPA proposed additional changes to the CCR rule in its Holistic Approach to Closure: Part A rule. This proposal addressed the D.C. Circuit's revocation of the provisions that allow unlined impoundments to continue receiving ash and establishes a new deadline of August 31, 2020, by which all unlined surface impoundments (including clay lined impoundments that do not otherwise meet the definition of “lined”) must initiate closure. The proposal also identifies and clarifies several opportunities to extend the closure deadlines for lack of alternative capacity or closure of the coal-fueled operating unit by a date certain. Comments on the proposal were accepted through January 31, 2020. In addition, it is anticipated that EPA will issue several more proposals over the coming months that further modify the CCR rule, including a federal permit program as directed under the WIIN Act; closure Part B, which may address liner equivalency demonstrations, the use of CCR in impoundment closure, and deadlines to complete closure by removal; and legacy impoundments. Until the proposals are finalized and fully litigated, the Registrants cannot determine whether additional action may be required.

Separately, on August 10, 2017, the EPA issued proposed permitting guidance on how states' coal combustion residuals permit programs should comply with the requirements of the final rule as authorized under the December 2016 Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act. Utilizing that guidance, the state of Oklahoma submitted an application to the EPA for approval of its state program and, on June 28, 2018, the EPA's approval of the application was published in the Federal Register. Environmental groups, including Waterkeeper Alliance and the Sierra Club, filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on September 26, 2018, alleging that the EPA unlawfully approved Oklahoma's permit program. This suit also incorporates claims first identified in a July 26, 2018 notice of intent to sue that alleged the EPA failed to perform nondiscretionary duties related to the development and publication of minimum guidelines for public participation in the approval of state permit programs for coal combustion residuals. To date, none of the states in which the Registrants operate has submitted an application to the EPA for approval of state permitting authority. The state of Utah adopted the federal final rule in September 2016, which required PacifiCorp to submit permit applications for two of its landfills by March 2017. It is anticipated that the state of Utah will submit an application to EPA for approval of its coal combustion residuals permit program prior to the end of 2021. In 2019, the state of Wyoming proposed to adopt state rules which incorporate the final federal rule by reference. It is anticipated that Wyoming will finalize its rule in late 2020 and submit an application to the EPA to implement a state permit program in early 2021.


70


Notwithstanding the status of the final coal combustion residuals rule, citizens' suits have been filed against regulated entities seeking judicial relief for contamination alleged to have been caused by releases of coal combustion byproducts. Some of these cases have been successful in imposing liability upon companies if coal combustion byproducts contaminate groundwater that is ultimately released or connected to surface water. In addition, actions have been filed against regulated entities seeking to require that surface impoundments containing coal combustion residuals be subject to closure by removal rather than being allowed to effectuate closure in place as provided under the final rule. The Registrants are not a party to these lawsuits and until they are resolved, the Registrants cannot predict the impact on overall compliance obligations.

Other

Other laws, regulations and agencies to which the relevant Registrants are subject include, but are not limited to:
The federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and similar state laws may require any current or former owners or operators of a disposal site, as well as transporters or generators of hazardous substances sent to such disposal site, to share in environmental remediation costs. Certain Registrants have been identified as potentially responsible parties in connection with certain disposal sites. The relevant Registrants have completed several cleanup actions and are participating in ongoing investigations and remedial actions. Costs associated with these actions are not expected to be material and are expected to be found prudent and included in rates.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, under which the United States Department of Energy is responsible for the selection and development of repositories for, and the permanent disposal of, spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive wastes. Refer to Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of Berkshire Hathaway Energy in Item 8 of this Form 10-K and Note 11 of the Notes to Financial Statements of MidAmerican Energy in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for additional information regarding MidAmerican Energy's nuclear decommissioning obligations.
The federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 and similar state statutes establish operational, reclamation and closure standards that must be met during and upon completion of PacifiCorp's mining activities.
The FERC evaluates hydroelectric systems to ensure environmental impacts are minimized, including the issuance of environmental impact statements for licensed projects both initially and upon relicensing. The FERC monitors the hydroelectric facilities for compliance with the license terms and conditions, which include environmental provisions. Refer to Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of Berkshire Hathaway Energy in Item 8 of this Form 10-K and Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of PacifiCorp in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for information regarding the relicensing of PacifiCorp's Klamath River hydroelectric system.

The Registrants expect they will be allowed to recover their respective prudently incurred costs to comply with the environmental laws and regulations discussed above. The Registrants' planning efforts take into consideration the complexity of balancing factors such as: (a) pending environmental regulations and requirements to reduce emissions, address waste disposal, ensure water quality and protect wildlife; (b) avoidance of excessive reliance on any one generation technology; (c) costs and trade-offs of various resource options including energy efficiency, demand response programs and renewable generation; (d) state-specific energy policies, resource preferences and economic development efforts; (e) additional transmission investment to reduce power costs and increase efficiency and reliability of the integrated transmission system; and (f) keeping rates affordable. Due to the number of generating units impacted by environmental regulations, deferring installation of compliance-related projects is often not feasible or cost effective and places the Registrants at risk of not having access to necessary capital, material, and labor while attempting to perform major equipment installations in a compressed timeframe concurrent with other utilities across the country. Therefore, the Registrants have established installation schedules with permitting agencies that coordinate compliance timeframes with construction and tie-in of major environmental compliance projects as units are scheduled off-line for planned maintenance outages; these coordinated efforts help reduce costs associated with replacement power and maintain system reliability.


71



Item 1A.    Risk Factors

Each Registrant is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, those described below. Careful consideration of these risks, together with all of the other information included in this Form 10-K and the other public information filed by the relevant Registrant, should be made before making an investment decision. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known or which each Registrant currently deems immaterial may also impair its business operations. Unless stated otherwise, the risks described below generally relate to each Registrant.

Corporate and Financial Structure Risks

BHE is a holding company and depends on distributions from subsidiaries, including joint ventures, to meet its obligations.

BHE is a holding company with no material assets other than the ownership interests in its subsidiaries and joint ventures, collectively referred to as its subsidiaries. Accordingly, cash flows and the ability to meet BHE's obligations are largely dependent upon the earnings of its subsidiaries and the payment of such earnings to BHE in the form of dividends or other distributions. BHE's subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities and have no obligation, contingent or otherwise, to pay amounts due pursuant to BHE's senior debt, junior subordinated debt or its other obligations, or to make funds available, whether by dividends or other payments, for the payment of amounts due pursuant to BHE's senior debt, junior subordinated debt or its other obligations, and do not guarantee the payment of any of its obligations. Distributions from subsidiaries may also be limited by:
their respective earnings, capital requirements, and required debt and preferred stock payments;
the satisfaction of certain terms contained in financing, ring-fencing or organizational documents; and
regulatory restrictions that limit the ability of BHE's regulated utility subsidiaries to distribute profits.

BHE is substantially leveraged, the terms of its existing senior and junior subordinated debt do not restrict the incurrence of additional debt by BHE or its subsidiaries, and BHE's senior debt is structurally subordinated to the debt of its subsidiaries, and each of such factors could adversely affect BHE's consolidated financial results.

A significant portion of BHE's capital structure is comprised of debt, and BHE expects to incur additional debt in the future to fund items such as, among others, acquisitions, capital investments and the development and construction of new or expanded facilities. As of December 31, 2019, BHE had the following outstanding obligations:
senior unsecured debt of $8.6 billion;
junior subordinated debentures of $100 million;
short-term borrowings of $1,590 million;
guarantees and letters of credit in respect of subsidiary and equity method investments aggregating $277 million; and
commitments, subject to satisfaction of certain specified conditions, to provide equity contributions in support of renewable tax equity investments totaling $2.4 billion.

BHE's consolidated subsidiaries also have significant amounts of outstanding debt, which totaled $32.3 billion as of December 31, 2019. These amounts exclude (a) trade debt, (b) preferred stock obligations, (c) letters of credit in respect of subsidiary debt, and (d) BHE's share of the outstanding debt of its own or its subsidiaries' equity method investments.

Given BHE's substantial leverage, it may not have sufficient cash to service its debt, which could limit its ability to finance future acquisitions, develop and construct additional projects, or operate successfully under difficult conditions, including those brought on by adverse national and global economies, unfavorable financial markets or growth conditions where its capital needs may exceed its ability to fund them. BHE's leverage could also impair its credit quality or the credit quality of its subsidiaries, making it more difficult to finance operations or issue future debt on favorable terms, and could result in a downgrade in debt ratings by credit rating agencies.


72


The terms of BHE's and its subsidiaries' debt do not limit BHE's ability or the ability of its subsidiaries to incur additional debt or issue preferred stock. Accordingly, BHE or its subsidiaries could enter into acquisitions, new financings, refinancings, recapitalizations, leases or other highly leveraged transactions that could significantly increase BHE's or its subsidiaries' total amount of outstanding debt. The interest payments needed to service this increased level of debt could adversely affect BHE's or its subsidiaries' financial results. Many of BHE's subsidiaries' debt agreements contain covenants, or may in the future contain covenants, that restrict or limit, among other things, such subsidiaries' ability to create liens, sell assets, make certain distributions, incur additional debt or miss contractual deadlines or requirements, and BHE's ability to comply with these covenants may be affected by events beyond its control. Further, if an event of default accelerates a repayment obligation and such acceleration results in an event of default under some or all of BHE's other debt, BHE may not have sufficient funds to repay all of the accelerated debt simultaneously, and the other risks described under "Corporate and Financial Structure Risks" may be magnified as well.

Because BHE is a holding company, the claims of its senior debt holders are structurally subordinated with respect to the assets and earnings of its subsidiaries. Therefore, the rights of its creditors to participate in the assets of any subsidiary in the event of a liquidation or reorganization are subject to the prior claims of the subsidiary's creditors and preferred shareholders, if any. In addition, pursuant to separate financing agreements, substantially all of PacifiCorp's electric utility properties, MidAmerican Energy's electric utility properties in the state of Iowa, Nevada Power's and Sierra Pacific's properties in the state of Nevada, AltaLink's transmission properties, the equity interest of MidAmerican Funding's subsidiary and substantially all of the assets of the subsidiaries of BHE Renewables that are direct or indirect owners of solar and wind generation projects, are directly or indirectly pledged to secure their financings and, therefore, may be unavailable as potential sources of repayment of BHE's debt.

A downgrade in BHE's credit ratings or the credit ratings of its subsidiaries, including the Subsidiary Registrants, could negatively affect BHE's or its subsidiaries' access to capital, increase the cost of borrowing or raise energy transaction credit support requirements.

BHE's senior unsecured debt and its subsidiaries' long-term debt, including the Subsidiary Registrants, are rated by various rating agencies. BHE cannot give assurance that its senior unsecured debt rating or any of its subsidiaries' long-term debt ratings will not be reduced in the future. Although none of the Registrants' outstanding debt has rating-downgrade triggers that would accelerate a repayment obligation, a credit rating downgrade would increase any such Registrant's borrowing costs and commitment fees on its revolving credit agreements and other financing arrangements, perhaps significantly. In addition, such Registrant would likely be required to pay a higher interest rate in future financings, and the potential pool of investors and funding sources would likely decrease. Further, access to the commercial paper market could be significantly limited, resulting in higher interest costs.

Similarly, any downgrade or other event negatively affecting the credit ratings of BHE's subsidiaries could make their costs of borrowing higher or access to funding sources more limited, which in turn could cause BHE to provide liquidity in the form of capital contributions or loans to such subsidiaries, thus reducing its and its subsidiaries' liquidity and borrowing capacity.

Most of the Registrants' large wholesale customers, suppliers and counterparties require such Registrant to have sufficient creditworthiness in order to enter into transactions, particularly in the wholesale energy markets. If the credit ratings of a Registrant were to decline, especially below investment grade, the relevant Registrant's financing costs and borrowings would likely increase because certain counterparties may require collateral in the form of cash, a letter of credit or some other form of security for existing transactions and as a condition to entering into future transactions with such Registrant. Amounts could be material and could adversely affect such Registrant's liquidity and cash flows.

BHE's majority shareholder, Berkshire Hathaway, could exercise control over BHE in a manner that would benefit Berkshire Hathaway to the detriment of BHE's creditors and BHE could exercise control over the Subsidiary Registrants in a manner that would benefit BHE to the detriment of the Subsidiary Registrants' creditors and PacifiCorp's preferred stockholders.

Berkshire Hathaway is majority owner of BHE and has control over all decisions requiring shareholder approval. In circumstances involving a conflict of interest between Berkshire Hathaway and BHE's creditors, Berkshire Hathaway could exercise its control in a manner that would benefit Berkshire Hathaway to the detriment of BHE's creditors.

BHE indirectly owns all of the common stock of PacifiCorp, Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific and is the sole member of MidAmerican Funding and, accordingly, indirectly owns all of MidAmerican Energy's common stock. As a result, BHE has control over all decisions requiring shareholder approval, including the election of directors. In circumstances involving a conflict of interest between BHE and the creditors of the Subsidiary Registrants, BHE could exercise its control in a manner that would benefit BHE to the detriment of the Subsidiary Registrants' creditors.


73


Business Risks

Much of BHE's growth has been achieved through acquisitions, and any such acquisition may not be successful.

Much of BHE's growth has been achieved through acquisitions. Future acquisitions may range from buying individual assets to the purchase of entire businesses. BHE will continue to investigate and pursue opportunities for future acquisitions that it believes, but cannot assure, may increase value and expand or complement existing businesses. BHE may participate in bidding or other negotiations at any time for such acquisition opportunities which may or may not be successful.

Any acquisition entails numerous risks, including, among others:
the failure to complete the transaction for various reasons, such as the inability to obtain the required regulatory approvals, materially adverse developments in the potential acquiree's business or financial condition or successful intervening offers by third parties;
the failure of the combined business to realize the expected benefits;
the risk that federal, state or foreign regulators or courts could require regulatory commitments or other actions in respect of acquired assets, potentially including programs, contributions, investments, divestitures and market mitigation measures;
the risk of unexpected or unidentified issues not discovered in the diligence process; and
the need for substantial additional capital and financial investments.

An acquisition could cause an interruption of, or a loss of momentum in, the activities of one or more of BHE's subsidiaries. In addition, the final orders of regulatory authorities approving acquisitions may be subject to appeal by third parties. The diversion of BHE management's attention and any delays or difficulties encountered in connection with the approval and integration of the acquired operations could adversely affect BHE's combined businesses and financial results and could impair its ability to realize the anticipated benefits of the acquisition.

BHE cannot assure that future acquisitions, if any, or any integration efforts will be successful, or that BHE's ability to repay its obligations will not be adversely affected by any future acquisitions.

The Registrants are subject to operating uncertainties and events beyond each respective Registrant's control that impact the costs to operate, maintain, repair and replace utility and interstate natural gas pipeline systems, which could adversely affect each respective Registrant's financial results.

The operation of complex utility systems or interstate natural gas pipeline and storage systems that are spread over large geographic areas involves many operating uncertainties and events beyond each respective Registrant's control. These potential events include the breakdown or failure of the Registrants' thermal, nuclear, hydroelectric, solar, wind and other electricity generating facilities and related equipment, compressors, pipelines, transmission and distribution lines or other equipment or processes, which could lead to catastrophic events; unscheduled outages; strikes, lockouts or other labor-related actions; shortages of qualified labor; transmission and distribution system constraints; failure to obtain, renew or maintain rights-of-way, easements and leases on United States federal, Native American, First Nations or tribal lands; terrorist activities or military or other actions, including cyber attacks; fuel shortages or interruptions; unavailability of critical equipment, materials and supplies; low water flows and other weather-related impacts; performance below expected levels of output, capacity or efficiency; operator error; third-party excavation errors; unexpected degradation of pipeline systems; design, construction or manufacturing defects; and catastrophic events such as severe storms, floods, fires, earthquakes, explosions, landslides, an electromagnetic pulse, mining incidents, litigation, wars, terrorism and embargoes. A catastrophic event might result in injury or loss of life, extensive property damage or environmental or natural resource damages. For example, in the event of an uncontrolled release of water at one of PacifiCorp's high hazard potential hydroelectric dams, it is probable that loss of human life, disruption of lifeline facilities and property damage could occur in the downstream population and civil or other penalties could be imposed by the FERC. Similarly, in the event of a fire caused by a Registrant's operation of its businesses, including transmission or distribution systems, the relevant Registrant could be exposed to significant liability for personal and property damages that result. The extent of that liability would be determined by the applicable state law where any such damage occurred. In California, for example, where PacifiCorp operates, state law currently exposes utilities to "inverse condemnation" liability for damages resulting from events such as fires caused by the utility's operations regardless of fault. Any of these events or other operational events could significantly reduce or eliminate the relevant Registrant's revenue or significantly increase its expenses, thereby reducing the availability of distributions to BHE. For example, if the relevant Registrant cannot operate its electricity or natural gas facilities at full capacity due to damage caused by a catastrophic event, its revenue could decrease and its expenses could increase due to the need to obtain energy from more expensive sources.

74



Further, the Registrants self-insure many risks, and current and future insurance coverage may not be sufficient to replace lost revenue or cover repair and replacement costs or other damages. The scope, cost and availability of each Registrant's insurance coverage may change, including the portion that is self-insured. Any reduction of each Registrant's revenue or increase in its expenses resulting from the risks described above, could adversely affect the relevant Registrant's financial results.

Each Registrant is subject to extensive federal, state, local and foreign legislation and regulation, including numerous environmental, health, safety, reliability, data privacy and other laws and regulations that affect its operations and costs. These laws and regulations are complex, dynamic and subject to new interpretations or change. In addition, new laws and regulations, including initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the utility industry, are continually being proposed and enacted that impose new or revised requirements or standards on each Registrant.

Each Registrant is required to comply with numerous federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations as described in "General Regulation" and "Environmental Laws and Regulations" in Item 1 of this Form 10-K that have broad application to each Registrant and limits the respective Registrant's ability to independently make and implement management decisions regarding, among other items, acquiring businesses; constructing, acquiring, disposing or retiring of operating assets; operating and maintaining generating facilities and transmission and distribution system assets; complying with pipeline safety and integrity and environmental requirements; setting rates charged to customers; establishing capital structures and issuing debt or equity securities; transacting between subsidiaries and affiliates; and paying dividends or similar distributions. These laws and regulations, which are followed in developing the Registrants' safety and compliance programs and procedures, are implemented and enforced by federal, state and local regulatory agencies, such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the FERC, the EPA, the DOT, the NRC, the Federal Mine Safety and Health Administration and various state regulatory commissions in the United States, and foreign regulatory agencies, such as GEMA, which discharges certain of its powers through its staff within Ofgem, in Great Britain and the AUC in Alberta, Canada.

Compliance with applicable laws and regulations generally requires each Registrant to obtain and comply with a wide variety of licenses, permits, inspections, audits and other approvals. Further, compliance with laws and regulations can require significant capital and operating expenditures, including expenditures for new equipment, inspection, cleanup costs, removal and remediation costs and damages arising out of contaminated properties. Compliance activities pursuant to existing or new laws and regulations could be prohibitively expensive or otherwise uneconomical. As a result, each Registrant could be required to shut down some facilities or materially alter its operations. Further, each Registrant may not be able to obtain or maintain all required environmental or other regulatory approvals and permits for its operating assets or development projects. Delays in, or active opposition by third parties to, obtaining any required environmental or regulatory authorizations or failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the authorizations may increase costs or prevent or delay each Registrant from operating its facilities, developing or favorably locating new facilities or expanding existing facilities. If any Registrant fails to comply with any environmental or other regulatory requirements, such Registrant may be subject to penalties and fines or other sanctions, including changes to the way its electricity generating facilities are operated that may adversely impact generation or how the Pipeline Companies are permitted to operate their systems that may adversely impact throughput. The costs of complying with laws and regulations could adversely affect each Registrant's financial results. Not being able to operate existing facilities or develop new generating facilities to meet customer electricity needs could require such Registrant to increase its purchases of electricity on the wholesale market, which could increase market and price risks and adversely affect such Registrant's financial results.

Existing laws and regulations, while comprehensive, are subject to changes and revisions from ongoing policy initiatives by legislators and regulators and to interpretations that may ultimately be resolved by the courts. For example, changes in laws and regulations could result in, but are not limited to, increased competition and decreased revenues within each Registrant's service territories, such as the recently defeated Nevada Energy Choice Initiative; new environmental requirements, including the implementation of or changes to the Affordable Clean Energy rule, RPS and GHG emissions reduction goals; the issuance of new or stricter air quality standards; the implementation of energy efficiency mandates; the issuance of regulations governing the management and disposal of coal combustion byproducts; changes in forecasting requirements; changes to each Registrant's service territories as a result of condemnation or takeover by municipalities or other governmental entities, particularly where it lacks the exclusive right to serve its customers; the inability of each Registrant to recover its costs on a timely basis, if at all; new pipeline safety requirements; or a negative impact on each Registrant's current cost recovery arrangements. In addition to changes in existing legislation and regulation, new laws and regulations are likely to be enacted from time to time that impose additional or new requirements or standards on each Registrant. Recent efforts by the EPA to repeal the Clean Power Plan could increase the filing of common law nuisance lawsuits against emitters of GHG. Adverse rulings in GHG-related cases could result in increased or changed regulations and could increase costs for GHG emitters, including the Registrants' generating facilities. The GHG rules, changes to those rules, and the Registrants' compliance requirements are subject to potential outcomes from proceedings and litigation challenging the rules.

75



New federal, regional, state and international accords, legislation, regulation, or judicial proceedings limiting GHG emissions could have a material adverse impact on the Registrants, the United States and the global economy. Companies and industries with higher GHG emissions, such as utilities with significant coal-fueled generating facilities, will be subject to more direct impacts and greater financial and regulatory risks. The impact is dependent on numerous factors, none of which can be meaningfully quantified at this time. These factors include, but are not limited to, the magnitude and timing of GHG emissions reduction requirements; the design of the requirements; the cost, availability and effectiveness of emissions control technology; the price, distribution method and availability of offsets and allowances used for compliance; government-imposed compliance costs; and the existence and nature of incremental cost recovery mechanisms. Examples of how new requirements may impact the Registrants include:
Additional costs may be incurred to purchase required emissions allowances under any market-based cap-and-trade system in excess of allocations that are received at no cost. These purchases would be necessary until new technologies could be developed and deployed to reduce emissions or lower carbon generation is available;
Acquiring and renewing construction and operating permits for new and existing generating facilities may be costly and difficult;
Additional costs may be incurred to purchase and deploy new generating technologies;
Costs may be incurred to retire existing coal-fueled generating facilities before the end of their otherwise useful lives or to convert them to burn fuels, such as natural gas or biomass, that result in lower emissions;
Operating costs may be higher and generating unit outputs may be lower;
Higher interest and financing costs and reduced access to capital markets may result to the extent that financial markets view climate change and GHG emissions as a greater business risk; and
The relevant Registrant's natural gas pipeline operations, electric transmission and retail sales may be impacted in response to changes in customer demand and requirements to reduce GHG emissions.

The impact of events or conditions caused by climate change, whether from natural processes or human activities, are uncertain and could vary widely, from highly localized to worldwide, and the extent to which a utility's operations may be affected is uncertain. Climate change may cause physical and financial risk through, among other things, sea level rise, changes in precipitation and extreme weather events. Consumer demand for energy may increase or decrease, based on overall changes in weather and as customers promote lower energy consumption through the continued use of energy efficiency programs or other means. Availability of resources to generate electricity, such as water for hydroelectric production and cooling purposes, may also be impacted by climate change and could influence the Registrants' existing and future electricity generating portfolio. These issues may have a direct impact on the costs of electricity production and increase the price customers pay or their demand for electricity.

Implementing actions required under, and otherwise complying with, new federal and state laws and regulations and changes in existing ones are among the most challenging aspects of managing utility operations. The Registrants cannot accurately predict the type or scope of future laws and regulations that may be enacted, changes in existing ones or new interpretations by agency orders or court decisions, nor can each Registrant determine their impact on it at this time; however, any one of these could adversely affect each Registrant's financial results through higher capital expenditures and operating costs, early closure of generating facilities or lower tax benefits or restrict or otherwise cause an adverse change in how each Registrant operates its business. To the extent that each Registrant is not allowed by its regulators to recover or cannot otherwise recover the costs to comply with new laws and regulations or changes in existing ones, the costs of complying with such additional requirements could have a material adverse effect on the relevant Registrant's financial results. Additionally, even if such costs are recoverable in rates, if they are substantial and result in rates increasing to levels that substantially reduce customer demand, this could have a material adverse effect on the relevant Registrant's financial results.

Recovery of costs and certain activities by each Registrant is subject to regulatory review and approval, and the inability to recover costs or undertake certain activities may adversely affect each Registrant's financial results.

State Regulatory Rate Review Proceedings

The Utilities establish rates for their regulated retail service through state regulatory proceedings. These proceedings typically involve multiple parties, including government bodies and officials, consumer advocacy groups and various consumers of energy, who have differing concerns but generally have the common objective of limiting rate increases or requesting rate decreases while also requiring the Utilities to ensure system reliability. Decisions are subject to judicial appeal, potentially leading to further uncertainty associated with the approval proceedings.


76


States set retail rates based in part upon the state regulatory commission's acceptance of an allocated share of total utility costs. When states adopt different methods to calculate interjurisdictional cost allocations, some costs may not be incorporated into rates of any state or other jurisdiction. Ratemaking is also generally done on the basis of estimates of normalized costs, so if a given year's realized costs are higher than normalized costs, rates may not be sufficient to cover those costs. In some cases, actual costs are lower than the normalized or estimated costs recovered through rates and from time-to-time may result in a state regulator requiring refunds to customers. Each state regulatory commission generally sets rates based on a test year established in accordance with that commission's policies. The test year data adopted by each state regulatory commission may create a lag between the incurrence of a cost and its recovery in rates. Each state regulatory commission also decides the allowed levels of expense, investment and capital structure that it deems are prudently incurred in providing the service and may disallow recovery in rates for any costs that it believes do not meet such standard. Additionally, each state regulatory commission establishes the allowed rate of return the Utilities will be given an opportunity to earn on their sources of capital. While rate regulation is premised on providing a fair opportunity to earn a reasonable rate of return on invested capital, the state regulatory commissions do not guarantee that each Registrant will be able to realize the allowed rate of return or recover all of its costs even if it believes such costs to be prudently incurred.

Some state regulatory commissions have authorized recovery of certain costs above the level assumed in establishing base rates through adjustment mechanisms, which may be subject to customer sharing. Any significant increase in fuel costs for electricity generation or purchased electricity costs could have a negative impact on the Utilities, despite efforts to minimize this impact through the use of hedging contracts and adjustment mechanisms or through future general regulatory rate reviews. Any of these consequences could adversely affect each Registrant's financial results.

FERC Jurisdiction

The FERC authorizes cost-based rates associated with transmission services provided by the Utilities' transmission facilities. Under the Federal Power Act, the Utilities, or MISO as it relates to MidAmerican Energy, may voluntarily file, or may be obligated to file, for changes, including general rate changes, to their system-wide transmission service rates. General rate changes implemented may be subject to refund. The FERC also has responsibility for approving both cost- and market-based rates under which the Utilities sell electricity in the wholesale market, has jurisdiction over most of PacifiCorp's hydroelectric generating facilities and has broad jurisdiction over energy markets. The FERC may impose price limitations, bidding rules and other mechanisms to address some of the volatility of these markets or could revoke or restrict the ability of the Utilities to sell electricity at market-based rates, which could adversely affect each Registrant's financial results. The FERC also maintains rules concerning standards of conduct, affiliate restrictions, interlocking directorates and cross-subsidization. As a transmission owning member of MISO, MidAmerican Energy is also subject to MISO-directed modifications of market rules, which are subject to FERC approval and operational procedures. As participants in EIM, PacifiCorp, Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific are also subject to applicable California ISO rules, which are subject to FERC approval and operational procedures. The FERC may also impose substantial civil penalties for any non-compliance with the Federal Power Act and the FERC's rules and orders.

The NERC has standards in place to ensure the reliability of the electric generation system and transmission grid. The Utilities are subject to the NERC's regulations and periodic audits to ensure compliance with those regulations. The NERC may carry out enforcement actions for non-compliance and administer significant financial penalties, subject to the FERC's review.

The FERC has jurisdiction over, among other things, the construction, abandonment, modification and operation of natural gas pipelines and related facilities used in the transportation, storage and sale of natural gas in interstate commerce, including all rates, charges and terms and conditions of service. The FERC also has market transparency authority and has adopted additional reporting and internet posting requirements for natural gas pipelines and buyers and sellers of natural gas.

Rates for the interstate natural gas transmission and storage operations at the Pipeline Companies, which include reservation, commodity, surcharges, fuel and gas lost and unaccounted for charges, are authorized by the FERC. In accordance with the FERC's rate-making principles, the Pipeline Companies' current maximum tariff rates are designed to recover prudently incurred costs included in their pipeline system's regulatory cost of service that are associated with the construction, operation and maintenance of their pipeline system and to afford the Pipeline Companies an opportunity to earn a reasonable rate of return. Nevertheless, the rates the FERC authorizes the Pipeline Companies to charge their customers may not be sufficient to recover the costs incurred to provide services in any given period. Moreover, from time to time, the FERC may change, alter or refine its policies or methodologies for establishing pipeline rates and terms and conditions of service. In addition, the FERC has the authority under Section 5 of the Natural Gas Act of 1938 ("NGA") to investigate whether a pipeline may be earning more than its allowed rate of return and, when appropriate, to institute proceedings against such pipeline to prospectively reduce rates. Any such proceedings, if instituted, could result in significantly adverse rate decreases.


77


Under FERC policy, interstate pipelines and their customers may execute contracts at negotiated rates, which may be above or below the maximum tariff rate for that service or the pipeline may agree to provide a discounted rate, which would be a rate between the maximum and minimum tariff rates. In a rate proceeding, rates in these contracts are generally not subject to adjustment. It is possible that the cost to perform services under negotiated or discounted rate contracts will exceed the cost used in the determination of the negotiated or discounted rates, which could result either in losses or lower rates of return for providing such services. Under certain circumstances, FERC policy allows interstate natural gas pipelines to design new maximum tariff rates to recover such costs in regulatory rate reviews. However, with respect to discounts granted to affiliates, the interstate natural gas pipeline must demonstrate that the discounted rate was necessary in order to meet competition.

GEMA Jurisdiction

The Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies, as Distribution Network Operators ("DNOs") and holders of electricity distribution licenses, are subject to regulation by GEMA. Most of the revenue of a DNO is controlled by a distribution price control formula set out in the electricity distribution license. The price control formula does not directly constrain profits from year-to-year, but is a control on revenue that operates independent of a significant portion of the DNO's actual costs. A resetting of the formula does not require the consent of the DNO, but if a licensee disagrees with a change to its license it can appeal the matter to the United Kingdom's Competition and Markets Authority. GEMA is able to impose financial penalties on DNOs that contravene any of their electricity distribution license duties or certain of their duties under British law, or fail to achieve satisfactory performance of individual standards prescribed by GEMA. Any penalty imposed must be reasonable and may not exceed 10% of the DNO's revenue. During the term of any price control, additional costs have a direct impact on the financial results of the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies.

AUC Jurisdiction

The AUC is an independent, quasi-judicial agency established by the province of Alberta, Canada, which is responsible for, among other things, approving the tariffs of transmission facility owners, including AltaLink, and distribution utilities, acquisitions of such transmission facility owners or utilities, and construction and operation of new transmission projects in Alberta. The AUC also investigates and rules on regulated rate disputes and system access problems.

The AUC regulates and oversees Alberta's electricity transmission sector with broad authority that may impact many of AltaLink's activities, including its tariffs, rates, construction, operations and financing. The AUC has various core functions in regulating the Alberta electricity transmission sector, including the following:
regulating and adjudicating issues related to the operation of electric utilities within Alberta;
processing and approving general tariff applications relating to revenue requirements and rates of return including deemed capital structure for regulated utilities while ensuring that utility rates are just and reasonable and approval of the transmission tariff rates of regulated transmission providers by the AESO, which is the independent transmission system operator in Alberta that controls the operation of AltaLink's transmission system;
approving the need for new electricity transmission facilities and permits to build and licenses to operate electricity transmission facilities;
reviewing operations and accounts from electric utilities and conducting on-site inspections to ensure compliance with industry regulations and standards;
adjudicating enforcement issues including the imposition of administrative penalties that arise when market participants violate the rules of the AESO; and
collecting, storing, analyzing, appraising and disseminating information to effectively fulfill its duties as an industry regulator.

In addition, AUC approval is required in connection with new energy and regulated utility initiatives in Alberta, amendments to existing approvals and financing proposals by designated utilities.


78


Physical or cyber attacks, both threatened and actual, could impact each Registrant's operations and could adversely affect its financial results.

Each Registrant relies on technology in virtually all aspects of its business. Like those of many large businesses, certain of the Registrant's technology systems have been subject to computer viruses, malicious codes, unauthorized access, phishing efforts, denial-of-service attacks and other cyber attacks and each Registrant expects to be subject to similar attacks in the future as such attacks become more sophisticated and frequent. A significant disruption or failure of its technology systems by physical or cyber attack could result in service interruptions, safety failures, security events, regulatory compliance failures, an inability to protect information and assets against unauthorized users, and other operational difficulties. Attacks perpetrated against each Registrant's systems could result in loss of assets and critical information and expose it to remediation costs and reputational damage.

Although the Registrants have taken steps intended to mitigate these risks, a significant disruption or cyber intrusion could adversely affect each Registrant's financial results. Cyber attacks could further adversely affect each Registrant's ability to operate facilities, information technology and business systems, or compromise sensitive customer and employee information. In addition, physical or cyber attacks against key suppliers or service providers could have a similar effect on each Registrant. Additionally, if each Registrant is unable to acquire, develop, implement, adopt or protect rights around new technology, it may suffer a competitive disadvantage.

Each Registrant is actively pursuing, developing and constructing new or expanded facilities, the completion and expected costs of which are subject to significant risk, and each Registrant has significant funding needs related to its planned capital expenditures.

Each Registrant actively pursues, develops and constructs new or expanded facilities. Each Registrant expects to incur significant annual capital expenditures over the next several years. Such expenditures may include construction and other costs for new electricity generating facilities, electric transmission or distribution projects, environmental control and compliance systems, natural gas storage facilities, new or expanded pipeline systems, and continued maintenance and upgrades of existing assets.

Development and construction of major facilities are subject to substantial risks, including fluctuations in the price and availability of commodities, manufactured goods, equipment, and the imposition of tariffs thereon when sourced by foreign providers, labor, siting and permitting and changes in environmental and operational compliance matters, load forecasts and other items over a multi-year construction period, as well as counterparty risk and the economic viability of the Registrants' suppliers, customers and contractors. Certain of the Registrants' construction projects are substantially dependent upon a single supplier or contractor and replacement of such supplier or contractor may be difficult and cannot be assured. These risks may result in the inability to timely complete a project or higher than expected costs to complete an asset and place it in-service and, in extreme cases, the loss of the power purchase agreements or other long-term off-take contracts underlying such projects. Such costs may not be recoverable in the regulated rates or market or contract prices each Registrant is able to charge its customers. Delays in construction of renewable projects may result in delayed in-service dates which may result in the loss of anticipated revenue or income tax benefits. It is also possible that additional generation needs may be obtained through power purchase agreements, which could increase long-term purchase obligations and force reliance on the operating performance of a third party. The inability to successfully and timely complete a project, avoid unexpected costs or recover any such costs could adversely affect such Registrant's financial results.

Furthermore, each Registrant depends upon both internal and external sources of liquidity to provide working capital and to fund capital requirements. If BHE does not provide needed funding to its subsidiaries and the subsidiaries are unable to obtain funding from external sources, they may need to postpone or cancel planned capital expenditures.

A significant sustained decrease in demand for electricity or natural gas in the markets served by each Registrant would decrease its operating revenue, could impact its planned capital expenditures and could adversely affect its financial results.

A significant sustained decrease in demand for electricity or natural gas in the markets served by each Registrant would decrease its operating revenue, could impact its planned capital expenditures and could adversely affect its financial results. Factors that could lead to a decrease in market demand include, among others:
a depression, recession or other adverse economic condition that results in a lower level of economic activity or reduced spending by consumers on electricity or natural gas;
an increase in the market price of electricity or natural gas or a decrease in the price of other competing forms of energy;
shifts in competitively priced natural gas supply sources away from the sources connected to the Pipeline Companies' systems, including shale gas sources;

79


efforts by customers, legislators and regulators to reduce the consumption of electricity generated or distributed by each Registrant through various existing laws and regulations, as well as, deregulation, conservation, energy efficiency and private generation measures and programs;
laws mandating or encouraging renewable energy sources, which may decrease the demand for electricity and natural gas or change the market prices of these commodities;
higher fuel taxes or other governmental or regulatory actions that increase, directly or indirectly, the cost of natural gas or other fuel sources for electricity generation or that limit the use of natural gas or the generation of electricity from fossil fuels;
a shift to more energy-efficient or alternative fuel machinery or an improvement in fuel economy, whether as a result of technological advances by manufacturers, legislation mandating higher fuel economy or lower emissions, price differentials, incentives or otherwise;
a reduction in the state or federal subsidies or tax incentives that are provided to agricultural, industrial or other customers, or a significant sustained change in prices for commodities such as ethanol or corn for ethanol manufacturers; and
sustained mild weather that reduces heating or cooling needs.

Each Registrant's operating results may fluctuate on a seasonal and quarterly basis and may be adversely affected by weather.

In most parts of the United States and other markets in which each Registrant operates, demand for electricity peaks during the summer months when irrigation and cooling needs are higher. Market prices for electricity also generally peak at that time. In other areas, including the western portion of PacifiCorp's service territory, demand for electricity peaks during the winter when heating needs are higher. In addition, demand for natural gas and other fuels generally peaks during the winter. This is especially true in MidAmerican Energy's and Sierra Pacific's retail natural gas businesses. Further, extreme weather conditions, such as heat waves, winter storms or floods could cause these seasonal fluctuations to be more pronounced. Periods of low rainfall or snowpack may negatively impact electricity generation at PacifiCorp's hydroelectric generating facilities, which may result in greater purchases of electricity from the wholesale market or from other sources at market prices. Additionally, PacifiCorp and MidAmerican Energy have added substantial wind-powered generating capacity, and BHE's unregulated subsidiaries are adding solar and wind-powered generating capacity, each of which is also a climate-dependent resource.

As a result, the overall financial results of each Registrant may fluctuate substantially on a seasonal and quarterly basis. Each Registrant has historically provided less service, and consequently earned less income, when weather conditions are mild. Unusually mild weather in the future may adversely affect each Registrant's financial results through lower revenue or margins. Conversely, unusually extreme weather conditions could increase each Registrant's costs to provide services and could adversely affect its financial results. The extent of fluctuation in each Registrant's financial results may change depending on a number of factors related to its regulatory environment and contractual agreements, including its ability to recover energy costs, the existence of revenue sharing provisions as it relates to MidAmerican Energy and Nevada Power, and terms of its wholesale sale contracts.

Each Registrant is subject to market risk associated with the wholesale energy markets, which could adversely affect its financial results.

In general, each Registrant's primary market risk is adverse fluctuations in the market price of wholesale electricity and fuel, including natural gas, coal and fuel oil, which is compounded by volumetric changes affecting the availability of or demand for electricity and fuel. The market price of wholesale electricity may be influenced by several factors, such as the adequacy or type of generating capacity, scheduled and unscheduled outages of generating facilities, prices and availability of fuel sources for generation, disruptions or constraints to transmission and distribution facilities, weather conditions, demand for electricity, economic growth and changes in technology. Volumetric changes are caused by fluctuations in generation or changes in customer needs that can be due to the weather, electricity and fuel prices, the economy, regulations or customer behavior. For example, the Utilities purchase electricity and fuel in the open market as part of their normal operating businesses. If market prices rise, especially in a time when larger than expected volumes must be purchased at market prices, the Utilities may incur significantly greater expense than anticipated. Likewise, if electricity market prices decline in a period when the Utilities are a net seller of electricity in the wholesale market, the Utilities could earn less revenue. Although the Utilities have energy cost adjustment mechanisms, the risks associated with changes in market prices may not be fully mitigated due to customer sharing bands as it relates to PacifiCorp and other factors.


80


Potential terrorist activities and the impact of military or other actions, could adversely affect each Registrant's financial results.

The ongoing threat of terrorism and the impact of military or other actions by nations or politically, ethnically or religiously motivated organizations regionally or globally may create increased political, economic, social and financial market instability, which could subject each Registrant's operations to increased risks. Additionally, the United States government has issued warnings that energy assets, specifically pipeline, nuclear generation, transmission and other electric utility infrastructure, are potential targets for terrorist attacks. Political, economic, social or financial market instability or damage to or interference with the operating assets of the Registrants, customers or suppliers may result in business interruptions, lost revenue, higher commodity prices, disruption in fuel supplies, lower energy consumption and unstable markets, particularly with respect to electricity and natural gas, and increased security, repair or other costs, any of which may materially adversely affect each Registrant in ways that cannot be predicted at this time. Any of these risks could materially affect its consolidated financial results. Furthermore, instability in the financial markets as a result of terrorism or war could also materially adversely affect each Registrant's ability to raise capital.

Certain Registrants are subject to the unique risks associated with nuclear generation.

The ownership and operation of nuclear power plants, such as MidAmerican Energy's 25% ownership interest in Quad Cities Station, involves certain risks. These risks include, among other items, mechanical or structural problems, inadequacy or lapses in maintenance protocols, the impairment of reactor operation and safety systems due to human error, the costs of storage, handling and disposal of nuclear materials, compliance with and changes in regulation of nuclear power plants, limitations on the amounts and types of insurance coverage commercially available, and uncertainties with respect to the technological and financial aspects of decommissioning nuclear facilities at the end of their useful lives. Additionally, Exelon Generation, the 75% owner and operator of the facility, may respond to the occurrence of any of these or other risks in a manner that negatively impacts MidAmerican Energy, including closure of Quad Cities Station prior to the expiration of its operating license. The prolonged unavailability, or early closure, of Quad Cities Station due to operational or economic factors could have a materially adverse effect on the relevant Registrant's financial results, particularly when the cost to produce power at the plant is significantly less than market wholesale prices. The following are among the more significant of these risks:
Operational Risk - Operations at any nuclear power plant could degrade to the point where the plant would have to be shut down. If such degradations were to occur, the process of identifying and correcting the causes of the operational downgrade to return the plant to operation could require significant time and expense, resulting in both lost revenue and increased fuel and purchased electricity costs to meet supply commitments. Rather than incurring substantial costs to restart the plant, the plant could be shut down. Furthermore, a shut-down or failure at any other nuclear power plant could cause regulators to require a shut-down or reduced availability at Quad Cities Station.
In addition, issues relating to the disposal of nuclear waste material, including the availability, unavailability and expense of a permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel could adversely impact operations as well as the cost and ability to decommission nuclear power plants, including Quad Cities Station, in the future.

Regulatory Risk - The NRC may modify, suspend or revoke licenses and impose civil penalties for failure to comply with applicable Atomic Energy Act regulations or the terms of the licenses of nuclear facilities. Unless extended, the NRC operating licenses for Quad Cities Station will expire in 2032. Changes in regulations by the NRC could require a substantial increase in capital expenditures or result in increased operating or decommissioning costs.

Nuclear Accident and Catastrophic Risks - Accidents and other unforeseen catastrophic events have occurred at nuclear facilities other than Quad Cities Station, both in the United States and elsewhere, such as at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan as a result of the earthquake and tsunami in March 2011. The consequences of an accident or catastrophic event can be severe and include loss of life and property damage. Any resulting liability from a nuclear accident or catastrophic event could exceed the relevant Registrant's resources, including insurance coverage.


81


Certain of BHE's subsidiaries are subject to the risk that customers will not renew their contracts or that BHE's subsidiaries will be unable to obtain new customers for expanded capacity, each of which could adversely affect its financial results.

If BHE's subsidiaries are unable to renew, remarket, or find replacements for their customer agreements on favorable terms, BHE's subsidiaries' sales volumes and operating revenue would be exposed to reduction and increased volatility. For example, without the benefit of long-term transportation agreements, BHE cannot assure that the Pipeline Companies will be able to transport natural gas at efficient capacity levels. Substantially all of the Pipeline Companies' revenues are generated under transportation and storage contracts that periodically must be renegotiated and extended or replaced, and the Pipeline Companies are dependent upon relatively few customers for a substantial portion of their revenue. Similarly, without long-term power purchase agreements, BHE cannot assure that its unregulated power generators will be able to operate profitably. Failure to maintain existing long-term agreements or secure new long-term agreements, or being required to discount rates significantly upon renewal or replacement, could adversely affect BHE's consolidated financial results. The replacement of any existing long-term agreements depends on market conditions and other factors that may be beyond BHE's subsidiaries' control.

Each Registrant is subject to counterparty risk, which could adversely affect its financial results.

Each Registrant is subject to counterparty credit risk related to contractual payment obligations with wholesale suppliers and customers. Adverse economic conditions or other events affecting counterparties with whom each Registrant conducts business could impair the ability of these counterparties to meet their payment obligations. Each Registrant depends on these counterparties to remit payments on a timely basis. Each Registrant continues to monitor the creditworthiness of its wholesale suppliers and customers in an attempt to reduce the impact of any potential counterparty default. If strategies used to minimize these risk exposures are ineffective or if any Registrant's wholesale suppliers' or customers' financial condition deteriorates or they otherwise become unable to pay, it could have a significant adverse impact on each Registrant's liquidity and its financial results.

Each Registrant is subject to counterparty performance risk related to performance of contractual obligations by wholesale suppliers, customers and contractors. Each Registrant relies on wholesale suppliers to deliver commodities, primarily natural gas, coal and electricity, in accordance with short- and long-term contracts. Failure or delay by suppliers to provide these commodities pursuant to existing contracts could disrupt the delivery of electricity and require the Utilities to incur additional expenses to meet customer needs. In addition, when these contracts terminate, the Utilities may be unable to purchase the commodities on terms equivalent to the terms of current contracts.

Each Registrant relies on wholesale customers to take delivery of the energy they have committed to purchase. Failure of customers to take delivery may require the relevant Registrant to find other customers to take the energy at lower prices than the original customers committed to pay. If each Registrant's wholesale customers are unable to fulfill their obligations, there may be a significant adverse impact on its financial results.

The Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies' customers are concentrated in a small number of electricity supply businesses with RWE Npower PLC and British Gas Trading Limited accounting for approximately 17% and 12%, respectively, of distribution revenue in 2019. AltaLink's primary source of operating revenue is the AESO. Generally, a single customer purchases the energy from BHE's independent power projects in the United States and the Philippines pursuant to long-term power purchase agreements. For example, certain of BHE Renewables' solar and wind independent power projects sell all of their electrical production to either Pacific Gas and Electric Company or Southern California Edison Company, respectively. Any material payment or other performance failure by the counterparties in these arrangements could have a significant adverse impact on BHE's consolidated financial results.

BHE owns investments and projects in foreign countries that are exposed to risks related to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates and increased economic, regulatory and political risks.

BHE's business operations and investments outside the United States increase its risk related to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates, primarily the British pound and the Canadian dollar. BHE's principal reporting currency is the United States dollar, and the value of the assets and liabilities, earnings, cash flows and potential distributions from its foreign operations changes with the fluctuations of the currency in which they transact. BHE indirectly owns a hydroelectric power plant in the Philippines and may acquire significant energy-related investments and projects outside of the United States. BHE may selectively reduce some foreign currency exchange rate risk by, among other things, requiring contracted amounts be settled in, or indexed to, United States dollars or a currency freely convertible into United States dollars, or hedging through foreign currency derivatives. These efforts, however, may not be effective and could negatively affect BHE's consolidated financial results.


82


In addition to any disruption in the global financial markets, the economic, regulatory and political conditions in some of the countries where BHE has operations or is pursuing investment opportunities may present increased risks related to, among others, inflation, foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations, currency repatriation restrictions, nationalization, renegotiation, privatization, availability of financing on suitable terms, customer creditworthiness, construction delays, business interruption, political instability, civil unrest, guerilla activity, terrorism, expropriation, trade sanctions, contract nullification and changes in law, regulations or tax policy. BHE may not choose to or be capable of either fully insuring against or effectively hedging these risks.

Poor performance of plan and fund investments and other factors impacting the pension and other postretirement benefit plans and nuclear decommissioning and mine reclamation trust funds could unfavorably impact each Registrant's cash flows, liquidity and financial results.

Costs of providing each Registrant's defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans and costs associated with the joint trustee plan to which PacifiCorp contributes depend upon a number of factors, including the rates of return on plan assets, the level and nature of benefits provided, discount rates, mortality assumptions, the interest rates used to measure required minimum funding levels, the funded status of the plans, changes in benefit design, tax deductibility and funding limits, changes in laws and government regulation and each Registrant's required or voluntary contributions made to the plans. Furthermore, the timing of recognition of unrecognized gains and losses associated with the Registrants’ defined benefit pension plans is subject to volatility due to events that may give rise to settlement accounting. Settlement events resulting from lump sum distributions offered by certain of the Registrants' defined benefit pension plans are influenced by the interest rates used to discount a participant’s lump sum distribution. When the applicable interest rates are low, lump sum distributions in a given year tend to increase resulting in a higher likelihood of triggering settlement accounting.

Certain of the Registrant's pension and other postretirement benefit plans are in underfunded positions. Each Registrant may be required to make cash contributions to fund these plans in the future. Additionally, each Registrant's plans have investments in domestic and foreign equity and debt securities and other investments that are subject to loss. Losses from investments could add to the volatility, size and timing of future contributions.

Furthermore, the funded status of the UMWA 1974 Pension Plan multiemployer plan to which PacifiCorp's subsidiary previously contributed is considered critical and declining. PacifiCorp's subsidiary involuntarily withdrew from the UMWA 1974 Pension Plan in June 2015 when the UMWA employees ceased performing work for the subsidiary. PacifiCorp has recorded its best estimate of the withdrawal obligation.

In addition, MidAmerican Energy is required to fund over time the projected costs of decommissioning Quad Cities Station, a nuclear power plant, and Bridger Coal Company, a joint venture of PacifiCorp's subsidiary, Pacific Minerals, Inc., is required to fund projected mine reclamation costs. Funds that MidAmerican Energy has invested in a nuclear decommissioning trust and a subsidiary of PacifiCorp has invested in a mine reclamation trust are invested in debt and equity securities and poor performance of these investments will reduce the amount of funds available for their intended purpose, which could require MidAmerican Energy or PacifiCorp's subsidiary to make additional cash contributions. Such cash funding obligations, which are also impacted by the other factors described above, could have a material impact on MidAmerican Energy's or PacifiCorp's liquidity by reducing their available cash.

Inflation and changes in commodity prices and fuel transportation costs may adversely affect each Registrant's financial results.

Inflation and increases in commodity prices and fuel transportation costs may affect each Registrant by increasing both operating and capital costs. As a result of existing rate agreements, contractual arrangements or competitive price pressures, each Registrant may not be able to pass the costs of inflation on to its customers. If each Registrant is unable to manage cost increases or pass them on to its customers, its financial results could be adversely affected.


83


Cyclical fluctuations and competition in the residential real estate brokerage and mortgage businesses could adversely affect HomeServices.

The residential real estate brokerage and mortgage industries tend to experience cycles of greater and lesser activity and profitability and are typically affected by changes in economic conditions, which are beyond HomeServices' control. Any of the following, among others, are examples of items that could have a material adverse effect on HomeServices' businesses by causing a general decline in the number of home sales, sale prices or the number of home financings which, in turn, would adversely affect its financial results:
rising interest rates or unemployment rates, including a sustained high unemployment rate in the United States;
periods of economic slowdown or recession in the markets served;
decreasing home affordability;
lack of available mortgage credit for potential homebuyers, such as the reduced availability of credit, which may continue into future periods;
inadequate home inventory levels;
sources of new competition; and
changes in applicable tax law.

Disruptions in the financial markets could affect each Registrant's ability to obtain debt financing or to draw upon or renew existing credit facilities and have other adverse effects on each Registrant.

Disruptions in the financial markets could affect each Registrant's ability to obtain debt financing or to draw upon or renew existing credit facilities and have other adverse effects on each Registrant. Significant dislocations and liquidity disruptions in the United States, Great Britain, Canada and global credit markets, such as those that occurred in 2008 and 2009, may materially impact liquidity in the bank and debt capital markets, making financing terms less attractive for borrowers that are able to find financing and, in other cases, may cause certain types of debt financing, or any financing, to be unavailable. Additionally, economic uncertainty in the United States or globally may adversely affect the United States' credit markets and could negatively impact each Registrant's ability to access funds on favorable terms or at all. If a Registrant is unable to access the bank and debt markets to meet liquidity and capital expenditure needs, it may adversely affect the timing and amount of its capital expenditures, acquisition financing and its financial results.

Potential changes in accounting standards may impact each Registrant's financial results and disclosures in the future, which may change the way analysts measure each Registrant's business or financial performance.

The Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") and the SEC continuously make changes to accounting standards and disclosure and other financial reporting requirements. New or revised accounting standards and requirements issued by the FASB or the SEC or new accounting orders issued by the FERC could significantly impact each Registrant's financial results and disclosures. For example, beginning in 2018 all changes in the fair values of equity securities (whether realized or unrealized) are recognized as gains or losses in the relevant Registrant's financial statements. Accordingly, periodic changes in such Registrant's reported net income will likely be subject to significant variability.

Each Registrant is involved in a variety of legal proceedings, the outcomes of which are uncertain and could adversely affect its financial results.

Each Registrant is, and in the future may become, a party to a variety of legal proceedings. Litigation is subject to many uncertainties, and the Registrants cannot predict the outcome of individual matters with certainty. It is possible that the final resolution of some of the matters in which each Registrant is involved could result in additional material payments substantially in excess of established reserves or in terms that could require each Registrant to change business practices and procedures or divest ownership of assets. Further, litigation could result in the imposition of financial penalties or injunctions and adverse regulatory consequences, any of which could limit each Registrant's ability to take certain desired actions or the denial of needed permits, licenses or regulatory authority to conduct its business, including the siting or permitting of facilities. Any of these outcomes could have a material adverse effect on such Registrant's financial results.

Item 1B.Unresolved Staff Comments

Not applicable.

84



Item 2.    Properties

Each Registrant's energy properties consist of the physical assets necessary to support its electricity and natural gas businesses. Properties of the relevant Registrant's electricity businesses include electric generation, transmission and distribution facilities, as well as coal mining assets that support certain of PacifiCorp's electric generating facilities. Properties of the relevant Registrant's natural gas businesses include natural gas distribution facilities, interstate pipelines, storage facilities, compressor stations and meter stations. The transmission and distribution assets are primarily within each Registrant's service territories. In addition to these physical assets, the Registrants have rights-of-way, mineral rights and water rights that enable each Registrant to utilize its facilities. It is the opinion of each Registrant's management that the principal depreciable properties owned by it are in good operating condition and are well maintained. Pursuant to separate financing agreements, substantially all of PacifiCorp's electric utility properties, MidAmerican Energy's electric utility properties in the state of Iowa, Nevada Power's and Sierra Pacific's properties in the state of Nevada, AltaLink's transmission properties and substantially all of the assets of the subsidiaries of BHE Renewables that are direct or indirect owners of generation projects are pledged or encumbered to support or otherwise provide the security for the related subsidiary debt. For additional information regarding each Registrant's energy properties, refer to Item 1 of this Form 10-K and Notes 4, 5 and 22 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of Berkshire Hathaway Energy in Item 8 of this Form 10-K, Notes 3 and 4 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of PacifiCorp in Item 8 of this Form 10-K, Notes 3 and 4 of the Notes to Financial Statements of MidAmerican Energy in Item 8 of this Form 10-K, Notes 3 and 4 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of Nevada Power in Item 8 of this Form 10-K and Notes 3 and 4 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of Sierra Pacific in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.

The following table summarizes Berkshire Hathaway Energy's operating electric generating facilities as of December 31, 2019:
      Facility Net Net Owned
Energy     Capacity Capacity
Source Entity Location by Significance (MWs) (MWs)
         
Natural gas PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy, NV Energy and BHE Renewables Nevada, Utah, Iowa, Illinois, Washington, Oregon, Texas, New York, Arizona and Wyoming 10,938 10,659
Coal PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy and NV Energy Wyoming, Iowa, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado and Montana 13,641 8,593
Wind PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy and BHE Renewables Iowa, Wyoming, Texas, Nebraska, Washington, California, Illinois, Oregon and Kansas 8,883 8,883
Solar BHE Renewables and NV Energy California, Texas, Arizona, Minnesota and Nevada 1,699 1,551
Hydroelectric PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy and BHE Renewables Washington, Oregon, The Philippines, Idaho, California, Utah, Hawaii, Montana, Illinois and Wyoming 1,299 1,277
Nuclear MidAmerican Energy Illinois 1,821 455
Geothermal PacifiCorp and BHE Renewables California and Utah 377 377
    Total 38,658 31,795

Additionally, as of December 31, 2019 the Company has electric generating facilities that are under construction in Iowa, Wyoming and Montana having total Facility Net Capacity and Net Owned Capacity of 1,816 MWs.

The right to construct and operate each Registrant's electric transmission and distribution facilities and interstate natural gas pipelines across certain property was obtained in most circumstances through negotiations and, where necessary, through prescription, eminent domain or similar rights. PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy, Nevada Power, Sierra Pacific, Northern Natural Gas and Kern River in the United States; Northern Powergrid (Northeast) Limited and Northern Powergrid (Yorkshire) plc in Great Britain; and AltaLink in Alberta, Canada continue to have the power of eminent domain or similar rights in each of the jurisdictions in which they operate their respective facilities, but the United States and Canadian utilities do not have the power of eminent domain with respect to governmental, Native American or Canadian First Nations' tribal lands. Although the main Kern River pipeline crosses the Moapa Indian Reservation, all facilities in the Moapa Indian Reservation are located within a utility corridor that is reserved to the United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management.

85



With respect to real property, each of the electric transmission and distribution facilities and interstate natural gas pipelines fall into two basic categories: (1) parcels that are owned in fee, such as certain of the electric generating facilities, electric substations, natural gas compressor stations, natural gas meter stations and office sites; and (2) parcels where the interest derives from leases, easements (including prescriptive easements), rights-of-way, permits or licenses from landowners or governmental authorities permitting the use of such land for the construction, operation and maintenance of the electric transmission and distribution facilities and interstate natural gas pipelines. Each Registrant believes it has satisfactory title or interest to all of the real property making up their respective facilities in all material respects.

Item 3.    Legal Proceedings

Each Registrant is party to a variety of legal actions arising out of the normal course of business. Plaintiffs occasionally seek punitive or exemplary damages. Each Registrant does not believe that such normal and routine litigation will have a material impact on its consolidated financial results. Each Registrant is also involved in other kinds of legal actions, some of which assert or may assert claims or seek to impose fines, penalties and other costs in substantial amounts.

Item 4.Mine Safety Disclosures

Information regarding Berkshire Hathaway Energy's and PacifiCorp's mine safety violations and other legal matters disclosed in accordance with Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Reform Act is included in Exhibit 95 to this Form 10-K.


86


PART II

Item 5.Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY

BHE's common stock is beneficially owned by Berkshire Hathaway, Mr. Walter Scott, Jr., a member of BHE's Board of Directors (along with his family members and related or affiliated entities) and Mr. Gregory E. Abel, BHE's Chairman, and has not been registered with the SEC pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, listed on a stock exchange or otherwise publicly held or traded. BHE has not declared or paid any cash dividends to its common shareholders since Berkshire Hathaway acquired an equity ownership interest in BHE in March 2000, and does not presently anticipate that it will declare any dividends on its common stock in the foreseeable future.

PACIFICORP

All common stock of PacifiCorp is held by its parent company, PPW Holdings LLC, which is a direct, wholly owned subsidiary of BHE. PacifiCorp declared and paid dividends to PPW Holdings LLC of $175 million in 2019 and $450 million in 2018.

MIDAMERICAN FUNDING AND MIDAMERICAN ENERGY

All common stock of MidAmerican Energy is held by its parent company, MHC, which is a direct, wholly owned subsidiary of MidAmerican Funding. MidAmerican Funding is an Iowa limited liability company whose membership interest is held solely by BHE. Neither MidAmerican Funding nor MidAmerican Energy declared or paid any cash distributions or dividends to its sole member or shareholder in 2019 and 2018.

NEVADA POWER

All common stock of Nevada Power is held by its parent company, NV Energy, which is an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of BHE. Nevada Power declared and paid dividends to NV Energy of $371 million in 2019. Nevada Power did not declare or pay dividends to NV Energy in 2018.

SIERRA PACIFIC

All common stock of Sierra Pacific is held by its parent company, NV Energy, which is an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of BHE. Sierra Pacific declared and paid dividends to NV Energy of $46 million in 2019. Sierra Pacific did not declare or pay dividends to NV Energy in 2018.


87


Item 6.Selected Financial Data
Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company and its subsidiaries 
PacifiCorp and its subsidiaries 
MidAmerican Funding, LLC and its subsidiaries and MidAmerican Energy Company 
Nevada Power Company and its subsidiaries 
Sierra Pacific Power Company 

Item 7.Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company and its subsidiaries 
PacifiCorp and its subsidiaries 
MidAmerican Funding, LLC and its subsidiaries and MidAmerican Energy Company 
Nevada Power Company and its subsidiaries 
Sierra Pacific Power Company 

Item 7A.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company and its subsidiaries 
PacifiCorp and its subsidiaries 
MidAmerican Funding, LLC and its subsidiaries and MidAmerican Energy Company 
Nevada Power Company and its subsidiaries 
Sierra Pacific Power Company 


88


Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company and its subsidiaries  
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 
Consolidated Balance Sheets 
Consolidated Statements of Operations 
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income 
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity 
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 
PacifiCorp and its subsidiaries  
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 
Consolidated Balance Sheets 
Consolidated Statements of Operations 
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income 
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders' Equity 
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 
MidAmerican Energy Company  
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 
Balance Sheets 
Statements of Operations 
Statements of Changes in Shareholder's Equity 
Statements of Cash Flows 
Notes to Financial Statements 
MidAmerican Funding, LLC and its subsidiaries  
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 
Consolidated Balance Sheets 
Consolidated Statements of Operations 
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Member's Equity 
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 
Nevada Power Company and its subsidiaries  
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 
Consolidated Balance Sheets 
Consolidated Statements of Operations 
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholder's Equity 
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 
Sierra Pacific Power Company  
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 
Balance Sheets 
Statements of Operations 
Statements of Changes in Shareholder's Equity 
Statements of Cash Flows 
Notes to Financial Statements 


89


Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company and its subsidiaries
Consolidated Financial Section

90


Item 6.Selected Financial Data

Information required by Item 6 is omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(a) to Form 10-K.

Item 7.Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following is management's discussion and analysis of certain significant factors that have affected the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of the Company during the periods included herein. Explanations include management's best estimate of the impact of weather, customer growth, usage trends and other factors. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the Company's historical Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The Company's actual results in the future could differ significantly from the historical results.

The reportable segment financial information includes all necessary adjustments and eliminations needed to conform to the Company's significant accounting policies. The differences between the reportable segment amounts and the consolidated amounts, described as BHE and Other, relate principally to other entities, corporate functions and intersegment eliminations.

Results of Operations

Overview

Net income for the Company's reportable segments for the years ended December 31 is summarized as follows (in millions):
 2019 2018 Change 2018 2017 Change
Net income attributable to BHE shareholders:               
PacifiCorp$773
 $739
 $34
 5% $739
 $769
 $(30) (4)%
MidAmerican Funding781
 669
 112
 17
 669
 574
 95
 17
NV Energy365
 317
 48
 15
 317
 346
 (29) (8)
Northern Powergrid256
 239
 17
 7
 239
 251
 (12) (5)
BHE Pipeline Group422
 387
 35
 9
 387
 277
 110
 40
BHE Transmission229
 210
 19
 9
 210
 224
 (14) (6)
BHE Renewables(1)
431
 329
 102
 31
 329
 864
 (535) (62)
HomeServices160
 145
 15
 10
 145
 149
 (4) (3)
BHE and Other(467) (467) 
 
 (467) (584) 117
 (20)
Total net income attributable to BHE shareholders$2,950
 $2,568
 $382
 15% $2,568
 $2,870
 $(302) (11)%

(1)Includes the tax attributes of disregarded entities that are not required to pay income taxes and the earnings of which are taxable directly to BHE.

Net income attributable to BHE shareholders increased $382 million for 2019 compared to 2018. Included in these results were pre-tax unrealized losses on the Company's investment in BYD Company Limited ($313 million, $227 million after-tax, in 2019 and $526 million, $383 million after-tax, in 2018) and a $134 million income tax benefit in 2018 related to the accrued repatriation tax on undistributed foreign earnings as a result of 2017 Tax Reform. Excluding the impacts of these items, adjusted net income attributable to BHE shareholders in 2019 was $3,177 million, an increase of $360 million, or 13%, compared to adjusted net income attributable to BHE shareholders in 2018 of $2,817 million.

Net income attributable to BHE shareholders decreased $302 million for 2018 compared to 2017. 2018 included a pre-tax unrealized loss of $526 million ($383 million after-tax) on the Company's investment in BYD Company Limited, partially offset by a $134 million income tax benefit related to the accrued repatriation tax on undistributed foreign earnings as a result of 2017 Tax Reform. 2017 included a $516 million income tax benefit as a result of 2017 Tax Reform, partially offset by $439 million of pre-tax charges ($263 million after-tax) from tender offers for certain long-term debt completed in December 2017. Excluding the impacts of these items, adjusted net income attributable to BHE shareholders in 2018 was $2,817 million, an increase of $200 million, or 8%, compared to adjusted net income attributable to BHE shareholders in 2017 of $2,617 million.


91


In 2018, the Domestic Regulated Businesses began passing the benefits of lower income tax expense related to the 2017 Tax Reform to customers through various regulatory mechanisms, including lower retail rates, higher depreciation expense and reductions to rate base, which generally produced lower revenue, operating income and income tax expense in 2018 compared to 2017.

The increase in net income attributable to BHE shareholders for 2019 compared to 2018 was due to the following:

PacifiCorp's net income increased $34 million primarily due to higher allowances for equity and borrowed funds used during construction of $55 million, lower pension and post retirement expense of $11 million and higher utility margin of $4 million, partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expense of $25 million from additional plant placed in-service, lower PTCs of $21 million from expirations, higher interest expense of $17 million and higher operations and maintenance expense of $10 million, primarily due to costs associated with the early retirement of a coal-fueled generation unit totaling $24 million offset by a decrease in wildfire suppression costs of $9 million. Utility margin increased primarily due to lower coal-fueled generation costs, higher wholesale average market prices, higher retail revenue primarily due to favorable customer volumes and higher net deferrals of incurred net power costs in accordance with established adjustment mechanisms, partially offset by lower wholesale volumes, higher purchased electricity costs, higher natural gas-fueled generation costs and lower net wheeling revenue. Retail customer volumes increased 0.4% primarily due to an increase in the average number of customers and the favorable impact of weather, partially offset by lower customer usage.
MidAmerican Funding's net income increased $112 million primarily due to higher income tax benefit of $115 million, largely due to higher PTCs of $70 million and the favorable impacts of ratemaking, higher electric utility margin, higher allowances for equity and borrowed funds of $32 million and higher investment earnings, partially offset by higher interest expense of $55 million and higher depreciation and amortization expense of $30 million due to additional assets placed in-service offset by $46 million of lower Iowa revenue sharing accruals. Electric utility margin increased due to higher wind generation, higher recoveries through bill riders (substantially offset in cost of fuel and energy, operations and maintenance expense and income tax expense) and higher retail customer volumes. Electric retail customer volumes increased 1.4% as an increase in industrial volumes of 4.0% was largely offset by lower residential volumes from the unfavorable impact of weather and lower customer usage.
NV Energy's net income increased $48 million primarily due to lower operations and maintenance expense, largely due to lower political activity expenses and lower earnings sharing accruals of $23 million at Nevada Power, partially offset by lower electric utility margin of $58 million and higher depreciation and amortization expense. Electric utility margin decreased due to lower retail customer volumes and lower average retail rates from a tax rate reduction rider effective April 1, 2018, partially offset by an increase in the average number of customers and higher wholesale and transmission revenue. Electric retail customer volumes decreased 1.4% primarily due to the impacts of weather, net of increased distribution only service customer volumes.
Northern Powergrid's net income increased $17 million primarily due to lower overall pension expense of $23 million, largely resulting from lower pension settlement losses recognized in 2019 compared to 2018, and higher distribution tariff rates of $39 million, partially offset by lower distributed units of $21 million, higher distribution-related operating and depreciation expenses of $13 million and the stronger United States dollar of $10 million.
BHE Pipeline Group's net income increased $35 million primarily due to higher transportation revenue of $45 million, lower property and other tax expense of $9 million due to a non-recurring property tax refund in 2019 and favorable margin of $9 million on system balancing activities, partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expense, net of the impact of lower depreciation rates at Kern River, due to increased spending on capital projects.
BHE Transmission's net income increased $19 million primarily due to favorable regulatory decisions received in 2019 and the unfavorable impacts of a regulatory rate order received in 2018 at AltaLink and higher equity earnings at Electric Transmission Texas, LLC, partially offset by the stronger United States dollar impact of $5 million.

92


BHE Renewables' net income increased $102 million primarily due to higher wind earnings of $74 million and higher geothermal earnings of $53 million largely due to higher generation and margins from market opportunities and lower operations and maintenance expense, partially offset by lower hydro earnings of $20 million, primarily due to lower rainfall and a declining financial asset balance, and lower solar earnings of $5 million primarily due to lower insolation. Wind earnings were favorable primarily due to improved tax equity investment earnings of $49 million, earnings from new projects of $35 million and a favorable change in the valuation of a power purchase agreement of $11 million, partially offset by lower revenues on existing projects of $12 million primarily from lower generation and $8 million of unfavorable changes in the valuation of interest rate swap derivatives. Tax equity investment earnings were favorable due to $57 million of earnings from projects reaching commercial operation and $7 million of higher commitment fees, partially offset by $13 million of lower earnings from existing projects mainly due to derates caused by turbine blade repairs.
HomeServices' net income increased $15 million primarily due to higher earnings at existing mortgage businesses of $33 million due to increased refinance activity and net income from acquired businesses of $9 million, partially offset by $36 million of lower earnings at existing brokerage businesses primarily from lower closed units and margins.
BHE and Other net loss remained the same as the change in the after-tax unrealized position of the Company's investment in BYD Company Limited of $156 million was offset by a $134 million income tax benefit recognized in 2018 related to the accrued repatriation tax on undistributed foreign earnings as a result of 2017 Tax Reform, higher interest expense and lower net income of $14 million at MidAmerican Energy Services, LLC driven by unrealized mark-to-market losses on contracts.
The decrease in net income attributable to BHE shareholders for 2018 compared to 2017 was due to the following:
PacifiCorp's net income decreased $30 million, primarily due to lower utility margin of $198 million and higher pension and post retirement expense of $13 million primarily due to a pension settlement charge, partially offset by a decrease in income tax expense of $181 million, primarily from a lower tax rate partially offset by $6 million of income in 2017 from 2017 Tax Reform, and higher allowance for funds used during construction of $22 million. Utility margin decreased due to lower average retail rates, including the impact of a lower federal tax rate due to the 2017 Tax Reform of $152 million, higher natural gas costs, lower wholesale revenue, higher purchased electricity costs and lower retail customer volumes, partially offset by higher net deferrals of incurred net power costs in accordance with established adjustment mechanisms and lower coal costs. Retail customer volumes decreased by 0.2% due to impacts of weather, partially offset by an increase in the average number of customers.
MidAmerican Funding's net income increased $95 million, primarily due to higher electric utility margin of $122 million, a higher income tax benefit of $60 million, primarily due to a $21 million increase in PTCs, a lower federal tax rate and a 2017 charge of $10 million from 2017 Tax Reform, after-tax charges of $17 million in 2017 related to the tender offer of a portion of MidAmerican Funding's 6.927% Senior Bonds due 2029 and higher allowance for borrowed and equity funds of $17 million, partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization of $109 million due to wind-powered generation and other plant placed in-service and increases for Iowa revenue sharing, higher operations and maintenance expense of $11 million and higher interest expense of $10 million. Electric utility margin increased due to higher recoveries through bill riders of $127 million (substantially offset in cost of fuel and energy, operations and maintenance expense and income tax expense), higher retail customer volumes of 5.6%, largely due to industrial growth and the favorable impact of weather, and higher wholesale revenue, partially offset by lower average retail rates of $126 million, predominantly from the impact of a lower federal tax rate due to 2017 Tax Reform, and higher generation and purchased power costs.
NV Energy's net income decreased $29 million, primarily due to an increase in operations and maintenance expense of $71 million from higher political activity expenses and $38 million of earnings sharing established in 2018 as part of the Nevada Power 2017 regulatory rate review, a decrease in electric utility margin of $52 million and an increase in depreciation and amortization of $34 million as a result of various regulatory-directed amortizations established in the Nevada Power 2017 regulatory rate review. These decreases to net income were partially offset by a decrease in income tax expense of $122 million, primarily from a lower federal tax rate and a 2017 charge of $19 million from 2017 Tax Reform. Electric utility margin decreased due to lower average retail rates, including the impact of a lower federal tax rate due to 2017 Tax Reform of $71 million, partially offset by higher retail customer volumes of 3.0%, mainly due to the favorable impact of weather.

93


Northern Powergrid's net income decreased $12 million due to higher distribution-related operating and depreciation expenses of $32 million from additional distribution network investment and higher pension expense of $13 million, largely resulting from pension settlement losses recognized in 2018 due to higher lump sum payments, partially offset by higher distribution revenue of $13 million, higher smart meter operating income of $9 million and the weaker United States dollar of $9 million. Distribution revenue increased due to higher tariff rates of $24 million, partially offset by unfavorable movements in regulatory provisions.
BHE Pipeline Group's net income increased $110 million, due to higher transportation revenue of $113 million at Northern Natural Gas and Kern River from higher volumes and rates due to unique market opportunities and colder temperatures, a decrease in income tax expense of $50 million, primarily from a lower federal tax rate offset by $7 million of income in 2017 from 2017 Tax Reform, and lower depreciation and amortization of $33 million, largely due to lower depreciation rates at Kern River, partially offset by higher operations and maintenance expense of $88 million, primarily due to increased pipeline integrity projects at Northern Natural Gas.
BHE Transmission's net income decreased $14 million from lower earnings at AltaLink of $10 million, primarily due to the impacts of a regulatory rate order in December 2018 and benefits from the release of contingent liabilities in 2017, partially offset by higher net income from the nonregulated natural gas generation business, and lower earnings at BHE U.S. Transmission of $4 million from lower equity earnings at Electric Transmission Texas, LLC due to the impacts of a regulatory rate order in March 2017.
BHE Renewables' net income decreased $535 million primarily due to $628 million of income in 2017 from 2017 Tax Reform primarily resulting from reductions in deferred income tax liabilities, $45 million of higher operations and maintenance expense, mainly due to losses on asset disposals in the Imperial Valley and transformer remediation costs, and an unfavorable change in the valuation of a power purchase agreement of $13 million. These decreases were partially offset by $50 million of increased revenue from overall higher generation and pricing at existing projects, favorable earnings of $34 million from tax equity investments due largely to earnings from additional tax equity investments of $41 million offset by $7 million of higher equity losses from existing tax equity investments, $29 million of net income from additional wind and solar capacity placed in-service, $15 million of make-whole premiums paid in 2017 due to early debt retirements and a settlement of $7 million received in 2018 related to transformer issues in 2016.
HomeServices' net income decreased $4 million, primarily due to lower margin and higher operating expenses at existing businesses, $31 million of income in 2017 from 2017 Tax Reform and $16 million of higher interest expense from increased borrowings primarily related to acquisitions, partially offset by net income of $58 million contributed from acquired businesses and a decrease in income tax expense of $28 million from a lower federal tax rate due to the impact of 2017 Tax Reform.
BHE and Other net loss improved $117 million, primarily due to the 2017 after-tax charge of $246 million related to the tender offer of a portion of BHE's senior bonds, a 2017 charge of $127 million from 2017 Tax Reform, a $134 million income tax benefit in 2018 related to the accrued repatriation tax on undistributed foreign earnings as a result of 2017 Tax Reform and lower consolidated state and foreign income tax expense, partially offset by the after-tax unrealized loss on the investment in BYD Company Limited totaling $383 million and $58 million of lower tax benefits from a lower federal tax rate due to the impact of 2017 Tax Reform.


94


Reportable Segment Results

Operating revenue and operating income for the Company's reportable segments for the years ended December 31 are summarized as follows (in millions):
 2019 2018 Change 2018 2017 Change
Operating revenue:               
PacifiCorp$5,068
 $5,026
 $42
 1 % $5,026
 $5,237
 $(211) (4)%
MidAmerican Funding2,927
 3,053
 (126) (4) 3,053
 2,846
 207
 7
NV Energy3,037
 3,039
 (2) 
 3,039
 3,015
 24
 1
Northern Powergrid1,013
 1,020
 (7) (1) 1,020
 949
 71
 7
BHE Pipeline Group1,131
 1,203
 (72) (6) 1,203
 993
 210
 21
BHE Transmission707
 710
 (3) 
 710
 699
 11
 2
BHE Renewables932
 908
 24
 3
 908
 838
 70
 8
HomeServices4,473
 4,214
 259
 6
 4,214
 3,443
 771
 22
BHE and Other556
 614
 (58) (9) 614
 594
 20
 3
Total operating revenue$19,844
 $19,787
 $57
  % $19,787
 $18,614
 $1,173
 6 %
                
Operating income:               
PacifiCorp$1,072
 $1,051
 $21
 2 % $1,051
 $1,440
 $(389) (27)%
MidAmerican Funding549
 550
 (1) 
 550
 544
 6
 1
NV Energy655
 607
 48
 8
 607
 766
 (159) (21)
Northern Powergrid472
 486
 (14) (3) 486
 488
 (2) 
BHE Pipeline Group572
 525
 47
 9
 525
 473
 52
 11
BHE Transmission323
 313
 10
 3
 313
 322
 (9) (3)
BHE Renewables336
 325
 11
 3
 325
 316
 9
 3
HomeServices222
 214
 8
 4
 214
 214
 
 
BHE and Other(51) 1
 (52) *
 1
 (41) 42
 *
Total operating income$4,150
 $4,072
 $78
 2 % $4,072
 $4,522
 $(450) (10)%

* Not meaningful

PacifiCorp

Operating revenue increased $42 million for 2019 compared to 2018 due to higher retail revenue of $40 million and higher wholesale and other revenue of $2 million. Retail revenue increased primarily due to higher customer volumes of $31 million and higher average retail rates of $9 million. Retail customer volumes increased 0.4% primarily due to an increase in the average number of residential and commercial customers and the favorable impact of weather, partially offset by lower customer usage. Wholesale and other revenue increased primarily due to higher wholesale average market prices, largely offset by lower wholesale volumes.

Operating income increased $21 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to lower depreciation and amortization expense of $25 million and higher utility margin of $4 million, partially offset by higher operations and maintenance expense of $10 million, primarily due to costs associated with the early retirement of a coal-fueled generation unit totaling $24 million offset by a decrease in wildfire suppression costs of $9 million. The decrease in depreciation and amortization expense reflects prior year accelerated depreciation of Utah’s share of certain thermal plant units of $174 million (offset in income tax expense) as ordered by the Utah Public Utilities Commission, partially offset by current year accelerated depreciation of Oregon’s share of certain retired wind equipment due to repowering projects that were placed into service in 2019 of $120 million (offset in income tax expense) as ordered by the Oregon Public Utilities Commission and additional plant placed in-service. Utility margin increased primarily due to lower coal-fueled generation costs, higher wholesale average market prices, higher retail revenue primarily due to favorable customer volumes and higher net deferrals of incurred net power costs in accordance with established adjustment mechanisms, partially offset by lower wholesale volumes, higher purchased electricity costs, higher natural gas-fueled generation costs and lower net wheeling revenue.


95


Operating revenue decreased $211 million for 2018 compared to 2017 due to lower retail revenue of $197 million and lower wholesale and other revenue of $14 million. Retail revenue decreased $180 million due to lower average retail rates, including the impact of lower federal tax rate due to 2017 Tax Reform of $152 million, and lower customer volumes of $17 million. Retail customer volumes decreased by 0.2% due to impacts of weather on the residential and commercial customer volumes and lower residential usage in all states except Utah and lower industrial usage in Oregon, Washington and Utah, partially offset by an increase in the average number of residential and commercial customers across the service territory, higher residential and commercial usage in Utah, higher irrigation usage and higher industrial usage in Wyoming and Idaho.

Operating income decreased $389 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to lower utility margin of $198 million, higher depreciation and amortization expense of $183 million, primarily due to accelerated depreciation of Utah's share of certain thermal plant units of $174 million as ordered by the Utah Public Utilities Commission. Utility margin decreased due to lower average retail rates, including the impact of a lower federal tax rate due to the 2017 Tax Reform of $151 million, higher natural gas costs, lower wholesale revenue, higher purchased electricity costs and lower retail customer volumes, partially offset by higher net deferrals of incurred net power costs in accordance with established adjustment mechanisms and lower coal costs.

MidAmerican Funding

Operating revenue decreased $126 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to lower electric and natural gas energy efficiency program revenue of $76 million (offset in operations and maintenance expense) and lower natural gas operating revenue of $66 million, partially offset by higher other operating revenue of $13 million, primarily from nonregulated utility construction services, and higher electric operating revenue of $3 million. Electric operating revenue increased due to higher retail revenue of $77 million, partially offset by lower wholesale and other revenue of $74 million. Electric retail revenue increased due to higher customer usage of $76 million and higher recoveries through bill riders (substantially offset in cost of fuel and energy, operations and maintenance expense and income tax expense), primarily the energy adjustment clause, partially offset by lower average rates of $54 million due to sales mix and $19 million from the unfavorable impact of weather. Electric retail customer volumes increased 1.4% as an increase in industrial volumes of 4.0% was largely offset by lower residential volumes from the unfavorable impact of weather and lower customer usage. Electric wholesale and other revenue decreased due to 10.6% lower sales volumes and $35 million from lower average per-unit prices. Natural gas operating revenue decreased from lower recoveries through the purchased gas adjustment clause due to a lower average per-unit cost of natural gas sold totaling $69 million (offset in cost of sales), partially offset by an increase in retail sales volumes of 2.0% from the favorable impact of weather in 2019.

Operating income decreased $1 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to higher electric utility margin, largely offset by higher operations and maintenance expense not recovered through bill riders and higher depreciation and amortization of $30 million. Electric utility margin increased due to higher wind generation, higher recoveries through bill riders and higher retail customer volumes. Operations and maintenance expense increased mainly due to higher wind-powered generation costs of $37 million, primarily due to the new and repowered wind-powered generating facilities, and higher electric and natural gas distribution costs of $12 million, partially offset by lower fossil-fueled generation maintenance costs. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense reflects $78 million related to new and repowered wind-powered generation and other additional plant placed in-service, partially offset by lower Iowa revenue sharing accruals of $46 million.

Operating revenue increased $207 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to higher electric operating revenue of $175 million and higher natural gas operating revenue of $35 million. Electric operating revenue increased due to higher retail revenue of $102 million and higher wholesale and other revenue of $73 million. Electric retail revenue increased $127 million from higher recoveries through bill riders (substantially offset in cost of fuel and energy, operations and maintenance expense and income tax expense), primarily the energy adjustment clause, $65 million from higher customer usage, including higher industrial sales volumes, and $36 million from the impact of weather in 2018, partially offset by lower average rates of $126 million, predominantly from the impact of a lower federal tax rate due to 2017 Tax Reform. Electric retail customer volumes increased 5.6%, largely due to industrial growth and the favorable impact of weather. Electric wholesale and other revenue increased due to 22.0% higher sales volumes and higher average per-unit prices of $18 million. Natural gas operating revenue increased due to 16.7% higher retail sales volumes from the impact of weather in 2018 and industrial growth, partially offset by a lower average per-unit price of $21 million (offset in cost of sales) and other usage and rate factors, including the impact of a lower federal tax rate due to 2017 Tax Reform.


96


Operating income increased $6 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to higher electric utility margin of $122 million and higher natural gas utility margin of $11 million, partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization of $109 million, higher operations and maintenance expense of $11 million and higher property and other taxes of $6 million. Wind-powered generation maintenance increased $23 million primarily due to the additional wind generation facilities but was offset by lower maintenance costs for transmission, distribution and fossil-fueled generation. The increase in depreciation and amortization reflects $65 million related to additional wind generation and other plant placed in-service and increases for Iowa revenue sharing of $44 million. Electric utility margin increased due to higher recoveries through bill riders, higher retail customer volumes and higher wholesale revenue, partially offset by lower average retail rates, predominately from the impact of a lower federal tax rate due to 2017 Tax Reform, and higher generation and purchased power costs. Natural gas utility margin increased due to higher retail sales volumes from colder temperatures in 2018, partially offset by lower average rates, including the impact of a lower federal tax rate due to 2017 Tax Reform.

NV Energy

Operating revenue decreased $2 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to lower electric operating revenue of $17 million, partially offset by higher natural gas operating revenue of $15 million. Electric operating revenue decreased due to lower retail revenue of $32 million, partially offset by higher wholesale and other revenue of $15 million. Electric retail revenue decreased primarily due to lower retail customer volumes of $50 million and a decrease from a tax rate reduction rider effective April 1, 2018 of $17 million, partially offset by higher fully-bundled energy rates (offset in cost of sales) of $31 million and an increase in the average number of customers of $9 million. Electric retail customer volumes decreased 1.4% primarily due to the impacts of weather, net of increased distribution only service customer volumes. Natural gas operating revenue increased due to a higher average per-unit price (offset in cost of sales) of $13 million and higher volumes from the impacts of weather.

Operating income increased $48 million for 2019 compared to 2018 due to lower operations and maintenance expense primarily due to lower political activity expenses and lower earnings sharing accruals at Nevada Power, partially offset by lower electric utility margin of $58 million and higher depreciation and amortization expense of $26 million. Electric utility margin decreased due to higher energy costs of $41 million and lower electric operating revenue of $17 million. Energy costs increased due to higher net deferred power costs of $109 million, partially offset by lower purchased power costs of $57 million and a lower average cost of fuel for generation of $11 million.

Operating revenue increased $24 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to higher electric operating revenue of $17 million and higher natural gas operating revenue of $5 million. Electric operating revenue increased due to higher electric retail revenue of $17 million primarily due to higher fully-bundled energy rates (offset in cost of fuel and energy) of $84 million, higher customer volumes of $19 million, primarily due to the impacts of weather, and customer growth of $11 million, partially offset by a decrease from the impact of a lower federal tax rate due to 2017 Tax Reform of $71 million and lower rates from the Nevada Power 2017 regulatory rate review of $30 million. Electric retail customer volumes, including distribution only service customers, increased 3.0% compared to 2017. Natural gas operating revenue increased due to a higher average per-unit price (offset in cost of sales) of $7 million, partially offset by lower volumes from the impacts of weather.

Operating income decreased $159 million for 2018 compared to 2017 due to an increase in operations and maintenance expense of $71 million, primarily due to higher political activity expenses and $38 million of earnings sharing established in 2018 as part of the Nevada Power 2017 regulatory rate review, a decrease in electric utility margin of $52 million and higher depreciation and amortization of $34 million as a result of various regulatory-directed amortizations established in the Nevada Power 2017 regulatory rate review. Electric utility margin decreased as higher energy costs of $69 million were offset by higher electric operating revenue of $17 million. Energy costs increased due to higher net deferred power costs of $57 million and higher purchased power costs of $33 million, partially offset by a lower average cost of fuel for generation of $21 million.

Northern Powergrid

Operating revenue decreased $7 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to the stronger United States dollar of $45 million and lower distributed units of $21 million, partially offset by higher distribution tariff rates of $39 million and higher smart meter revenue of $15 million due to a larger number of units installed. Operating income decreased $14 million for 2019 compared to 2018 mainly due to the stronger United States dollar of $21 million, higher distribution-related operations and maintenance expense and higher depreciation expense related to additional distribution network and smart meter investments, partially offset by the higher distribution and smart meter revenues.


97


Operating revenue increased $71 million for 2018 compared to 2017 due to the weaker United States dollar of $36 million, higher smart metering revenues of $27 million and higher distribution revenues of $13 million, partially offset by lower contracting revenue of $6 million. Smart metering revenue increased due to a larger number of units installed. Distribution revenue increased primarily due to higher tariff rates of $24 million, partially offset by unfavorable movements on regulatory provisions of $6 million. Operating income decreased $2 million for 2018 compared to 2017 mainly due to higher distribution-related operating and depreciation expenses of $32 million from additional distribution network investment, partially offset by the weaker United States dollar of $18 million, higher distribution revenue of $13 million and higher smart meter operating income of $9 million.

BHE Pipeline Group

Operating revenue decreased $72 million for 2019 compared to 2018 due to lower gas sales of $89 million at Northern Natural Gas related to system balancing activities (largely offset in cost of sales), partially offset by higher transportation revenue of $19 million. Transportation revenue increased from generally higher volumes and rates, partially offset by the impact of period two rates of $26 million (largely offset in depreciation and amortization expense) and $11 million from refunds related to 2017 Tax Reform at Kern River. Operating income increased $47 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to higher transportation revenue of $45 million, lower property and other tax expense of $9 million due to a non-recurring property tax refund in 2019 and favorable margins of $9 million on system balancing activities, partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expense, net of the impact of lower depreciation rates at Kern River, due to increased spending on capital projects.

Operating revenue increased $210 million for 2018 compared to 2017 due to higher transportation revenues of $113 million at Northern Natural Gas and Kern River from higher volumes and rates due to unique market opportunities and colder temperatures and higher gas sales of $99 million related to system balancing activities at Northern Natural Gas (largely offset in cost of sales). Operating income increased $52 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to higher transportation revenues at Northern Natural Gas and Kern River and lower depreciation and amortization of $33 million, largely due to lower depreciation rates at Kern River, partially offset by higher operations and maintenance expense, primarily due to increased pipeline integrity projects at Northern Natural Gas.

BHE Transmission

Operating revenue decreased $3 million for 2019 compared to 2018 mainly due to the stronger United States dollar of $17 million, largely offset by favorable regulatory decisions received in 2019 at AltaLink. Operating income increased $10 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to favorable regulatory decision received in 2019 and the unfavorable impacts of a regulatory rate order received in 2018 at AltaLink, partially offset by the stronger United States dollar of $8 million.

Operating revenue increased $11 million for 2018 compared to 2017 due to higher operating revenue at AltaLink, primarily from higher revenue from the nonregulated natural gas generation business and additional assets placed in-service, partially offset by the release of contingent liabilities in 2017. Operating income decreased $9 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to the impacts of a regulatory rate order received by AltaLink in December 2018 and the release of contingent liabilities in 2017, partially offset by the weaker United States dollar and higher operating income from the nonregulated natural gas generation business.

BHE Renewables

Operating revenue increased $24 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to higher wind revenues of $32 million and higher natural gas and geothermal revenues of $32 million due to higher generation and pricing from market opportunities, partially offset by lower hydro revenues of $28 million due to lower rainfall and lower solar revenues of $11 million due to lower insolation. Wind revenues increased primarily due to $33 million from new projects and a favorable change in the valuation of a power purchase agreement of $11 million, partially offset by lower generation of $12 million at existing projects. Operating income increased $11 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to the higher operating revenue and lower operations and maintenance expense of $18 million at the geothermal and hydro projects, partially offset by higher expenses related to new wind-powered generation of $30 million.

Operating revenue increased $70 million for 2018 compared to 2017 due to overall higher generation and pricing of $50 million at existing projects and $33 million from additional wind and solar capacity placed in-service, partially offset by an unfavorable change in the valuation of a power purchase agreement of $13 million. Operating income increased $9 million for 2018 compared to 2017 due to the increase in operating revenue, partially offset by higher operations and maintenance expense of $45 million related to losses on asset disposals in the Imperial Valley, transformer remediation costs and higher depreciation expense of $17 million, primarily related to additional solar and wind capacity placed in-service.


98


HomeServices

Operating revenue increased $259 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to an increase from acquired businesses of $221 million and higher mortgage revenue at existing businesses of $103 million due to increased refinance activity, partially offset by lower brokerage revenue at existing businesses of $74 million mainly due to a 4% decrease in closed units. Operating income increased $8 million for 2019 compared to 2018 due to an increase at existing mortgage businesses of $47 million and an increase from acquired businesses of $15 million, partially offset by a decrease at existing brokerage companies of $54 million primarily from lower closed units and margins.

Operating revenue increased $771 million for 2018 compared to 2017 due to an increase from acquired businesses totaling $838 million and a 4% increase in average home sales prices for existing brokerage businesses, offset by a 5% decrease in closed brokerage units at existing brokerage businesses. Operating income was unchanged for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to higher earnings from acquired businesses of $65 million offset by lower earnings from existing businesses.

BHE and Other

Operating revenue decreased $58 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to lower electricity and natural gas volumes at MidAmerican Energy Services, LLC. BHE and Other had an operating loss of $51 million in 2019 compared to operating income of $1 million in 2018 primarily due to lower margin of $25 million driven by unrealized mark-to-market losses on contracts at MidAmerican Energy Services, LLC and higher other operating costs.

Operating revenue increased $20 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to higher electricity and natural gas volumes and favorable unrealized mark-to-market gains on contracts at MidAmerican Energy Services, LLC. BHE and Other had operating income of $1 million in 2018 compared to an operating loss of $41 million in 2017 primarily due to lower other operating costs and higher margins at MidAmerican Energy Services, LLC.

Consolidated Other Income and Expense Items

Interest expense

Interest expense for the years ended December 31 is summarized as follows (in millions):
 2019 2018 Change 2018 2017 Change
            
Subsidiary debt$1,477
 $1,412
 $65
 5% $1,412
 $1,399
 $13
 1 %
BHE senior debt and other430
 421
 9
 2
 421
 423
 (2) 
BHE junior subordinated debentures5
 5
 
 
 5
 19
 (14) (74)
Total interest expense$1,912
 $1,838
 $74
 4% $1,838
 $1,841
 $(3)  %

Interest expense increased $74 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to debt issuances at BHE, PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy and BHE Pipeline Group, partially offset by scheduled maturities, principal payments and the impact of foreign currency exchange rate movements.

Interest expense decreased $3 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to repayments of BHE junior subordinated debentures of $944 million in 2017, scheduled maturities and principal payments and early redemptions of subsidiary debt, partially offset by debt issuances at BHE, MidAmerican Funding, BHE Renewables and HomeServices.

Capitalized interest

Capitalized interest increased $16 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to higher construction work-in-progress balances at PacifiCorp and MidAmerican Energy, partially offset by a lower construction work-in-progress balance at BHE Renewables.

Capitalized interest increased $16 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to higher construction work-in-progress balances at PacifiCorp, MidAmerican Energy and BHE Renewables.


99


Allowance for equity funds
Allowance for equity funds increased $69 million for 2019 compared to 2018 and $28 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to higher construction work-in-progress balances at PacifiCorp and MidAmerican Energy.

Interest and dividend income
Interest and dividend income increased $4 million for 2019 compared to 2018 and $2 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to higher cash balances at PacifiCorp and MidAmerican Energy, partially offset by a lower financial asset balance at the Casecnan project.

(Losses) gains on marketable securities, net

(Losses) gains on marketable securities, net was favorable $250 million for 2019 compared to 2018 and unfavorable $552 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to the change in the unrealized position on the Company's investment in BYD Company Limited of $213 million and $(526) million, respectively.

Other, net

Other, net improved $106 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due to higher investment earnings and lower non-service pension expense of $20 million, largely resulting from lower settlement losses recognized in 2019 compared to 2018 at PacifiCorp and Northern Powergrid.

Other, net improved $411 million primarily due to charges of $439 million in 2017 from tender offers related to certain long-term debt completed in December 2017.

Income tax benefit

Income tax benefit increased $15 million for 2019 compared to 2018 and the effective tax rate was (25)% for 2019 and (30)% for 2018. The effective tax rate increased primarily due to higher pre-tax income and a $134 million income tax benefit recognized in 2018 related to the accrued repatriation tax on undistributed foreign earnings as a result of 2017 Tax Reform, partially offset by higher PTCs of $188 million, the favorable impacts of ratemaking and lower consolidated state income taxes in 2019.

Income tax benefit increased $29 million for 2018 compared to 2017 and the effective tax rate was (30)% for 2018 and (22)% for 2017. The effective tax rate decreased primarily due to the reduction in the United States federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%, effective January 1, 2018, the favorable impacts of ratemaking of $140 million, including amortization of Utah's share of non-protected excess deferred income taxes used to accelerate depreciation of certain thermal plant units as ordered by the Utah Public Utilities Commission, a $134 million income tax benefit recognized in 2018 related to the accrued repatriation tax on undistributed foreign earnings as a result of 2017 Tax Reform, higher PTCs of $76 million and lower United States income taxes on foreign earnings of $40 million, partially offset by net impacts of $731 million in 2017 as a result of 2017 Tax Reform.

The 2017 Tax Reform most notably lowered the United States federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21% effective January 1, 2018, and created a one-time repatriation tax on undistributed foreign earnings and profits. The $731 million of lower income tax expense was comprised of benefits from reductions in deferred income tax liabilities of $1,150 million, partially offset by an accrual for the deemed repatriation of undistributed foreign earnings and profits totaling $419 million.

Federal renewable electricity PTCs are earned as energy from qualifying wind-powered generating facilities is produced and sold based on a per kilowatt rate as prescribed pursuant to the applicable federal income tax law and are eligible for the credit for 10 years from the date the qualifying generating facilities are placed in-service. A credit of $0.025 per kilowatt hour was applied to 2019 production and a credit of $0.024 per kilowatt hour was applied to 2018 and 2017 production, which resulted in PTCs of $759 million in 2019, $571 million in 2018 and $495 million in 2017.


100


Equity (loss) income

Equity (loss) income for the years ended December 31 is summarized as follows (in millions):
 2019 2018 Change 2018 2017 Change
Equity income (loss):               
ETT$65
 $62
 $3
 5% $62
 $(62) $124
 *
Tax equity investments(148) (61) (87) * (61) (120) 59
 (49)%
Agua Caliente28
 27
 1
 4 27
 24
 3
 13
HomeServices7
 8
 (1) (13) 8
 6
 2
 33
Other4
 7
 (3) (43) 7
 1
 6
 *
Total equity (loss) income$(44) $43
 $(87) * $43
 $(151) $194
 *

* Not meaningful

Equity income decreased $87 million for 2019 compared to 2018 primarily due higher pre-tax equity losses from tax equity investments at BHE Renewables. PTCs and other income tax benefits from these projects are recognized in income tax expense.

Equity income increased $194 million for 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to the impacts of 2017 Tax Reform, which decreased equity income in 2017 by $228 million mainly due to equity earnings charges recognized totaling $154 million for amounts to be returned to the customers of equity investments in regulated entities. These investments include pass-through entities for income tax purposes and the lower equity income is entirely offset by lower income tax expense as a result of benefits from reductions in deferred income tax liabilities. Additionally, 2018 pre-tax equity earnings were lower at Electric Transmission Texas, LLC primarily due to the impacts of new retail rates effective March 2017.

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests decreased $5 million for 2019 compared to 2018 mainly due to lower earnings at the Casecnan project.

Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests decreased $17 million for 2018 compared to 2017 mainly due to the April 2018 purchase of a redeemable noncontrolling interest at HomeServices.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Each of BHE's direct and indirect subsidiaries is organized as a legal entity separate and apart from BHE and its other subsidiaries. It should not be assumed that the assets of any subsidiary will be available to satisfy BHE's obligations or the obligations of its other subsidiaries. However, unrestricted cash or other assets that are available for distribution may, subject to applicable law, regulatory commitments and the terms of financing and ring-fencing arrangements for such parties, be advanced, loaned, paid as dividends or otherwise distributed or contributed to BHE or affiliates thereof. The Company's long-term debt may include provisions that allow BHE or its subsidiaries to redeem such debt in whole or in part at any time. These provisions generally include make-whole premiums. Refer to Note 18 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for further discussion regarding the limitation of distributions from BHE's subsidiaries.


101


As of December 31, 2019, the Company's total net liquidity was as follows (in millions):
     MidAmerican NV Northern BHE    
 BHE PacifiCorp Funding Energy Powergrid Canada Other Total
                
Cash and cash equivalents$13
 $30
 $288
 $49
 $334
 $69
 $257
 $1,040
  
              
Credit facilities3,500
 1,200
 1,309
 650
 199
 674
 1,880
 9,412
Less:               
Short-term debt(1,590) (130) 
 
 
 (211) (1,283) (3,214)
Tax-exempt bond support and letters of credit
 (256) (370) 
 
 (3) 
 (629)
Net credit facilities1,910
 814
 939
 650
 199
 460
 597
 5,569
                
Total net liquidity$1,923
 $844
 $1,227
 $699
 $533
 $529
 $854
 $6,609
Credit facilities: 
  
  
    
    
  
Maturity dates2022
 2022
 2020, 2022
 2022
 2022
 2023
 2020, 2022
  

Refer to Note 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for further discussion regarding the Company's credit facilities, letters of credit, equity commitments and other related items.

On January 29, 2019, PG&E Corporation and Pacific Gas and Electric Company filed voluntary petitions for relief under chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California. As a result, the Company does not expect to receive distributions from Topaz or Agua Caliente in the near term.

Operating Activities

Net cash flows from operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018 were $6.2 billion and $6.8 billion, respectively. The decrease was primarily due to changes in working capital, partially offset by an increase in income tax receipts.

Net cash flows from operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 were $6.8 billion and $6.1 billion, respectively. The increase was primarily due to changes in working capital and an increase in income tax receipts.

The timing of the Company's income tax cash flows from period to period can be significantly affected by the estimated federal income tax payment methods and assumptions for each payment date.

Investing Activities

Net cash flows from investing activities for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018 were $(9.0) billion and $(7.0) billion, respectively. The change was primarily due to higher capital expenditures of $1.1 billion and higher funding of tax equity investments. Refer to "Future Uses of Cash" for further discussion of capital expenditures.

Net cash flows from investing activities for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 were $(7.0) billion and $(6.1) billion, respectively. The change was primarily due to higher capital expenditures of $1.7 billion and higher funding of tax equity investments, partially offset by higher cash paid for acquisitions in 2017 of $1.0 billion. Refer to "Future Uses of Cash" for further discussion of capital expenditures.

Acquisitions

In 2017, the Company completed various acquisitions totaling $1.1 billion, net of cash acquired. The purchase price for each acquisition was allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, which primarily related to residential real estate brokerage businesses, development and construction costs for a 110-MW solar project and a 50-MW solar project, and the remaining 25% interest in a natural gas-fueled generation facility at Nevada Power. As a result of the various acquisitions, the Company acquired assets of $1.1 billion, assumed liabilities of $487 million and recognized goodwill of $508 million.

102



Financing Activities

Net cash flows from financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2019 were $3,124 million. Sources of cash totaled $5.4 billion and consisted of proceeds from subsidiary debt issuances totaling $4.7 billion and net proceeds from short-term debt of $684 million. Uses of cash totaled $2.3 billion and consisted mainly of $1.9 billion for repayments of subsidiary debt and repurchases of common stock of $293 million.

Net cash flows from financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2018 were $(174) million. Sources of cash totaled $5.6 billion and consisted of proceeds from BHE senior debt issuances of $3.2 billion and proceeds from subsidiary debt issuances totaling $2.4 billion. Uses of cash totaled $5.8 billion and consisted mainly of $2.4 billion for repayments of subsidiary debt, net repayments of short term debt of $1.9 billion, $1.0 billion for repayments of BHE senior debt and the purchase of redeemable noncontrolling interest of $131 million.

Net cash flows from financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2017 were $274 million. Sources of cash totaled $4.1 billion and consisted of net proceeds from short-term debt of $2.4 billion and proceeds from subsidiary debt issuances totaling $1.7 billion. Uses of cash totaled $3.9 billion and consisted mainly of $2.3 billion for repayments of BHE senior debt and junior subordinated debentures, $1.0 billion for repayments of subsidiary debt and tender offer premiums paid of $435 million.

Debt Repurchases

The Company may from time to time seek to acquire its outstanding debt securities through cash purchases in the open market, privately negotiated transactions or otherwise. Any debt securities repurchased by the Company may be reissued or resold by the Company from time to time and will depend on prevailing market conditions, the Company's liquidity requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors. The amounts involved may be material.

Common Stock Transactions

For the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, BHE repurchased 447,712 shares of its common stock for $293 million, 177,381 shares of its common stock for $107 million and 35,000 shares of its common stock for $19 million, respectively.

Future Uses of Cash

The Company has available a variety of sources of liquidity and capital resources, both internal and external, including net cash flows from operating activities, public and private debt offerings, the issuance of commercial paper, the use of unsecured revolving credit facilities, the issuance of equity and other sources. These sources are expected to provide funds required for current operations, capital expenditures, acquisitions, investments, debt retirements and other capital requirements. The availability and terms under which BHE and each subsidiary has access to external financing depends on a variety of factors, including its credit ratings, investors' judgment of risk and conditions in the overall capital markets, including the condition of the utility industry and project finance markets, among other items.

Capital Expenditures

The Company has significant future capital requirements. Capital expenditure needs are reviewed regularly by management and may change significantly as a result of these reviews, which may consider, among other factors, changes in environmental and other rules and regulations; impacts to customers' rates; outcomes of regulatory proceedings; changes in income tax laws; general business conditions; load projections; system reliability standards; the cost and efficiency of construction labor, equipment and materials; commodity prices; and the cost and availability of capital. Expenditures for certain assets may ultimately include acquisitions of existing assets.


103


The Company's historical and forecast capital expenditures, each of which exclude amounts for non-cash equity AFUDC and other non-cash items, by reportable segment for the years ended December 31 are as follows (in millions):
 Historical Forecast
 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
            
PacifiCorp$769
 $1,257
 $2,175
 $2,788
 $1,374
 $2,392
MidAmerican Funding1,776
 2,332
 2,810
 1,861
 1,027
 877
NV Energy456
 503
 657
 675
 468
 526
Northern Powergrid579
 566
 602
 732
 660
 471
BHE Pipeline Group286
 427
 687
 489
 470
 421
BHE Transmission334
 270
 247
 522
 321
 260
BHE Renewables323
 817
 122
 106
 65
 71
HomeServices37
 47
 54
 44
 38
 35
BHE and Other11
 22
 10
 18
 9
 6
Total$4,571
 $6,241
 $7,364
 $7,235
 $4,432
 $5,059

 Historical Forecast
 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
            
Wind generation$1,291
 $2,740
 $2,784
 $2,355
 $627
 $717
Electric transmission343
 219
 640
 685
 289
 1,410
Other growth689
 715
 828
 845
 682
 431
Operating2,248
 2,567
 3,112
 3,350
 2,834
 2,501
Total$4,571
 $6,241
 $7,364
 $7,235
 $4,432
 $5,059

The Company's historical and forecast capital expenditures consisted mainly of the following:
Wind generation includes the following:
Construction of wind-powered generating facilities at MidAmerican Energy totaling $1,486 million for 2019, $1,261 million for 2018 and $657 million for 2017. MidAmerican Energy placed in-service 1,019 MWs (nominal ratings) during 2019, 817 MWs (nominal ratings) during 2018 and 334 MWs (nominal ratings) during 2017. Wind XI, a 2,000-MW project, was completed in January 2020. Wind XII is a 591-MW project, including 201 MWs placed in-service in 2019 and facilities expected to be placed in-service by the end of 2020. MidAmerican Energy expects all of these wind-powered generating facilities to qualify for 100% of PTCs available. PTCs from these projects are excluded from MidAmerican Energy's Iowa energy adjustment clause until these generation assets are reflected in base rates. Additionally, MidAmerican Energy continues to evaluate wind-powered and other renewable generating facilities that would not be subject to pre-approved ratemaking principles.
Repowering certain existing wind-powered generating facilities at MidAmerican Energy totaling $369 million for 2019, $422 million for 2018 and $514 million for 2017. The repowering projects entail the replacement of significant components of older turbines. Planned spending for the repowered generating facilities totals $136 million in 2020, $436 million in 2021 and $329 million in 2022. Of the 1,056 MWs of current repowering projects not in-service as of December 31, 2019, 649 MWs are currently expected to qualify for 80% of the federal PTCs available for ten years following each facility's return to service and 407 MWs are expected to qualify for 60% of such credits.
Construction of wind-powered generating facilities at PacifiCorp totaling $338 million for 2019, $9 million for 2018, and $5 million for 2017. A total of 1,190 MWs of new wind-powered generating facilities are expected to be placed in-service in 2020. Planned spending for the new wind-powered generating facilities totals $1,303 million in 2020, $79 million in 2021 and $388 million in 2022. The energy production from the new wind-powered generating facilities is expected to qualify for 100% of the federal PTCs available for ten years once the equipment is placed in service.


104


Repowering certain existing wind-powered generating facilities at PacifiCorp totaling $585 million for 2019, $332 million for 2018 and $6 million for 2017. The repowering projects entail the replacement of significant components of older turbines. Certain repowering projects were placed in service in 2019 and the remaining repowering projects are expected to be placed in-service at various dates in 2020. Planned spending for the repowered generating facilities totals $87 million in 2020. The energy production from such repowered facilities is expected to qualify for 100% of the federal PTCs available for ten years following each facility's return to service.
Construction of wind-powered generating facilities at BHE Renewables totaling $15 million for 2019, $717 million for 2018 and $109 million for 2017. BHE Renewables placed in-service 512 MWs during 2018.
Electric transmission includes PacifiCorp's costs for the 140-mile 500-kV Aeolus-Bridger/Anticline transmission line, which is a major segment of PacifiCorp's Energy Gateway Transmission expansion program expected to be placed in service in 2020 and AltaLink's directly assigned projects from the AESO.
Other growth includes projects to deliver power and services to new markets, new customer connections, enhancements to existing customer connections and investments in solar generation.
Operating includes ongoing distribution systems infrastructure needed at the Utilities and Northern Powergrid, investments in routine expenditures for generation, transmission, distribution and other infrastructure needed to serve existing and expected demand and environmental spending relating to emissions control equipment and the management of coal combustion residuals.

Contractual Obligations
The Company has contractual cash obligations that may affect its consolidated financial condition. The following table summarizes the Company's material contractual cash obligations as of December 31, 2019 (in millions):
  Payments Due By Periods
    2021- 2023- 2025 and  
  2020 2022 2024 After Total
           
BHE senior debt $350
 $450
 $900
 $6,951
 $8,651
BHE junior subordinated debentures 
 
 
 100
 100
Subsidiary debt 2,189
 2,650
 3,223
 22,821
 30,883
Interest payments on long-term debt(1)
 1,758
 3,260
 2,972
 19,824
 27,814
Short-term debt 3,214
 
 
 
 3,214
Operating and finance lease liabilities

 149
 260
 155
 532
 1,096
Interest payments on operating and finance lease liabilities(1)
 69
 115
 86
 395
 665
Fuel, capacity and transmission contract commitments(1)
 2,218
 2,720
 2,181
 13,584
 20,703
Construction commitments(1)
 1,682
 548
 10
 
 2,240
Easements(1)
 62
 138
 142
 2,259
 2,601
Other(1)
 718
 753
 586
 1,655
 3,712
Total contractual cash obligations $12,409
 $10,894
 $10,255
 $68,121
 $101,679

(1)Not reflected on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The Company has other types of commitments that arise primarily from unused lines of credit, letters of credit or relate to construction and other development costs (Liquidity and Capital Resources included within this Item 7 and Note 9), uncertain tax positions (Note 12) and asset retirement obligations (Note 14), which have not been included in the above table because the amount and timing of the cash payments are not certain. Refer, where applicable, to the respective referenced note in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for additional information.


105


Additionally, the Company has invested in projects sponsored by third parties, commonly referred to as tax equity investments. Under the terms of these tax equity investments, the Company has entered into equity capital contribution agreements with the project sponsors that require contributions. The Company has made contributions of $1,619 million, $698 million and $403 million in 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively, and has commitments as of December 31, 2019, subject to satisfaction of certain specified conditions, to provide equity contributions of $2.4 billion in 2020 pursuant to these equity capital contribution agreements as the various projects achieve commercial operation. Once a project achieves commercial operation, the Company enters into a partnership agreement with the project sponsor that directs and allocates the operating profits and tax benefits from the project.

Regulatory Matters

The Company is subject to comprehensive regulation. Refer to the discussion contained in Item 1 of this Form 10-K for further discussion regarding the Company's general regulatory framework and current regulatory matters.

BHE Renewables' Counterparty Risk

On January 29, 2019, PG&E Corporation and Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the "PG&E Utility") (together "PG&E") filed voluntary petitions for relief under chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California ("PG&E Bankruptcy Filing"). The Company owns 100% of Topaz and owns a 49% interest in Agua Caliente. Topaz is a 550-MW solar photovoltaic electric power generating facility located in California. Topaz sells 100% of its energy, capacity and RECs generated from the facility to PG&E Utility under a 25-year wholesale power purchase agreement ("PPA") that is in effect until October 2039. As of December 31, 2019, the Company's consolidated balance sheet includes $1.0 billion of property, plant and equipment, net and $0.9 billion of non-recourse project debt related to Topaz. Agua Caliente is a 290-MW solar photovoltaic electric power generating facility located in Arizona. Agua Caliente sells 100% of its energy, capacity and RECs generated from the facility to PG&E Utility under a 25-year wholesale PPA that is in effect until June 2039. As of December 31, 2019, the Company's equity investment in Agua Caliente totals $73 million and the project has $0.8 billion of non-recourse project debt owed to the United States Department of Energy. The PG&E Bankruptcy Filing is an event of default under the Topaz PPA ("PPA Default"). PG&E paid in full the invoices for December 2018 deliveries and all amounts invoiced to date for post-petition energy deliveries for both Topaz and Agua Caliente. PG&E has not paid for the power delivered from January 1 through January 28, 2019. The Company continues to perform on its obligations and deliver renewable energy to the PG&E Utility, and PG&E has publicly stated it will pay suppliers in full under normal terms for post-petition goods and services received. The Company maintains that, in light of the current facts and circumstances, the PPA Default could not reasonably be expected to result in a material adverse effect under the Topaz indenture and, therefore, no default has occurred under the Topaz indenture. In July 2019, the California Governor signed AB 1054 into law. AB 1054 is comprehensive legislation addressing wildfire risk in the state of California that, among other items, authorizes a wildfire fund which would operate as an insurance fund to support the creditworthiness of electrical utilities, if certain utilities, including PG&E, participate by making the required contributions, among other things. In July 2019, PG&E notified the CPUC of its intent to participate in the insurance fund and such participation requires, among other items, PG&E to exit bankruptcy by June 30, 2020. The Company believes it is more likely than not that no impairment exists and current debt obligations will be met, as post-petition contractual revenue payments are expected to be paid by PG&E Utility to the Topaz and Agua Caliente projects. The Company will continue to monitor the situation, including continued receipt of future PG&E payments and the future risk of the PPAs being rejected or modified through the bankruptcy process.

Quad Cities Generating Station Operating Status

Exelon Generation Company, LLC ("Exelon Generation"), the operator of Quad Cities Generating Station Units 1 and 2 ("Quad Cities Station") of which MidAmerican Energy has a 25% ownership interest, announced on June 2, 2016, its intention to shut down Quad Cities Station on June 1, 2018. In December 2016, Illinois passed legislation creating a zero emission standard, which went into effect June 1, 2017. The zero emission standard requires the Illinois Power Agency to purchase zero emission credits and recover the costs from certain ratepayers in Illinois, subject to certain limitations. The proceeds from the zero emission credits will provide Exelon Generation additional revenue through 2027 as an incentive for continued operation of Quad Cities Station. MidAmerican Energy will not receive additional revenue from the subsidy.

On February 14, 2017, two lawsuits were filed with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ("Northern District of Illinois") against the Illinois Power Agency alleging that the state's zero emission credit program violates certain provisions of the United States Constitution. Both lawsuits were dismissed at the Northern District of Illinois, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissals. On April 15, 2019, plaintiffs' petition seeking United States Supreme Court review of the case was denied.


106


On January 9, 2017, the Electric Power Supply Association ("EPSA") filed two requests with the FERC seeking to expand Minimum Offer Price Rule ("MOPR") provisions to apply to existing resources receiving zero emission credit compensation. When a resource is subjected to a MOPR, its offer price in the market is adjusted to effectively remove the revenues it receives through a government-provided financial support program, resulting in a higher offer that may not clear the capacity market. If the EPSA's requests are successful, an expanded MOPR could result in an increased risk of Quad Cities Station not clearing in future capacity auctions and Exelon Generation no longer receiving capacity revenues for the facility. As majority owner and operator of Quad Cities Station, Exelon Generation filed protests at the FERC in response to each filing.

On December 19, 2019, the FERC issued an order in the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. ("PJM") MOPR proceeding that broadly applies the MOPR to all new and existing resources, including nuclear, greatly expanding the breadth and scope of PJM's MOPR, effective as of PJM's next capacity auction. The FERC directed PJM to make a compliance filing within 90 days. The FERC has no deadline for acting on PJM's compliance filing. While the FERC included some limited exemptions in its order, no exemptions were available to state-supported nuclear resources, such as Quad Cities Station. In addition, the FERC provided no new mechanism for accommodating state-supported resources other than the existing Fixed Resource Requirement ("FRR") mechanism under which an entire utility zone would be removed from PJM's capacity auction along with sufficient resources to support the load in such zone. Unless Illinois can implement an FRR program in their PJM zones, the MOPR will apply to Exelon Generation's nuclear plants in those states receiving a benefit under the Illinois zero emissions program, including Quad Cities Station, resulting in higher offers for those units that may not clear the capacity market.

On January 21, 2020, Exelon Generation, PJM and a number of other entities submitted individual requests for rehearing of the FERC's December 19, 2019 order on the PJM MOPR. Exelon Generation is currently working with PJM and other stakeholders to pursue the FRR option prior to the next capacity auction in PJM. If Illinois implements the FRR option, Quad Cities Station could be removed from PJM's capacity auction and instead supply capacity and be compensated under the FRR program. Implementing the FRR program in Illinois will require both legislative and regulatory changes. MidAmerican Energy cannot predict whether such legislative and regulatory changes can be implemented prior to the next capacity auction in PJM or their potential impact on the continued operation of Quad Cities Station.

Environmental Laws and Regulations

The Company is subject to federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations regarding climate change, RPS, air and water quality, emissions performance standards, coal combustion byproduct disposal, hazardous and solid waste disposal, protected species and other environmental matters that have the potential to impact its current and future operations. In addition to imposing continuing compliance obligations and capital expenditure requirements, these laws and regulations provide regulators with the authority to levy substantial penalties for noncompliance, including fines, injunctive relief and other sanctions. These laws and regulations are administered by various federal, state, local and international agencies. The Company believes it is in material compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, although many laws and regulations are subject to interpretation that may ultimately be resolved by the courts. Refer to "Environmental Laws and Regulations" in Item 1 of this Form 10-K for further discussion regarding environmental laws and regulations.

Collateral and Contingent Features

Debt of BHE and debt and preferred securities of certain of its subsidiaries are rated by credit rating agencies. Assigned credit ratings are based on each rating agency's assessment of the rated company's ability to, in general, meet the obligations of its issued debt or preferred securities. The credit ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities, and there is no assurance that a particular credit rating will continue for any given period of time.

BHE and its subsidiaries have no credit rating downgrade triggers that would accelerate the maturity dates of outstanding debt, and a change in ratings is not an event of default under the applicable debt instruments. The Company's unsecured revolving credit facilities do not require the maintenance of a minimum credit rating level in order to draw upon their availability. However, commitment fees and interest rates under the credit facilities are tied to credit ratings and increase or decrease when the ratings change. A ratings downgrade could also increase the future cost of commercial paper, short- and long-term debt issuances or new credit facilities.


107


In accordance with industry practice, certain wholesale agreements, including derivative contracts, contain credit support provisions that in part base certain collateral requirements on credit ratings for senior unsecured debt as reported by one or more of the three recognized credit rating agencies. These agreements may either specifically provide bilateral rights to demand cash or other security if credit exposures on a net basis exceed specified rating-dependent threshold levels ("credit-risk-related contingent features") or provide the right for counterparties to demand "adequate assurance," or in some cases terminate the contract, in the event of a material adverse change in creditworthiness. These rights can vary by contract and by counterparty. As of December 31, 2019, the applicable entities' credit ratings from the three recognized credit rating agencies were investment grade. If all credit-risk-related contingent features or adequate assurance provisions for these agreements had been triggered as of December 31, 2019, the Company would have been required to post $390 million of additional collateral. The Company's collateral requirements could fluctuate considerably due to market price volatility, changes in credit ratings, changes in legislation or regulation, or other factors.

Inflation

Historically, overall inflation and changing prices in the economies where BHE's subsidiaries operate have not had a significant impact on the Company's consolidated financial results. In the United States and Canada, the Regulated Businesses operate under cost-of-service based rate structures administered by various state and provincial commissions and the FERC. Under these rate structures, the Regulated Businesses are allowed to include prudent costs in their rates, including the impact of inflation. The price control formula used by the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies incorporates the rate of inflation in determining rates charged to customers. BHE's subsidiaries attempt to minimize the potential impact of inflation on their operations through the use of fuel, energy and other cost adjustment clauses and bill riders, by employing prudent risk management and hedging strategies and by considering, among other areas, its impact on purchases of energy, operating expenses, materials and equipment costs, contract negotiations, future capital spending programs and long-term debt issuances. There can be no assurance that such actions will be successful.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

The Company has certain investments that are accounted for under the equity method in accordance with GAAP. Accordingly, an amount is recorded on the Company's Consolidated Balance Sheets as an equity investment and is increased or decreased for the Company's pro-rata share of earnings or losses, respectively, less any dividends from such investments. Certain equity investments are presented on the Consolidated Balance Sheets net of investment tax credits.


108


As of December 31, 2019, the Company's investments that are accounted for under the equity method had short- and long-term debt of $2.4 billion, unused revolving credit facilities of $119 million and letters of credit outstanding of $88 million. As of December 31, 2019, the Company's pro-rata share of such short- and long-term debt was $1.2 billion, unused revolving credit facilities was $60 million and outstanding letters of credit was $43 million. The entire amount of the Company's pro-rata share of the outstanding short- and long-term debt and unused revolving credit facilities is non-recourse to the Company. The entire amount of the Company's pro-rata share of the outstanding letters of credit is recourse to the Company. Although the Company is generally not required to support debt service obligations of its equity investees, default with respect to this non-recourse short- and long-term debt could result in a loss of invested equity.

New Accounting Pronouncements

For a discussion of new accounting pronouncements affecting the Company, refer to Note 2 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.

Critical Accounting Estimates

Certain accounting measurements require management to make estimates and judgments concerning transactions that will be settled several years in the future. Amounts recognized on the Consolidated Financial Statements based on such estimates involve numerous assumptions subject to varying and potentially significant degrees of judgment and uncertainty and will likely change in the future as additional information becomes available. The following critical accounting estimates are impacted significantly by the Company's methods, judgments and assumptions used in the preparation of the Consolidated Financial Statements and should be read in conjunction with the Company's Summary of Significant Accounting Policies included in Note 2 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.

Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation

The Regulated Businesses prepare their financial statements in accordance with authoritative guidance for regulated operations, which recognizes the economic effects of regulation. Accordingly, the Regulated Businesses defer the recognition of certain costs or income if it is probable that, through the ratemaking process, there will be a corresponding increase or decrease in future regulated rates. Regulatory assets and liabilities are established to reflect the impacts of these deferrals, which will be recognized in earnings in the periods the corresponding changes in regulated rates occur.

The Company continually evaluates the applicability of the guidance for regulated operations and whether its regulatory assets and liabilities are probable of inclusion in future regulated rates by considering factors such as a change in the regulator's approach to setting rates from cost-based ratemaking to another form of regulation, other regulatory actions or the impact of competition that could limit the Regulated Businesses' ability to recover their costs. The Company believes the application of the guidance for regulated operations is appropriate and its existing regulatory assets and liabilities are probable of inclusion in future regulated rates. The evaluation reflects the current political and regulatory climate at the federal, state and provincial levels. If it becomes no longer probable that the deferred costs or income will be included in future regulated rates, the related regulatory assets and liabilities will be recognized in net income, returned to customers or re-established as accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) ("AOCI"). Total regulatory assets were $2.9 billion and total regulatory liabilities were $7.3 billion as of December 31, 2019. Refer to Note 7 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for additional information regarding the Regulated Businesses' regulatory assets and liabilities.

Classification and Recognition Methodology

The majority of the Company's commodity derivative contracts are probable of inclusion in the rates of its rate-regulated subsidiaries, and changes in the estimated fair value of derivative contracts are generally recorded as net regulatory assets or liabilities. Accordingly, amounts are generally not recognized in earnings until the contracts are settled and the forecasted transaction has occurred. As of December 31, 2019, the Company had $77 million recorded as net regulatory assets related to derivative contracts on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.


109


Impairment of Goodwill and Long-Lived Assets

The Company's Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2019 includes goodwill of acquired businesses of $9.7 billion. The Company evaluates goodwill for impairment at least annually and completed its annual review as of October 31. Additionally, no indicators of impairment were identified as of December 31, 2019. Significant judgment is required in estimating the fair value of the reporting unit and performing goodwill impairment tests. The Company uses a variety of methods to estimate a reporting unit's fair value, principally discounted projected future net cash flows. Key assumptions used include, but are not limited to, the use of estimated future cash flows; multiples of earnings; and an appropriate discount rate. Estimated future cash flows are impacted by, among other factors, growth rates, changes in regulations and rates, ability to renew contracts and estimates of future commodity prices. In estimating future cash flows, the Company incorporates current market information, as well as historical factors. Refer to Note 22 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for additional information regarding the Company's goodwill.

The Company evaluates long-lived assets for impairment, including property, plant and equipment, when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable or the assets are being held for sale. Upon the occurrence of a triggering event, the asset is reviewed to assess whether the estimated undiscounted cash flows expected from the use of the asset plus the residual value from the ultimate disposal exceeds the carrying value of the asset. If the carrying value exceeds the estimated recoverable amounts, the asset is written down to the estimated fair value and any resulting impairment loss is reflected on the Consolidated Statements of Operations. As substantially all property, plant and equipment was used in regulated businesses as of December 31, 2019, the impacts of regulation are considered when evaluating the carrying value of regulated assets.

The estimate of cash flows arising from the future use of the asset that are used in the impairment analysis requires judgment regarding what the Company would expect to recover from the future use of the asset. Changes in judgment that could significantly alter the calculation of the fair value or the recoverable amount of the asset may result from significant changes in the regulatory environment, the business climate, management's plans, legal factors, market price of the asset, the use of the asset or the physical condition of the asset, future market prices, load growth, competition and many other factors over the life of the asset. Any resulting impairment loss is highly dependent on the underlying assumptions and could significantly affect the Company's results of operations.

Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits

Certain of the Company's subsidiaries sponsor defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans that cover the majority of employees. The Company recognizes the funded status of the defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Funded status is the fair value of plan assets minus the benefit obligation as of the measurement date. As of December 31, 2019, the Company recognized a net liability totaling $21 million for the funded status of the defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans. As of December 31, 2019, amounts not yet recognized as a component of net periodic benefit cost that were included in net regulatory assets totaled $600 million and in AOCI totaled $570 million.

The expense and benefit obligations relating to these defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans are based on actuarial valuations. Inherent in these valuations are key assumptions, including discount rates, expected long-term rate of return on plan assets and healthcare cost trend rates. These key assumptions are reviewed annually and modified as appropriate. The Company believes that the assumptions utilized in recording obligations under the plans are reasonable based on prior plan experience and current market and economic conditions. Refer to Note 13 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for disclosures about the defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans, including the key assumptions used to calculate the funded status and net periodic benefit cost for these plans as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019.

The Company chooses a discount rate based upon high quality debt security investment yields in effect as of the measurement date that corresponds to the expected benefit period. The pension and other postretirement benefit liabilities increase as the discount rate is reduced.

In establishing its assumption as to the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets, the Company utilizes the expected asset allocation and return assumptions for each asset class based on historical performance and forward-looking views of the financial markets. Pension and other postretirement benefits expense increases as the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets decreases. The Company regularly reviews its actual asset allocations and rebalances its investments to its targeted allocations when considered appropriate.


110


The Company chooses a healthcare cost trend rate that reflects the near and long-term expectations of increases in medical costs and corresponds to the expected benefit payment periods. The healthcare cost trend rate is assumed to gradually decline to 5.00% by 2025, at which point the rate of increase is assumed to remain constant. Refer to Note 13 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for healthcare cost trend rate sensitivity disclosures.

The key assumptions used may differ materially from period to period due to changing market and economic conditions. These differences may result in a significant impact to pension and other postretirement benefits expense and the funded status. If changes were to occur for the following key assumptions, the approximate effect on the Consolidated Financial Statements would be as follows (dollars in millions):
 Domestic Plans  
     Other Postretirement United Kingdom
 Pension Plans Benefit Plans Pension Plan
 +0.5% -0.5% +0.5% -0.5% +0.5% -0.5%
            
Effect on December 31, 2019           
Benefit Obligations:           
Discount rate$(143) $158
 $(27) $30
 $(190) $171
            
Effect on 2019 Periodic Cost:           
Discount rate$(1) $2
 $1
 $(1) $(19) $19
Expected rate of return on plan assets(12) 12
 (4) 2
 (10) 10

A variety of factors affect the funded status of the plans, including asset returns, discount rates, mortality assumptions, plan changes and the Company's funding policy for each plan.

Income Taxes

In determining the Company's income taxes, management is required to interpret complex income tax laws and regulations, which includes consideration of regulatory implications imposed by the Company's various regulatory commissions. The Company's income tax returns are subject to continuous examinations by federal, state, local and foreign income tax authorities that may give rise to different interpretations of these complex laws and regulations. Due to the nature of the examination process, it generally takes years before these examinations are completed and these matters are resolved. The Company recognizes the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is more-likely-than-not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position. The tax benefits recognized in the Consolidated Financial Statements from such a position are measured based on the largest benefit that is more-likely-than-not to be realized upon ultimate settlement. Although the ultimate resolution of the Company's federal, state, local and foreign income tax examinations is uncertain, the Company believes it has made adequate provisions for these income tax positions. The aggregate amount of any additional income tax liabilities that may result from these examinations, if any, is not expected to have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial results. Refer to Note 12 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for additional information regarding the Company's income taxes.

It is probable the Company's regulated businesses will pass income tax benefits and expense related to the federal tax rate change from 35% to 21% as a result of 2017 Tax Reform, certain property-related basis differences and other various differences on to their customers in certain state and provincial jurisdictions. As of December 31, 2019, these amounts were recognized as a net regulatory liability of $3.4 billion and will be included in regulated rates when the temporary differences reverse.
The Company has not established deferred income taxes on its undistributed foreign earnings that have been determined by management to be reinvested indefinitely; however, the Company periodically evaluates its capital requirements. If circumstances change in the future and a portion of the Company's undistributed foreign earnings were repatriated, the dividends may be subject to taxation in the United States but the tax is not expected to be material.


111


Revenue Recognition - Unbilled Revenue

Revenue recognized is equal to what the Company has the right to invoice as it corresponds directly with the value to the customer of the Company's performance to date and includes billed and unbilled amounts. The determination of customer invoices is based on a systematic reading of meters, fixed reservation charges based on contractual quantities and rates or, in the case of the Great Britain distribution businesses, when information is received from the national settlement system. At the end of each month, energy provided to customers since the date of the last meter reading is estimated, and the corresponding unbilled revenue is recorded. Unbilled revenue was $638 million as of December 31, 2019. Factors that can impact the estimate of unbilled energy include, but are not limited to, seasonal weather patterns, total volumes supplied to the system, line losses, economic impacts and composition of sales among customer classes. Unbilled revenue is reversed in the following month and billed revenue is recorded based on the subsequent meter readings.


112


Item 7A.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

The Company's Consolidated Balance Sheets include assets and liabilities with fair values that are subject to market risks. The Company's significant market risks are primarily associated with commodity prices, interest rates, equity prices, foreign currency exchange rates and the extension of credit to counterparties with which the Company transacts. The following discussion addresses the significant market risks associated with the Company's business activities. Each of the Company's business platforms has established guidelines for credit risk management.

Commodity Price Risk

The Company is principally exposed to electricity, natural gas, coal and fuel oil commodity price risk primarily through BHE's ownership of the Utilities as they have an obligation to serve retail customer load in their regulated service territories. The Company also provides nonregulated retail electricity and natural gas services in competitive markets. The Utilities' load and generating facilities represent substantial underlying commodity positions. Exposures to commodity prices consist mainly of variations in the price of fuel required to generate electricity, wholesale electricity that is purchased and sold and natural gas supply for retail customers. Commodity prices are subject to wide price swings as supply and demand are impacted by, among many other unpredictable items, weather, market liquidity, generating facility availability, customer usage, storage and transmission and transportation constraints. The Company does not engage in a material amount of proprietary trading activities. To manage a portion of its commodity price risk, the Company uses commodity derivative contracts, which may include forwards, futures, options, swaps and other agreements, to effectively secure future supply or sell future production generally at fixed prices. The Company does not hedge all of its commodity price risk, thereby exposing the unhedged portion to changes in market prices. The Company's exposure to commodity price risk is generally limited by its ability to include commodity costs in regulated rates, which is subject to regulatory lag that occurs between the time the costs are incurred and when the costs are included in regulated rates, as well as the impact of any customer sharing resulting from cost adjustment mechanisms.

The table that follows summarizes the Company's price risk on commodity contracts accounted for as derivatives, excluding collateral netting of $79 million and $59 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, and shows the effects of a hypothetical 10% increase and 10% decrease in forward market prices with the contracted or expected volumes. The selected hypothetical change does not reflect what could be considered the best or worst case scenarios (dollars in millions).

 Fair Value - Estimated Fair Value after
 Net Asset Hypothetical Change in Price
 (Liability) 10% increase 10% decrease
As of December 31, 2019:     
Not designated as hedging contracts$16
 $57
 $(24)
Designated as hedging contracts(21) (1) (41)
Total commodity derivative contracts$(5) $56
 $(65)
      
As of December 31, 2018:     
Not designated as hedging contracts$5
 $34
 $(12)
Designated as hedging contracts5
 37
 (21)
Total commodity derivative contracts$10
 $71
 $(33)

The settled cost of certain of the Company's commodity derivative contracts not designated as hedging contracts is included in regulated rates and, therefore, net unrealized gains and losses associated with interim price movements on commodity derivative contracts do not expose the Company to earnings volatility. Consolidated financial results would be negatively impacted if the costs of wholesale electricity, wholesale natural gas or fuel are higher than what is included in regulated rates, including the impacts of adjustment mechanisms. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, a net regulatory asset of $77 million and $110 million, respectively, was recorded related to the net derivative asset of $16 million and $5 million, respectively. The difference between the net regulatory asset and the net derivative asset relates primarily to a power purchase agreement derivative at BHE Renewables. For the Company's commodity derivative contracts designated as hedging contracts, net unrealized gains and losses associated with interim price movements on commodity derivative contracts, to the extent the hedge is considered effective, generally do not expose the Company to earnings volatility.


113


Interest Rate Risk

The Company is exposed to interest rate risk on its outstanding variable-rate short- and long-term debt, future debt issuances and mortgage commitments. The Company manages its interest rate risk by limiting its exposure to variable interest rates primarily through the issuance of fixed-rate long-term debt and by monitoring market changes in interest rates. As a result of the fixed interest rates, the Company's fixed-rate long-term debt does not expose the Company to the risk of loss due to changes in market interest rates. Additionally, because fixed-rate long-term debt is not carried at fair value on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, changes in fair value would impact earnings and cash flows only if the Company were to reacquire all or a portion of these instruments prior to their maturity. The nature and amount of the Company's short- and long-term debt can be expected to vary from period to period as a result of future business requirements, market conditions and other factors. Refer to Notes 9, 10, 11, and 15 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K for additional discussion of the Company's short and long-term debt.

As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the Company had short- and long-term variable-rate obligations totaling $4.8 billion and $4.3 billion, respectively, that expose the Company to the risk of increased interest expense in the event of increases in short-term interest rates. If variable interest rates were to increase by 10% from December 31 levels, it would not have a material effect on the Company's consolidated annual interest expense. The carrying value of the variable-rate obligations approximates fair value as of December 31, 2019 and 2018.

The Company may from time to time enter into interest rate derivative contracts, such as interest rate swaps or locks, forward sale commitments or mortgage interest rate lock commitments, to mitigate the Company's exposure to interest rate risk. Changes in fair value of agreements designated as cash flow hedges are reported in accumulated other comprehensive income to the extent the hedge is effective until the forecasted transaction occurs. Changes in fair value of agreements not designated as hedging contracts are recognized in earnings. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the Company had variable-to-fixed interest rate swaps with notional amounts of $380 million and $637 million, respectively, and £141 million and £161 million, respectively, to protect the Company against an increase in interest rates. Additionally, as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the Company had mortgage commitments, net, with notional amounts of $913 million and $326 million, respectively, to protect the Company against an increase in interest rates. The fair value of the Company's interest rate derivative contracts was a net derivative liability of $5 million as of December 31, 2019 and a net derivative liability of $8 million as of December 31, 2018. A hypothetical 20 basis point increase and a 20 basis point decrease in interest rates would not have a material impact on the Company.

Equity Price Risk

Market prices for equity securities are subject to fluctuation and consequently the amount realized in the subsequent sale of an investment may significantly differ from the reported market value. Fluctuation in the market price of a security may result from perceived changes in the underlying economic characteristics of the investee, the relative price of alternative investments and general market conditions.

As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the Company's investment in BYD Company Limited common stock represented approximately 69% and 79%, respectively, of the total fair value of the Company's equity securities. The majority of the Company's remaining equity securities are held in a trust related to the decommissioning of nuclear generation assets and the realized and unrealized gains and losses are recorded as a net regulatory liability since the Company expects to recover costs for these activities through regulated rates. The following table summarizes the Company's investment in BYD Company Limited as of December 31, 2019 and 2018 and the effects of a hypothetical 30% increase and a 30% decrease in market price as of those dates. The selected hypothetical change does not reflect what could be considered the best or worst case scenarios (dollars in millions).

     Estimated Hypothetical
   Hypothetical Fair Value after Percentage Increase
 Fair Price Hypothetical (Decrease) in BHE
 Value Change Change in Prices Shareholders' Equity
        
As of December 31, 2019$1,122
 30% increase $1,459
 1 %
   30% decrease 785
 (1)
        
As of December 31, 2018$1,435
 30% increase $1,866
 1 %
   30% decrease 1,005
 (1)

114



Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risk

BHE's business operations and investments outside of the United States increase its risk related to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates primarily in relation to the British pound and the Canadian dollar. BHE's reporting currency is the United States dollar, and the value of the assets and liabilities, earnings, cash flows and potential distributions from BHE's foreign operations changes with the fluctuations of the currency in which they transact.

Northern Powergrid's functional currency is the British pound. As of December 31, 2019, a 10% devaluation in the British pound to the United States dollar would result in the Company's Consolidated Balance Sheet being negatively impacted by a $452 million cumulative translation adjustment in AOCI. A 10% devaluation in the average currency exchange rate would have resulted in lower reported earnings for Northern Powergrid of $26 million in 2019.

BHE Canada's functional currency is the Canadian dollar. As of December 31, 2019, a 10% devaluation in the Canadian dollar to the United States dollar would result in the Company's Consolidated Balance Sheet being negatively impacted by a $336 million cumulative translation adjustment in AOCI. A 10% devaluation in the average currency exchange rate would have resulted in lower reported earnings for BHE Canada of $17 million in 2019.

Credit Risk

Domestic Regulated Operations

The Utilities are exposed to counterparty credit risk associated with wholesale energy supply and marketing activities with other utilities, energy marketing companies, financial institutions and other market participants. Credit risk may be concentrated to the extent the Utilities' counterparties have similar economic, industry or other characteristics and due to direct or indirect relationships among the counterparties. Before entering into a transaction, the Utilities analyze the financial condition of each significant wholesale counterparty, establish limits on the amount of unsecured credit to be extended to each counterparty and evaluate the appropriateness of unsecured credit limits on an ongoing basis. To further mitigate wholesale counterparty credit risk, the Utilities enter into netting and collateral arrangements that may include margining and cross-product netting agreements and obtain third-party guarantees, letters of credit and cash deposits. If required, the Utilities exercise rights under these arrangements, including calling on the counterparty's credit support arrangement.

As of December 31, 2019, PacifiCorp's aggregate credit exposure with wholesale energy supply and marketing counterparties included counterparties having non-investment grade, internally rated credit ratings. Substantially all of these non-investment grade, internally rated counterparties are associated with long-duration solar and wind power purchase agreements from facilities that have not yet achieved commercial operation and for which PacifiCorp has no obligation should the facilities not achieve commercial operation.

Substantially all of MidAmerican Energy's electric wholesale sales revenue results from participation in RTOs, including the MISO and the PJM. MidAmerican Energy's share of historical losses from defaults by other RTO market participants has not been material. Additionally, as of December 31, 2019, MidAmerican Energy's aggregate direct credit exposure from electric wholesale marketing counterparties was not material.

As of December 31, 2019, NV Energy's aggregate credit exposure from energy related transactions, based on settlement and mark-to-market exposures, net of collateral, was not material.

Northern Natural Gas' primary customers include utilities in the upper Midwest. Kern River's primary customers are electric and natural gas distribution utilities, major oil and natural gas companies or affiliates of such companies, electric generating companies, energy marketing and trading companies and financial institutions. As a general policy, collateral is not required for receivables from creditworthy customers. Customers' financial condition and creditworthiness, as defined by the tariff, are regularly evaluated and historical losses have been minimal. In order to provide protection against credit risk, and as permitted by the separate terms of each of Northern Natural Gas' and Kern River's tariffs, the companies have required customers that lack creditworthiness to provide cash deposits, letters of credit or other security until they meet the creditworthiness requirements of the respective tariff.


115


Northern Powergrid

The Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies charge fees for the use of their distribution systems to supply companies. The supply companies purchase electricity from generators and traders, sell the electricity to end-use customers and use the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies' distribution networks pursuant to the multilateral "Distribution Connection and Use of System Agreement." The Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies' customers are concentrated in a small number of electricity supply businesses. During 2019, RWE Npower PLC and certain of its affiliates and British Gas Trading Limited represented approximately 17% and 12%, respectively, of the total combined distribution revenue of the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies. The industry operates in accordance with a framework which sets credit limits for each supply business based on its credit rating or payment history and requires them to provide credit cover if their value at risk (measured as being equivalent to 45 days usage) exceeds the credit limit. Acceptable credit typically is provided in the form of a parent company guarantee, letter of credit or an escrow account. Ofgem has indicated that, provided the Northern Powergrid Distribution Companies have implemented credit control, billing and collection in line with best practice guidelines and can demonstrate compliance with the guidelines or are able to satisfactorily explain departure from the guidelines, any bad debt losses arising from supplier default will be recovered through an increase in future allowed income. Losses incurred to date have not been material.

BHE Canada

AltaLink's primary source of operating revenue is the AESO, an entity rated AA- by Standard and Poor's. Because of the dependence on a single customer, any material failure of the customer to fulfill its obligations would significantly impair AltaLink's ability to meet its existing and future obligations. Total operating revenue for AltaLink was $706 million for the year ended December 31, 2019.

BHE Renewables

BHE Renewables owns independent power projects in the United States and the Philippines that generally have separate project financing agreements. These projects source of operating revenue is derived primarily from long-term power purchase agreements with single customers, primarily utilities, which expire between 2019 and 2043. Because of the dependence generally from a single customer at each project, any material failure of the customer to fulfill its obligations would significantly impair that project's ability to meet its existing and future obligations. On January 29, 2019, a customer of certain BHE Renewables' solar projects filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. See BHE Renewables' Counterparty Risk in Item 7 of this Form 10-K for additional information. Total operating revenue for BHE Renewables was $932 million for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Other Energy Business

MidAmerican Energy Services, LLC ("MES") is exposed to counterparty credit risk associated with wholesale energy supply and marketing activities with financial institutions and other market participants. Credit risk may be concentrated to the extent that MES' counterparties have similar economic, industry or other characteristics and due to direct or indirect relationships among the counterparties. Before entering into a transaction, MES analyzes the financial condition of each significant wholesale counterparty, establishes limits on the amount of unsecured credit to be extended to each counterparty and evaluates the appropriateness of unsecured credit limits on an ongoing basis. To further mitigate wholesale counterparty credit risk, MES enters into netting and collateral arrangements that may include margining and cross-product netting agreements and obtains third-party guarantees, letters of credit and cash deposits. If required, MES exercises rights under these arrangements, including calling on the counterparty's credit support arrangement.

As of December 31, 2019, MES' aggregate credit exposure from energy related transactions, based on settlement and mark-to-market exposures, net of collateral, was not material.


116


Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data



117




REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


To the Board of Directors and the Shareholders of
Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company
Des Moines, Iowa

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, changes in equity, and cash flows, for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2019, and the related notes and the schedules listed in the Index at Item 15(a)(2) (collectively referred to as the "financial statements"). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2019, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Change in Accounting Principle

As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company has changed its method of accounting for leases in 2019 due to the adoption of ASU 2016-02 "Leases". In 2018, the Company changed its method of accounting for investments in equity securities (excluding equity method investments) due to the adoption of ASU 2016-01 "Financial Instruments - Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities".

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.




/s/Deloitte & Touche LLP

Des Moines, Iowa
February 21, 2020

We have served as the Company's auditor since 1991.



118


BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Amounts in millions)

 As of December 31,
 2019 2018
ASSETS
Current assets:   
Cash and cash equivalents$1,040
 $627
Restricted cash and cash equivalents212
 227
Trade receivables, net1,910
 2,038
Inventories873
 844
Mortgage loans held for sale1,039
 468
Other current assets839
 943
Total current assets5,913
 5,147
    
Property, plant and equipment, net73,305
 68,087
Goodwill9,722
 9,595
Regulatory assets2,766
 2,896
Investments and restricted cash and cash equivalents and investments6,255
 4,903
Other assets2,090
 1,561
    
Total assets$100,051
 $92,189

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

119


BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (continued)
(Amounts in millions)

 As of December 31,
 2019 2018
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
Current liabilities:   
Accounts payable$1,839
 $1,809
Accrued interest493
 469
Accrued property, income and other taxes537
 599
Accrued employee expenses285
 275
Short-term debt3,214
 2,516
Current portion of long-term debt2,539
 2,081
Other current liabilities1,350
 1,021
Total current liabilities10,257
 8,770
    
BHE senior debt8,231
 8,577
BHE junior subordinated debentures100
 100
Subsidiary debt28,483
 25,492
Regulatory liabilities7,100
 7,346
Deferred income taxes9,653
 9,047
Other long-term liabilities3,649
 3,134
Total liabilities67,473
 62,466
    
Commitments and contingencies (Note 16)
 
    
Equity:   
BHE shareholders' equity:   
Common stock - 115 shares authorized, no par value, 77 shares issued and outstanding
 
Additional paid-in capital6,389
 6,371
Long-term income tax receivable(530) (457)
Retained earnings28,296
 25,624
Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net(1,706) (1,945)
Total BHE shareholders' equity32,449
 29,593
Noncontrolling interests129
 130
Total equity32,578
 29,723
    
Total liabilities and equity$100,051
 $92,189

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

120


BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ENERGY COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Amounts in millions)

 Years Ended December 31,
 2019 2018 2017
Operating revenue:     
Energy$15,371
 $15,573
 $15,171
Real estate4,473
 4,214
 3,443
Total operating revenue19,844
 19,787