SOUTHERN COMPANY
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
|
|
|
þ |
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES |
|
|
|
For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2007
|
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES |
For the Transition Period from to
|
|
|
|
|
Commission |
|
Registrant, State of Incorporation, |
|
I.R.S. Employer |
File Number |
|
Address and Telephone Number |
|
Identification No. |
1-3526
|
|
The Southern Company
|
|
58-0690070 |
|
|
(A Delaware Corporation) |
|
|
|
|
30 Ivan Allen Jr. Boulevard, N.W. |
|
|
|
|
Atlanta, Georgia 30308 |
|
|
|
|
(404) 506-5000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-3164
|
|
Alabama Power Company
|
|
63-0004250 |
|
|
(An Alabama Corporation) |
|
|
|
|
600 North 18th Street |
|
|
|
|
Birmingham, Alabama 35291 |
|
|
|
|
(205) 257-1000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-6468
|
|
Georgia Power Company
|
|
58-0257110 |
|
|
(A Georgia Corporation) |
|
|
|
|
241 Ralph McGill Boulevard, N.E. |
|
|
|
|
Atlanta, Georgia 30308 |
|
|
|
|
(404) 506-6526 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-2429
|
|
Gulf Power Company
|
|
59-0276810 |
|
|
(A Florida Corporation) |
|
|
|
|
One Energy Place |
|
|
|
|
Pensacola, Florida 32520 |
|
|
|
|
(850) 444-6111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
001-11229
|
|
Mississippi Power Company
|
|
64-0205820 |
|
|
(A Mississippi Corporation) |
|
|
|
|
2992 West Beach |
|
|
|
|
Gulfport, Mississippi 39501 |
|
|
|
|
(228) 864-1211 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
333-98553
|
|
Southern Power Company
|
|
58-2598670 |
|
|
(A Delaware Corporation) |
|
|
|
|
30 Ivan Allen Jr. Boulevard, N.W. |
|
|
|
|
Atlanta, Georgia 30308 |
|
|
|
|
(404) 506-5000 |
|
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:1
Each of the following classes or series of securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act is listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
|
|
|
|
|
Title of each class |
|
|
|
Registrant |
Common Stock, $5 par value
|
|
|
|
The Southern Company |
|
Class A preferred, cumulative, $25 stated capital |
|
|
Alabama Power Company |
5.20% Series
|
|
5.83% Series
|
|
5.30% Series |
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Notes |
|
|
|
|
5 5/8% Series AA
|
|
5.875% Series II |
|
5 7/8% Series GG
|
|
6.375% Series JJ |
|
5.875% Series 2007B |
|
|
|
|
|
Class A Preferred Stock, non-cumulative, |
|
|
|
|
Par value $25 per share |
|
|
|
Georgia Power Company |
6 1/8% Series
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Notes |
|
|
|
|
5.90% Series O
|
|
6% Series R
|
5.70% Series X |
5.75% Series T |
|
6% Series W
|
5.75% Series G2 |
6.375% Series 2007D |
|
|
|
|
|
Mandatorily redeemable preferred securities, |
|
|
|
$25 liquidation amount |
|
|
|
|
5 7/8% Trust Preferred Securities3 |
|
|
|
Senior Notes |
|
|
|
Gulf Power Company |
5.25% Series H
|
|
5.75% Series I
|
|
5.875% Series J |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
As of December 31, 2007. |
|
2 |
|
Assumed by Georgia Power Company in connection with its merger with Savannah
Electric and Power Company, effective July 1, 2006. |
|
3 |
|
Issued by Georgia Power Capital Trust VII and guaranteed by Georgia Power Company. |
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Notes |
|
|
|
Mississippi Power Company |
5 5/8% Series E
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depositary preferred shares, each representing one-fourth |
|
|
|
|
of a share of preferred stock, cumulative, $100 par value |
|
|
|
|
5.25% Series
|
|
|
|
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title of each class |
|
|
|
|
|
Registrant |
Preferred stock, cumulative, $100 par value |
|
|
|
Alabama Power Company |
4.20% Series
|
|
4.60% Series
|
|
4.72% Series |
|
|
4.52% Series
|
|
4.64% Series
|
|
4.92% Series |
|
|
Class A Preferred Stock, cumulative, $100,000 stated capital
Flexible Money Market (Series 2003A)5
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, cumulative, $100 par value |
|
Mississippi Power Company |
4.40% Series
|
|
4.60% Series |
|
|
4.72% Series |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
As of December 31, 2007. |
|
5 |
|
Redeemed on January 2, 2008. |
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of
the Securities Act.
|
|
|
|
|
Registrant |
|
Yes |
|
No |
The Southern Company
|
|
ü |
|
|
Alabama Power Company
|
|
ü |
|
|
Georgia Power Company
|
|
ü |
|
|
Gulf Power Company
|
|
|
|
ü |
Mississippi Power Company
|
|
|
|
ü |
Southern Power Company
|
|
|
|
ü |
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or
Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No þ (Response applicable to all registrants.)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrants (1) have 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 registrants were required to file such reports), and (2) have been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is
not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of 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. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
(Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large |
|
|
|
|
|
Smaller |
|
|
Accelerated |
|
Accelerated |
|
Non-accelerated |
|
Reporting |
Registrant |
|
Filer |
|
Filer |
|
Filer |
|
Company |
The Southern Company
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alabama Power Company
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
Georgia Power Company
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
Gulf Power Company
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
Mississippi Power Company
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
Southern Power Company
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). Yes o No þ (Response applicable to all registrants.)
Aggregate market value of The Southern Companys common stock held by non-affiliates of The
Southern Company at June 29, 2007: $25.9 billion. All of the common stock of the other registrants
is held by The Southern Company. A description of each registrants common stock follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Description of |
|
Shares Outstanding |
Registrant |
|
Common Stock |
|
at January 31, 2008 |
The Southern Company |
|
Par Value $5 Per Share |
|
|
764,712,159 |
|
Alabama Power Company |
|
Par Value $40 Per Share |
|
|
17,975,000 |
|
Georgia Power Company |
|
Without Par Value |
|
|
9,261,500 |
|
Gulf Power Company |
|
Without Par Value |
|
|
1,792,717 |
|
Mississippi Power Company |
|
Without Par Value |
|
|
1,121,000 |
|
Southern Power Company |
|
Par Value $0.01 Per Share |
|
|
1,000 |
|
Documents incorporated by reference: specified portions of The Southern Companys Proxy Statement
relating to the 2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into PART III.
In addition, specified portions of the Information Statements of Alabama Power Company, Georgia
Power Company, and Mississippi Power Company relating to each of their respective 2008 Annual
Meetings of Shareholders are incorporated by reference into PART III.
Southern Power Company meets the conditions set forth in General Instructions I(1)(a) and (b) of
Form 10-K and is therefore filing this Form 10-K with the reduced disclosure format specified in
General Instructions I(2)(b) and (c) of Form 10-K.
This combined Form 10-K is separately filed by The Southern Company, Alabama Power Company, Georgia
Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Mississippi Power Company, and Southern 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.
DEFINITIONS
When used in Items 1 through 5 and Items 9A through 15, the following terms will have the meanings
indicated.
|
|
|
Term |
|
Meaning |
AFUDC
|
|
Allowance for Funds Used During Construction |
Alabama Power
|
|
Alabama Power Company |
AMEA
|
|
Alabama Municipal Electric Authority |
Clean Air Act
|
|
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 |
Dalton
|
|
Dalton Utilities |
DOE
|
|
United States Department of Energy |
Duke Energy
|
|
Duke Energy Corporation |
Energy Act of 1992
|
|
Energy Policy Act of 1992 |
Energy Act of 2005
|
|
Energy Policy Act of 2005 |
Energy Solutions
|
|
Southern Company Energy Solutions, Inc. |
EPA
|
|
United States Environmental Protection Agency |
FASB
|
|
Financial Accounting Standards Board |
FERC
|
|
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission |
FMPA
|
|
Florida Municipal Power Agency |
FP&L
|
|
Florida Power & Light Company |
Georgia Power
|
|
Georgia Power Company |
Gulf Power
|
|
Gulf Power Company |
Hampton
|
|
City of Hampton, Georgia |
Holding Company Act
|
|
Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, as amended |
IBEW
|
|
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers |
IIC
|
|
Intercompany Interchange Contract |
IPP
|
|
Independent Power Producer |
IRP
|
|
Integrated Resource Plan |
IRS
|
|
Internal Revenue Service |
KUA
|
|
Kissimmee Utility Authority |
MEAG
|
|
Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia |
Mirant
|
|
Mirant Corporation |
Mississippi Power
|
|
Mississippi Power Company |
Moodys
|
|
Moodys Investors Service |
NRC
|
|
Nuclear Regulatory Commission |
OPC
|
|
Oglethorpe Power Corporation |
OUC
|
|
Orlando Utilities Commission |
PowerSouth
|
|
PowerSouth Energy Cooperative (formerly, Alabama
Electric Cooperative, Inc.) |
PPA
|
|
Power Purchase Agreement |
Progress Energy Carolinas
|
|
Carolina Power & Light Company, d/b/a Progress Energy
Carolinas, Inc. |
Progress Energy Florida
|
|
Florida Power Corporation, d/b/a Progress Energy
Florida, Inc. |
PSC
|
|
Public Service Commission |
registrants
|
|
The Southern Company, Alabama Power Company, Georgia
Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Mississippi Power
Company, and Southern Power Company |
ii
DEFINITIONS
(continued)
|
|
|
Term |
|
Meaning |
RFP
|
|
Request for Proposal |
RUS
|
|
Rural Utility Service (formerly
Rural Electrification Administration) |
S&P
|
|
Standard and Poors, a division of The
McGraw-Hill Companies |
Savannah Electric
|
|
Savannah Electric and Power Company (merged
into Georgia Power on July 1, 2006) |
SCS
|
|
Southern Company Services, Inc. (the system
service company) |
SEC
|
|
Securities and Exchange Commission |
SEGCO
|
|
Southern Electric Generating Company |
SEPA
|
|
Southeastern Power Administration |
SERC
|
|
Southeastern Electric Reliability Council |
SMEPA
|
|
South Mississippi Electric Power Association |
Southern Company
|
|
The Southern Company |
Southern Company system
|
|
Southern Company, the traditional operating
companies, Southern Power, SEGCO, Southern
Nuclear, SCS, SouthernLINC Wireless, and
other subsidiaries |
Southern Holdings
|
|
Southern Company Holdings, Inc. |
SouthernLINC Wireless
|
|
Southern Communications Services, Inc. |
Southern Nuclear
|
|
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. |
Southern Power
|
|
Southern Power Company |
traditional operating companies
|
|
Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power
Company, Gulf Power Company, and
Mississippi Power Company |
TVA
|
|
Tennessee Valley Authority |
iii
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements
include, among other things, statements concerning the strategic goals for the wholesale business,
retail sales growth, customer growth, storm damage cost recovery and repairs, fuel cost recovery,
environmental regulations and expenditures, earnings growth, dividend payout ratios, access to
sources of capital, projections for postretirement benefit trust contributions, financing
activities, completion of construction projects, impacts of adoption of new accounting rules, costs
of implementing the IIC settlement with the FERC, and estimated construction and other
expenditures. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as
may, will, could, should, expects, plans, anticipates, believes, estimates,
projects, predicts, potential, or continue or the negative of these terms or other similar
terminology. There are various factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from
those suggested by the forward-looking statements; accordingly, there can be no assurance that such
indicated results will be realized. These factors include:
|
|
the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory change, including legislative
and regulatory initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility
industry, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, environmental laws including
regulation of water quality and emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon, soot, or
particulate matter and other substances, and also changes in tax and other laws and
regulations to which Southern Company and its subsidiaries are subject, as well as changes in
application of existing laws and regulations; |
|
|
|
current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings, or inquiries,
including the pending EPA civil actions against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, FERC
matters, IRS audits, and Mirant matters; |
|
|
|
the effects, extent, and timing of the entry of additional competition in the markets in
which Southern Companys subsidiaries operate; |
|
|
|
variations in demand for electricity, including those relating to weather, the general
economy, population, and business growth (and declines), and the effects of energy
conservation measures; |
|
|
|
available sources and costs of fuel; |
|
|
|
effects of inflation; |
|
|
|
ability to control costs; |
|
|
|
investment performance of Southern Companys employee benefit plans; |
|
|
|
advances in technology; |
|
|
|
state and federal rate regulations and the impact of pending and future rate cases and
negotiations, including rate actions relating to fuel and storm restoration cost recovery; |
|
|
|
the performance of projects undertaken by the non-utility businesses and the success of
efforts to invest in and develop new opportunities; |
|
|
|
internal restructuring or other restructuring options that may be pursued; |
|
|
|
potential business strategies, including acquisitions or dispositions of assets or
businesses, which cannot be assured to be completed or beneficial to Southern Company or its
subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
the ability of counterparties of Southern Company and its subsidiaries to make payments as
and when due; |
|
|
|
the ability to obtain new short- and long-term contracts with neighboring utilities; |
|
|
|
the direct or indirect effect on Southern Companys business resulting from terrorist
incidents and the threat of terrorist incidents; |
|
|
|
interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing
efforts, including Southern Companys and its subsidiaries credit ratings; |
|
|
|
the ability of Southern Company and its subsidiaries to obtain additional generating capacity
at competitive prices; |
|
|
|
catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, hurricanes, droughts,
pandemic health events such as an avian influenza, or other similar occurrences; |
|
|
|
the direct or indirect effects on Southern Companys business resulting from incidents
similar to the August 2003 power outage in the Northeast; |
|
|
|
the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard setting bodies; and |
|
|
|
other factors discussed elsewhere herein and in other reports filed by the registrants from
time to time with the SEC. |
The registrants expressly disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.
iv
PART I
Item 1. BUSINESS
Southern Company was incorporated under the laws of Delaware on November 9, 1945. Southern Company
is domesticated under the laws of Georgia and is qualified to do business as a foreign corporation
under the laws of Alabama. Southern Company owns all of the outstanding common stock of Alabama
Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power, each of which is an operating public
utility company. The traditional operating companies supply electric service in the states of
Alabama, Georgia, Florida, and Mississippi. More particular information relating to each of the
traditional operating companies is as follows:
Alabama Power is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Alabama on November 10,
1927, by the consolidation of a predecessor Alabama Power Company, Gulf Electric Company, and
Houston Power Company. The predecessor Alabama Power Company had been in continuous existence
since its incorporation in 1906.
Georgia Power was incorporated under the laws of the State of Georgia on June 26, 1930, and
admitted to do business in Alabama on September 15, 1948. Effective July 1, 2006, Savannah
Electric, formerly a wholly-owned subsidiary of Southern Company, was merged with and into
Georgia Power.
Gulf Power is a Florida corporation that has had a continuous existence since it was originally
organized under the laws of the State of Maine on November 2, 1925. Gulf Power was admitted to
do business in Florida on January 15, 1926, in Mississippi on October 25, 1976, and in Georgia
on November 20, 1984. Gulf Power became a Florida corporation after being domesticated under
the laws of the State of Florida on November 2, 2005.
Mississippi Power was incorporated under the laws of the State of Mississippi on July 12, 1972,
was admitted to do business in Alabama on November 28, 1972, and effective December 21, 1972, by
the merger into it of the predecessor Mississippi Power Company, succeeded to the business and
properties of the latter company. The predecessor Mississippi Power Company was incorporated
under the laws of the State of Maine on November 24, 1924, and was admitted to do business in
Mississippi on December 23, 1924, and in Alabama on December 7, 1962.
In addition, Southern Company owns all of the common stock of Southern Power, which is also an
operating public utility company. Southern Power constructs, acquires, owns, and manages
generation assets and sells electricity at market-based rates in the wholesale market. Southern
Power is a corporation organized under the laws of Delaware on January 8, 2001 and was admitted to
do business in the States of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia on January 10, 2001, in the State of
Mississippi on January 30, 2001, and in the State of North Carolina on February 19, 2007.
Southern Company also owns all the outstanding common stock or membership interests of SouthernLINC
Wireless, Southern Nuclear, SCS, Southern Holdings and other direct and indirect subsidiaries.
SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications services to the traditional
operating companies and markets these services to the public and also provides wholesale fiber
optic solutions to telecommunication providers in the Southeast. Southern Nuclear operates and
provides services to Alabama Powers and Georgia Powers nuclear plants. SCS is the system service
company providing, at cost, specialized services to Southern Company and its subsidiary companies.
Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding subsidiary for Southern Companys investments in
synthetic fuels and leveraged leases and various other energy-related businesses. The investments
in synthetic fuels ended on December 31, 2007.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power each own 50% of the outstanding common stock of SEGCO. SEGCO is an
operating public utility company that owns electric generating units with an aggregate capacity of
1,019,680 kilowatts at Plant Gaston on the Coosa River near Wilsonville, Alabama. Alabama Power
and Georgia Power are each entitled to one-half of SEGCOs capacity and energy. Alabama Power acts
as SEGCOs agent in the operation of SEGCOs units and furnishes coal to SEGCO as fuel for its
units. SEGCO also owns three 230,000 volt transmission lines extending from Plant Gaston to the
Georgia state line at which point connection is made with the Georgia Power
I-1
transmission line system.
Southern Companys segments and related information is included in Note 10 to the financial
statements of Southern Company in Item 8 herein.
The registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on
Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports are made available on Southern Companys website,
free of charge, as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with
or furnished to the SEC. Southern Companys internet address is www.southerncompany.com.
The Southern Company System
Traditional
Operating Companies
The traditional operating companies own generation and transmission facilities. See PROPERTIES in Item 2 herein for additional information on the traditional operating companies generating
facilities. The transmission facilities of each of the traditional operating companies are
connected to the respective companys own generating plants and other sources of power and are
interconnected with the transmission facilities of the other traditional operating companies and
SEGCO by means of heavy-duty high voltage lines. For information on Georgia Powers integrated
transmission system, see Territory Served by the Traditional Operating Companies and Southern Power herein.
Operating contracts covering arrangements in effect with principal neighboring utility systems
provide for capacity exchanges, capacity purchases and sales, transfers of economy energy, and
other similar transactions. Additionally, the traditional operating companies have entered into
voluntary reliability agreements with the subsidiaries of Entergy Corporation, Florida Electric
Power Coordinating Group and TVA and with Progress Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy, South Carolina
Electric & Gas Company, and Virginia Electric and Power Company, each of which provides for the
establishment and periodic review of principles and procedures for planning and operation of
generation and transmission facilities, maintenance schedules, load retention programs, emergency
operations, and other matters affecting the reliability of bulk power supply. The traditional
operating companies have joined with other utilities in the Southeast (including those referred to
above) to form the SERC to augment further the reliability and adequacy of bulk power supply.
Through the SERC, the traditional operating companies are represented on the National Electric
Reliability Council.
The IIC provides for coordinating operations of the power producing facilities of the traditional
operating companies and Southern Power and the capacities available to such companies from
non-affiliated sources and for the pooling of surplus energy available for interchange.
Coordinated operation of the entire interconnected system is conducted through a central power
supply coordination office maintained by SCS. The available sources of energy are allocated to the
traditional operating companies and Southern Power to provide the most economical sources of power
consistent with reliable operation. The resulting benefits and savings are apportioned among each
of the companies. See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL FERC
Matters Intercompany Interchange Contract of each registrant in Item 7 herein and Note 3 to the
financial statements of each registrant, all under FERC Matters Intercompany Interchange
Contract in Item 8 herein for information on the settlement of the FERC proceeding related to the
IIC.
Southern Company, each traditional operating company, Southern Power, Southern Nuclear, SEGCO, and
other subsidiaries have contracted with SCS to furnish, at direct or allocated cost and upon
request, the following services: general and design engineering, purchasing, accounting and
statistical analysis, finance and treasury, tax, information resources, marketing, auditing,
insurance and pension administration, human resources, systems and procedures, and other services
with respect to business and operations and power pool transactions. Southern Power and
SouthernLINC Wireless have also secured from the traditional operating companies certain services
which are furnished at cost and, in the case of Southern Power in compliance with FERC regulations.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power each have a contract with Southern Nuclear to operate Plant Farley
and Plants Hatch and Vogtle, respectively. See Regulation Nuclear Regulation herein for
additional information.
I-2
Southern Power
Southern Power is an electric wholesale generation subsidiary with market-based rate authority from
the FERC. Southern Power constructs, acquires, owns, and manages generating facilities and sells
the output under long-term, fixed-price capacity contracts both to unaffiliated wholesale
purchasers as well as to the traditional operating companies (under PPAs approved by the applicable
state PSCs and the FERC). Southern Powers business activities are not subject to traditional
state regulation of utilities but are subject to regulation by the FERC. Southern Power has
attempted to insulate itself from significant fuel supply, fuel transportation, and electric
transmission risks by making such risks the responsibility of the counterparties to the PPAs.
However, Southern Powers overall profit will depend on the parameters of the wholesale market and
the efficient operation of its wholesale generating assets. For
additional information on Southern Powers business activities, see MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OVERVIEW-
Business Activities of Southern Power in Item 7 herein.
In 2006, Southern Power acquired all of the outstanding membership interests of DeSoto County
Generating Company, LLC and Rowan County Power, LLC from a subsidiary
of Progress Energy, Inc. For additional information on these
acquisitions see Note 2 to the financial statements of Southern
Power in Item 8 herein. At December 31, 2007, Southern Power had
6,896 megawatts of nameplate capacity in commercial operation.
Other Businesses
Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding subsidiary for Southern Companys investments in
synthetic fuels and leveraged leases and various other energy-related businesses. Southern
Companys interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities was terminated in 2006. Synthetic fuel
tax credits expired on December 31, 2007 and the synthetic fuel investments were terminated on
December 31, 2007.
SouthernLINC Wireless serves the traditional operating companies and markets its services to
non-affiliates within the Southeast. SouthernLINC Wireless delivers multiple wireless
communication options including push to talk, cellular service, text messaging, wireless internet
access, and wireless data. Its system covers approximately 128,000 square miles in the Southeast.
SouthernLINC Wireless also provides wholesale fiber optic solutions to telecommunication providers
in the Southeast.
These efforts to invest in and develop new business opportunities offer potential returns exceeding
those of rate-regulated operations. However, these activities also involve a higher degree of
risk.
Construction Programs
The subsidiary companies of Southern Company are engaged in continuous construction programs to
accommodate existing and estimated future loads on their respective systems. For estimated
construction and environmental expenditures for the periods 2008 through 2010, see Note 7 to the
financial statements of each registrant all under Construction Program in Item 8 herein.
Estimated construction costs in 2008 are expected to be apportioned approximately as follows: (in
millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southern |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company |
|
Alabama |
|
Georgia |
|
Gulf |
|
Mississippi |
|
Southern |
|
|
|
|
|
|
System* |
|
Power |
|
Power |
|
Power |
|
Power |
|
Power |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New generation |
|
$ |
221 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
183 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental |
|
|
1,768 |
|
|
|
646 |
|
|
|
707 |
|
|
|
317 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other generating
facilities,
including
associated plant
substations |
|
|
507 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
New business |
|
|
527 |
|
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transmission |
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
316 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution |
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nuclear fuel |
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
159 |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General plant |
|
|
327 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,451 |
|
|
$ |
1,571 |
|
|
$ |
2,031 |
|
|
$ |
410 |
|
|
$ |
186 |
|
|
$ |
109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I-3
|
|
|
* |
|
These amounts include the traditional operating companies and Southern Power (as detailed in the
table above) as well as the amounts for the other subsidiaries. See Other Businesses herein for
additional information. |
The construction programs are subject to periodic review and revision, and actual construction
costs may vary materially from the above estimates because of numerous factors. These factors
include: changes in business conditions; acquisition of additional generating assets; revised load
growth estimates; changes in environmental statutes and regulations; changes in existing nuclear
plants to meet new regulatory requirements; changes in FERC rules and regulations; increasing costs
of labor, equipment and materials; cost of capital and other factors described above under the
heading Cautionary Notice Regarding Forward Looking Statements. In addition, there can be no
assurance that costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered.
Under Georgia law, Georgia Power is required to file an IRP for approval by the Georgia PSC.
Through the IRP process, the Georgia PSC must pre-certify the construction of new power plants and
new PPAs. See Rate Matters Integrated Resource Planning herein for additional information.
See Regulation Environmental Statutes and Regulations herein for additional information with
respect to certain existing and proposed environmental requirements and PROPERTIES Jointly-Owned
Facilities in Item 2 herein for additional information concerning Alabama Powers, Georgia
Powers, and Southern Powers joint ownership of certain generating units and related facilities
with certain non-affiliated utilities.
Financing Programs
See each of the registrants MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
LIQUIDITY in Item 7 herein and Note 6 to the financial statements of each registrant in Item 8
herein for information concerning financing programs.
Fuel Supply
The traditional operating companies and SEGCOs supply of electricity is derived predominantly
from coal. Southern Powers supply of electricity is primarily fueled by natural gas. See
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS RESULTS OF OPERATION Fuel and Purchased Power Expenses
of Southern Company and each traditional operating company in Item 7 herein for information
regarding the electricity generated and the average cost of fuel in cents per net kilowatt-hour
generated for the years 2005 through 2007.
The traditional operating companies have agreements in place from which they expect to receive
approximately 84% of their coal burn requirements in 2008. These agreements have terms ranging
between one and seven years. In 2007, the weighted average sulfur content of all coal burned by
the traditional operating companies was 0.84% sulfur. This sulfur level, along with banked and
purchased sulfur dioxide allowances, allowed the traditional operating companies to remain within
limits set by the Phase II acid rain requirements of the Clean Air Act. In 2007, Southern Company
purchased approximately $50.76 million of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emission allowances to
be used in current and future periods. As additional environmental regulations are proposed that
impact the utilization of coal, the traditional operating companies fuel mix will be monitored to
ensure that the traditional operating companies remain in compliance with applicable laws and
regulations. Additionally, Southern Company and the traditional operating companies will continue
to evaluate the need to purchase additional emission allowances and the timing of capital
expenditures for emission control equipment. See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE
EARNINGS POTENTIAL Environmental Matters of Southern
Company and each traditional operating company in Item 7 herein for information on the Clean Air
Act and global climate issues.
SCS, acting on behalf of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power, has agreements in
place for the natural gas burn requirements of the Southern Company system. For 2008, SCS has
contracted for 650 billion cubic feet of natural gas supply. These agreements cover remaining
terms up to 12 years. In addition to gas supply, SCS has contracts in place for both firm gas
transportation and storage. Management believes that these contracts provide sufficient natural
gas supplies, transportation, and storage to ensure normal operations of the Southern Company
systems natural gas generating units.
I-4
Changes in fuel prices to the traditional operating companies are generally reflected in fuel
adjustment clauses contained in rate schedules. See Rate
Matters Rate Structure and Cost Recovery Plans herein for
additional information. Southern Powers PPAs generally provide that the counterparty is
responsible for substantially all of the cost of fuel.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power have numerous contracts covering a portion of their nuclear fuel
needs for uranium, conversion services, enrichment services and fuel fabrication. These contracts
have varying expiration dates and most of them are for less than 10 years. Management believes
that sufficient capacity for nuclear fuel supplies and processing exists to preclude the impairment
of normal operations of the Southern Company systems nuclear generating units.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power have contracts with the United States, acting through the DOE, that
provide for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The DOE failed to begin disposing of
spent fuel in 1998, as required by the contracts, and Alabama Power and Georgia Power are pursuing
legal remedies against the government for breach of contract. See Note 1 to the financial
statements of Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Georgia Power under Nuclear Fuel Disposal
Costs in Item 8 herein for additional information.
Territory Served by the Traditional Operating Companies and Southern Power
The territory in which the traditional operating companies provide electric service comprises most
of the states of Alabama and Georgia together with the northwestern portion of Florida and
southeastern Mississippi. In this territory there are non-affiliated electric distribution systems
which obtain some or all of their power requirements either directly or indirectly from the
traditional operating companies. The territory has an area of approximately 120,000 square miles
and an estimated population of approximately 13 million. Southern Power sells electricity at
market-based prices in the Super-Southeast wholesale market to investor-owned utilities, IPPs,
municipalities, and electric cooperatives.
Alabama Power is engaged, within the State of Alabama, in the generation and purchase of
electricity and the transmission, distribution, and sale of such electricity at retail in over 650
communities (including Anniston, Birmingham, Gadsden, Mobile, Montgomery, and Tuscaloosa) and at
wholesale to 15 municipally-owned electric distribution systems, 11 of which are served indirectly
through sales to AMEA, and two rural distributing cooperative associations. Alabama Power also
supplies steam service in downtown Birmingham. Alabama Power owns coal reserves near its Plant
Gorgas and uses the output of coal from the reserves in its generating plants. Alabama Power also
sells, and cooperates with dealers in promoting the sale of, electric appliances.
Georgia Power is engaged in the generation and purchase of electricity and the transmission,
distribution, and sale of such electricity within the State of Georgia at retail in over 600
communities (including Athens, Atlanta, Augusta, Columbus, Macon, Rome, and Savannah), as well as
in rural areas, and at wholesale currently to OPC, MEAG, Dalton, Hampton, and 30 electric
cooperatives.
Gulf Power is engaged, within the northwestern portion of Florida, in the generation and purchase
of electricity and the transmission, distribution, and sale of such electricity at retail in 71
communities (including Pensacola, Panama City, and Fort Walton Beach), as well as in rural areas,
and at wholesale to a non-affiliated utility and a municipality.
Mississippi Power is engaged in the generation and purchase of electricity and the transmission,
distribution, and sale of such energy within 23 counties in southeastern Mississippi, at retail in
123 communities (including Biloxi, Gulfport, Hattiesburg, Laurel, Meridian, and Pascagoula), as
well as in rural areas, and at wholesale to one municipality, six rural electric distribution
cooperative associations, and one generating and transmitting cooperative.
For information relating to kilowatt-hour sales by classification for the traditional operating
companies, see MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS RESULTS OF OPERATIONS of each traditional
operating company in Item 7 herein. Also, for information relating to the sources of revenues for
Southern Company, each traditional operating company, and Southern Power, reference is made to Item
6 herein.
The RUS has authority to make loans to cooperative associations or corporations to enable them to
provide electric
I-5
service to customers in rural sections of the country. There are 71 electric cooperative
organizations operating in the territory in which the traditional operating companies provide
electric service at retail or wholesale.
One of these organizations, PowerSouth, is a generating and transmitting cooperative selling power
to several distributing cooperatives, municipal systems, and other customers in south Alabama and
northwest Florida. PowerSouth owns generating units with approximately 1,776 megawatts of
nameplate capacity, including an undivided 8.16% ownership interest in Alabama Powers Plant Miller
Units 1 and 2. PowerSouths facilities were financed with RUS loans secured by long-term contracts
requiring distributing cooperatives to take their requirements from PowerSouth to the extent such
energy is available.
Alabama Power and Gulf Power have entered into separate agreements with PowerSouth involving
interconnection between their respective systems. The delivery of capacity and energy from
PowerSouth to certain distributing cooperatives in the service areas of Alabama Power and Gulf
Power is governed by the Southern Company/PowerSouth Network Transmission Service Agreement. The
rates for this service to PowerSouth are on file with the FERC. See PROPERTIES Jointly-Owned
Facilities in Item 2 herein for details of Alabama Powers joint-ownership with PowerSouth of a
portion of Plant Miller.
Four electric cooperative associations, financed by the RUS, operate within Gulf Powers service
area. These cooperatives purchase their full requirements from PowerSouth and SEPA (a federal
power marketing agency). A non-affiliated utility also operates within Gulf Powers service area
and purchases its full requirements from Gulf Power.
Mississippi Power has an interchange agreement with SMEPA, a generating and transmitting
cooperative, pursuant to which various services are provided, including the furnishing of
protective capacity by Mississippi Power to SMEPA.
There are also 65 municipally-owned electric distribution systems operating in the territory in
which the traditional operating companies provide electric service at retail or wholesale.
Forty-eight municipally-owned electric distribution systems and one county-owned system receive
their requirements through MEAG, which was established by a Georgia state statute in 1975. MEAG
serves these requirements from self-owned generation facilities, some of which are acquired and
jointly-owned with Georgia Power, power purchased from Georgia Power, and purchases from other
resources. MEAG also has a pseudo scheduling and services agreement with Georgia Power. Dalton
serves its requirements from self-owned generation facilities, some of which are acquired and
jointly-owned with Georgia Power, and through purchases from Georgia Power pursuant to their
partial requirements tariff. In addition, Georgia Power serves the full requirements of Hamptons
electric distribution system under a market-based contract. See PROPERTIES Jointly-Owned
Facilities in Item 2 herein for additional information.
Georgia Power has entered into substantially similar agreements with Georgia Transmission
Corporation (formerly OPCs transmission division), MEAG, and Dalton providing for the
establishment of an integrated transmission system to carry the power and energy of all parties.
The agreements require an investment by each party in the integrated transmission system in
proportion to its respective share of the aggregate system load. See PROPERTIES Jointly-Owned
Facilities in Item 2 herein for additional information.
Southern Power has PPAs with the municipalities of Dalton, North Carolina Municipal Power Agency
No. 1, Florida Municipal Power Agency, and Piedmont Municipal Power Agency. See MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL Power Sales Agreements of Southern Power in
Item 7 herein for additional information concerning Southern Powers PPAs.
SCS, acting on behalf of the traditional operating companies, also has a contract with SEPA
providing for the use of the traditional operating companies facilities at government expense to
deliver to certain cooperatives and municipalities, entitled by federal statute to preference in
the purchase of power from SEPA, quantities of power equivalent to the amounts of power allocated
to them by SEPA from certain United States government hydroelectric projects.
The retail service rights of all electric suppliers in the State of Georgia are regulated by the
Territorial Electric
I-6
Service Act of 1973. Pursuant to the provisions of this Act, all areas within existing municipal
limits were assigned to the primary electric supplier therein. Areas outside of such municipal
limits were either to be assigned or to be declared open for customer choice of supplier by action
of the Georgia PSC pursuant to standards set forth in this Act. Consistent with such standards,
the Georgia PSC has assigned substantially all of the land area in the state to a supplier.
Notwithstanding such assignments, this Act provides that any new customer locating outside of 1973
municipal limits and having a connected load of at least 900 kilowatts may exercise a one-time
choice for the life of the premises to receive electric service from the supplier of its choice.
See Competition herein for additional information.
Pursuant to the 1956 Utility Act, the Mississippi PSC issued Grandfather Certificates of public
convenience and necessity to Mississippi Power and to six distribution rural cooperatives operating
in southeastern Mississippi, then served in whole or in part by Mississippi Power, authorizing them
to distribute electricity in certain specified geographically described areas of the state. The
six cooperatives serve approximately 325,000 retail customers in a certificated area of
approximately 10,300 square miles. In areas included in a Grandfather Certificate, the utility
holding such certificate may, without further certification, extend its lines up to five miles;
other extensions within that area by such utility, or by other utilities, may not be made except
upon a showing of, and a grant of a certificate of, public convenience and necessity. Areas
included in such a certificate which are subsequently annexed to municipalities may continue to be
served by the holder of the certificate, irrespective of whether it has a franchise in the annexing
municipality. On the other hand, the holder of the municipal franchise may not extend service into
such newly annexed area without authorization by the Mississippi PSC.
Competition
The electric utility industry in the United States is continuing to evolve as a result of
regulatory and competitive factors. Among the early primary agents of change was the Energy Act of
1992 which allowed IPPs to access a utilitys transmission network in order to sell electricity to
other utilities.
The competition for retail energy sales among competing suppliers of energy is influenced by
various factors, including price, availability, technological advancements, service, and
reliability. These factors are, in turn, affected by, among other influences, regulatory,
political, and environmental considerations, taxation, and supply.
Generally, the traditional operating companies have experienced, and expect to continue to
experience, competition in their respective retail service territories in varying degrees as the
result of self-generation (as described above) by customers and other factors. See also Territory
Served by the Traditional Operating Companies and Southern Power herein for additional information concerning suppliers of electricity
operating within or near the areas served at retail by the traditional operating companies.
Southern Power competes with investor owned utilities, IPPs, and others for wholesale energy sales
in primarily the Southeastern United States wholesale market. The needs of this market are driven
by the demands of end users in the Southeast and the generation available. Southern Powers
success in wholesale energy sales is influenced by various factors including reliability and
availability of Southern Powers plants, availability of transmission to serve the demand, price,
and Southern Powers ability to contain costs.
Alabama Power currently has cogeneration contracts in effect with 10 industrial customers. Under
the terms of these contracts, Alabama Power purchases excess generation of such companies. During
2007, Alabama Power purchased approximately 101 million kilowatt-hours from such companies at a
cost of $4.9 million.
Georgia Power currently has contracts in effect with nine small power producers whereby Georgia
Power purchases their excess generation. During 2007, Georgia Power purchased 8 million
kilowatt-hours from such companies at a cost of $0.6 million. Georgia Power has PPAs for
electricity with two cogeneration facilities. Payments are subject to reductions for failure to
meet minimum capacity output. During 2007, Georgia Power purchased 559 million kilowatt-hours at a
cost of $86.9 million from these facilities.
Also during 2007, Georgia Power purchased energy from seven customer-owned generating facilities.
Six of the seven customers provide only energy to Georgia Power. These six customers make no
capacity commitment and are not dispatched by Georgia Power. Georgia Power does have a contract
with the remaining customer for eight
I-7
megawatts of dispatchable capacity and energy. During 2007, Georgia Power purchased a total of 88
million kilowatt-hours from the seven suppliers at a cost of approximately $2.8 million.
Gulf Power currently has agreements in effect with various industrial, commercial, and qualifying
facilities pursuant to which Gulf Power purchases as available energy from customer-owned
generation. During 2007, Gulf Power purchased 57.8 million kilowatt-hours from such companies for
approximately $2.3 million.
Mississippi Power currently has a cogeneration agreement in effect with one of its industrial
customers. Under the terms of this contract, Mississippi Power purchases any excess generation.
During 2007, this customer had no excess generation.
Seasonality
The demand for electric power generation is affected by seasonal differences in the weather. At
the traditional operating companies and Southern Power, the demand for power peaks during the
summer months, with market prices reflecting the demand of power and available generating resources
at that time. Power demand peaks can also be recorded during the winter. As a result, the overall
operating results of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power in
the future may fluctuate substantially on a seasonal basis. In addition, Southern Company, the
traditional operating companies, and Southern Power have historically sold less power when weather
conditions are milder.
Regulation
State Commissions
The traditional operating companies are subject to the jurisdiction of their respective state PSCs.
The PSCs have broad powers of supervision and regulation over public utilities operating in the
respective states, including their rates, service regulations, sales of securities (except for the
Mississippi PSC), and, in the cases of the Georgia PSC and the Mississippi PSC, in part, retail
service territories. See Territory Served by the Traditional
Operating Companies and Southern Power and Rate Matters herein for
additional information.
Federal Power Act
In 2005, the U.S. Congress passed the Energy Act of 2005 which repealed the Holding Company Act
effective February 8, 2006. The traditional operating companies, Southern Power and its generation
subsidiaries, and SEGCO are all public utilities engaged in wholesale sales of energy in interstate
commerce and therefore remain subject to the rate, financial, and accounting jurisdiction of the
FERC under the Federal Power Act. The FERC must approve certain financings and allows an at cost
standard for services rendered by system service companies such as SCS. In addition to its repeal
of the Holding Company Act, the Energy Act of 2005 authorized the FERC to establish regional
reliability organizations authorized to enforce reliability standards, established a process for
the FERC to address impediments to the construction of transmission, and established clear
responsibility for the FERC to prohibit manipulative energy trading practices.
Alabama Power and Georgia Power are also subject to the provisions of the Federal Power Act or the
earlier Federal Water Power Act applicable to licensees with respect to their hydroelectric
developments. Among the hydroelectric projects subject to licensing by the FERC are 14 existing
Alabama Power generating stations having an aggregate installed capacity of 1,662,400 kilowatts and
18 existing Georgia Power generating stations having an aggregate installed capacity of 1,074,696
kilowatts.
In 2003, Georgia Power started the relicensing process for the Morgan Falls project which is
located on the Chattahoochee River near Atlanta, Georgia and submitted the final license
application for this facility to the FERC in February 2007. The current license for the Morgan
Falls project expires in 2009. In 2007, Georgia Power began the relicensing process for Bartletts
Ferry which is located on the Chattahoochee River near Columbus, Georgia. The current Bartletts
Ferry license expires in 2014 and the application for a new license is expected to be submitted to
the FERC in 2012. In July 2005, Alabama Power filed two applications with the FERC for new 50-year
licenses for its seven hydroelectric developments on the Coosa River (Weiss, Henry, Logan Martin,
Lay, Mitchell, Jordan,
I-8
and Bouldin) and for the Lewis Smith and Bankhead developments on the Warrior River. The FERC
licenses for all of these nine developments expired in July and August of 2007. The FERC issued an
annual license for the Coosa developments on August 8, 2007 and issued an annual license for the
Warrior developments on September 6, 2007. These annual licenses provide the FERC with additional
time to complete its review of the license applications. In 2006, Alabama Power initiated the
process of developing an application to relicense the Martin hydroelectric project located on the
Tallapoosa River. The current Martin license will expire in 2013 and the application for a new
license is expected to be filed with the FERC in 2011. See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL FERC Matters Hydro Relicensing of Alabama Power in Item 7 herein
for additional information.
Georgia Power and OPC also have a license, expiring in 2027, for the Rocky Mountain Plant, a pure
pumped storage facility of 847,800 kilowatt capacity. See PROPERTIES Jointly-Owned Facilities
in Item 2 herein for additional information.
Licenses for all projects, excluding those discussed above, expire in the period 2015-2034 in the
case of Alabama Powers projects and in the period 2014-2039 in the case of Georgia Powers
projects.
Upon or after the expiration of each license, the United States Government, by act of Congress, may
take over the project or the FERC may relicense the project either to the original licensee or to a
new licensee. In the event of takeover or relicensing to another, the original licensee is to be
compensated in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Power Act, such compensation to
reflect the net investment of the licensee in the project, not in excess of the fair value of the
property, plus reasonable damages to other property of the licensee resulting from the severance
therefrom of the property. If the FERC does not act on the new license application prior to the
expiration of the existing license, the FERC is required to issue annual licenses, under the same
terms and conditions of the existing license, until a new license is issued.
Nuclear Regulation
Alabama Power, Georgia Power and Southern Nuclear are subject to regulation by the NRC. The NRC is
responsible for licensing and regulating nuclear facilities and materials and for conducting
research in support of the licensing and regulatory process, as mandated by the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; and the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Act of 1978; and in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
as amended, and other applicable statutes. These responsibilities also include protecting public
health and safety, protecting the environment, protecting and safeguarding nuclear materials and
nuclear power plants in the interest of national security, and assuring conformity with antitrust
laws.
The NRC operating licenses for Plant Vogtle units 1 and 2 currently expire in January 2027 and
February 2029, respectively. In January 2002, the NRC granted Georgia Power a 20-year extension of
the licenses for both units at Plant Hatch which permits the operation of units 1 and 2 until 2034
and 2038, respectively. Georgia Power filed an application with the NRC in June 2007 to extend the
licenses for Plant Vogtle units 1 and 2 for an additional 20 years. In May 2005, the NRC granted
Alabama Power a 20-year extension of the licenses for both units at Plant Farley which permits
operation of units 1 and 2 until 2037 and 2041, respectively.
See Notes 1 and 9 to the financial statements of Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Georgia Power
in Item 8 herein for information on nuclear decommissioning costs and nuclear insurance.
FERC Matters
See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL FERC Matters of each of
the registrants in Item 7 herein for information on matters regarding the FERC.
Environmental Statutes and Regulations
Southern Companys operations are subject to extensive regulation by state and federal
environmental agencies under a variety of statutes and regulations governing environmental media,
including air, water, and land resources. Compliance with these existing environmental
requirements involves significant capital and operating costs, a major
I-9
portion of which is expected to be recovered through existing ratemaking provisions. There is no
assurance, however, that all such costs will be recovered.
Compliance with the federal Clean Air Act and resulting regulations has been, and will continue to
be, a significant focus for Southern Company, each traditional operating company, Southern Power,
and SEGCO. In addition, existing environmental laws and regulations may be changed or new laws and
regulations may be adopted or otherwise become applicable to Southern Company, the traditional
operating companies, or Southern Power, including laws and regulations designed to address global
climate change, air quality, water quality or other environmental, public health, and welfare
concerns. See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL Environmental
Matters of Southern Company and each of the traditional operating companies in Item 7 herein for
additional information about the Clean Air Act and other environmental issues, including the
litigation brought by the EPA under the New Source Review provisions of the Clean Air Act and
possible climate change legislation and regulation. Also see MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL Environmental Matters and Global Climate Issues of Southern Power
in Item 7 herein for information about the Clean Air Act, other environmental issues, and possible
climate change legislation and regulation.
The traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO are unable to predict at this time
what additional steps they may be required to take as a result of the implementation of existing or
future control requirements for climate, air, water, and hazardous or toxic materials, but such
steps could adversely affect system operations and result in substantial additional costs.
The outcome of the matters mentioned above under Regulation cannot now be determined, except that
these developments may result in delays in obtaining appropriate licenses for generating
facilities, increased construction and operating costs, or reduced generation, the nature and
extent of which, while not determinable at this time, could be substantial.
Rate Matters
Rate Structure and Cost Recovery Plans
The rates and service regulations of the traditional operating companies are uniform for each class
of service throughout their respective service areas. Rates for residential electric service are
generally of the block type based upon kilowatt-hours used and include minimum charges.
Residential and other rates contain separate customer charges. Rates for commercial service are
presently of the block type and, for large customers, the billing demand is generally used to
determine capacity and minimum bill charges. These large customers rates are generally based upon
usage by the customer and include rates with special features to encourage off-peak usage.
Additionally, Alabama Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power are generally allowed by their
respective state PSCs to negotiate the terms and cost of service to large customers. Such terms
and cost of service, however, are subject to final state PSC approval.
Fuel and net purchased energy costs are recovered through specific fuel cost recovery provisions at
the traditional operating companies. These fuel cost recovery provisions are adjusted to reflect
increases or decreases in such costs as needed. Gulf Powers and Mississippi Powers fuel cost
recovery provisions are adjusted annually to reflect increases or decreases in such costs. Georgia
Power is currently required to file for an adjustment to its fuel cost recovery rate no later than
March 1, 2008. Alabama Powers fuel clause is adjusted as required. Revenues are adjusted for
differences between recoverable costs and amounts actually recovered in current rates.
Approved environmental compliance and storm damage costs are recovered at Alabama Power, Gulf
Power, and Mississippi Power through cost recovery provisions approved by their respective state
PSCs. Within limits approved by their respective PSCs, these rates are adjusted to reflect
increases or decreases in such costs as required.
Georgia Powers environmental compliance costs were recovered in base rates through 2007. Under
the 2007 retail rate plan approved by the Georgia PSC, an environmental compliance cost recovery
tariff was implemented effective January 1, 2008, to allow for recovery of costs related to
environmental controls mandated by state and federal regulations. Georgia Power continues to
recover storm damage and new plant costs through its base rates.
I-10
Alabama Power recovers the cost of certificated new plant and purchased power capacity and Gulf
Power recovers purchased power capacity and conservation costs through cost recovery provisions
which are adjusted as required to reflect increases or decreases in such costs as needed. Revenues
are adjusted for differences between recoverable costs and amounts actually recovered in current
rates.
See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL PSC Matters of Southern
Company and each of the traditional operating companies in Item 7 herein and Note 3 to the
financial statements of Southern Company under Alabama Power Retail Regulatory Matters and
Georgia Power Retail Regulatory Matters and Note 3 to the financial statements of each of the
traditional operating companies under Retail Regulatory Matters in Item 8 herein for a discussion
of rate matters. Also, see Note 1 to the financial statements of Southern Company and each of the
traditional operating companies in Item 8 herein for a discussion of recovery of fuel costs, storm
damage costs, and environmental compliance costs through rates.
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power are authorized by the FERC to sell power to
non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices. Specific FERC
approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate. See
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL FERC Matters Market-Based
Rate Authority of each registrant in Item 7 herein and Note 3 to the financial statements of each
registrant under FERC Matters Market-Based Rate Authority in Item 8 herein for a discussion of
rate matters.
Integrated Resource Planning
Triennially, Georgia Power must file an IRP with the Georgia PSC that specifies how it intends to
meet the future electrical needs of its customers through a combination of demand-side and
supply-side resources. The Georgia PSC under state law will certify any new demand-side or
supply-side resources. Once certified, the lesser of actual or certified construction costs and
purchased power costs will be recoverable through rates.
On July 12, 2007, the Georgia PSC approved Georgia Powers 2007 IRP including the following
provisions:
(1) retiring the coal units at Plant McDonough and replacing them with combined-cycle natural gas
units; (2) approving new energy efficiency pilot programs and rate recovery of demand-side
management programs; (3) approving pursuit of up to three new renewable generation projects with a
Georgia Power ownership interest; and (4) establishing new nuclear units as a preferred option to
meet demand in the 2015/2016 timeframe.
In July 2007, the Georgia PSC ordered Georgia Power to issue a RFP, submit the proposals for new
base load generation needed in the 2016-2017 timeframe by February 1, 2008, and file an application
to certify the chosen resources by May 1, 2008. The RFP was issued in November 2007. In December
2007, Georgia Power requested, and the Georgia PSC approved, extension of the proposal submission
until May 1, 2008 and the filing date of Georgia Powers application to certify the chosen
resources until August 1, 2008.
See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS RESULTS OF OPERATION Fuel and Purchased Power
Expenses of Georgia Power in Item 7 herein for information on the Georgia PSCs approval of PPAs
to begin in 2010.
I-11
Employee Relations
The Southern Company system had a total of 26,742 employees on its payroll at December 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employees at December 31, 2007 |
|
Alabama Power |
|
|
6,980 |
|
Georgia Power |
|
|
9,270 |
|
Gulf Power |
|
|
1,324 |
|
Mississippi Power |
|
|
1,299 |
|
SCS |
|
|
4,125 |
|
Southern Holdings* |
|
|
1 |
|
Southern Nuclear |
|
|
3,267 |
|
Southern Power** |
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
476 |
|
|
Total |
|
|
26,742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
One of Southern Holdings subsidiaries has an employee. Southern Holdings has agreements with
SCS whereby all other employee services are rendered at cost. |
|
** |
|
Southern Power has no employees. Southern Power has agreements with SCS and the traditional
operating companies whereby employee services are rendered at amounts in compliance with FERC
regulations. |
The traditional operating companies have separate agreements with local unions of the IBEW
generally covering wages, working conditions, and procedures for handling grievances and
arbitration. These agreements apply with certain exceptions to operating, maintenance, and
construction employees.
Alabama Power has agreements with the IBEW on a five-year contract extending to August 15, 2009.
Upon notice given at least 60 days prior to that date, negotiations may be initiated with respect
to agreement terms to be effective after such date.
Georgia Power has an agreement with the IBEW covering wages and working conditions, which is in
effect through June 30, 2008.
Gulf Power has an agreement with the IBEW covering wages and working conditions, which is in effect
through October 14, 2009.
Mississippi
Power has an agreement with the IBEW covering wages and working
conditions, which is in effect through August 16, 2010.
Southern Nuclear has agreements with the IBEW on a three-year contract extending to June 30, 2008
for Plants Hatch and Vogtle and a three-year contract which is in effect through August 15, 2009
for Plant Farley. Upon notice given at least 60 days prior to these dates, negotiations may be
initiated with respect to agreement terms to be effective after such dates.
The agreements also subject the terms of the pension plans for the companies discussed above to collective bargaining with the unions at either a five-year or a 10-year cycle, depending upon union and company actions.
I-12
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS
In addition to the other information in this Form 10-K, including MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL in Item 7 of each registrant, and other documents filed by
Southern Company and/or its subsidiaries with the SEC from time to time, the following factors
should be carefully considered in evaluating Southern Company and its subsidiaries. Such factors
could affect actual results and cause results to differ materially from those expressed in any
forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, Southern Company and/or its subsidiaries.
Risks Related to the Energy Industry
Southern Company and its subsidiaries are subject to substantial governmental regulation.
Compliance with current and future regulatory requirements and procurement of necessary approvals,
permits, and certificates may result in substantial costs to Southern Company and its subsidiaries.
Southern Company and its subsidiaries, including the traditional operating companies and Southern
Power, are subject to substantial regulation from federal, state, and local regulatory agencies.
Southern Company and its subsidiaries are required to comply with numerous laws and regulations and
to obtain numerous permits, approvals, and certificates from the governmental agencies that
regulate various aspects of their businesses, including customer rates, service regulations, retail
service territories, sales of securities, asset acquisitions and sales, accounting policies and
practices, and the operation of fossil-fuel, hydroelectric, and nuclear generating facilities. For
example, the rates charged to wholesale customers by the traditional operating companies and by
Southern Power must be approved by the FERC and failure to maintain FERC market-based rate
authority may impact the rates charged to wholesale customers. Additionally, the respective state
PSCs must approve the traditional operating companies rates for retail customers. While the
retail rates approved by the respective state PSCs are designed to provide for recovery of costs
and a return on invested capital, there can be no assurance that a state PSC will not deem certain
costs to be imprudently incurred and not subject to recovery.
Southern Company and its subsidiaries believe the necessary permits, approvals and certificates
have been obtained for its existing operations and that their respective businesses are conducted
in accordance with applicable laws; however, the impact of any future revision or changes in
interpretations of existing regulations or the adoption of new laws and regulations applicable to
Southern Company or any of its subsidiaries cannot now be predicted. Changes in regulation or the
imposition of additional regulations could influence the operating environment of Southern Company
and its subsidiaries and may result in substantial costs.
Certain events in the energy markets that are beyond the control of Southern Company and its
subsidiaries have increased the level of public and regulatory scrutiny in the energy industry and
in the capital markets. The reaction to these events may result in new laws or regulations related
to the business operations or the accounting treatment of the existing operations of Southern
Company and its subsidiaries which could have a negative impact on the net income or access to
capital of Southern Company and its subsidiaries.
Companies in regulated and unregulated electric utility businesses have been under an increased
amount of public and regulatory scrutiny with respect to, among other things, accounting practices,
financial disclosures, and relationships with independent auditors. This increased scrutiny has
led to substantial changes in laws and regulations affecting Southern Company and its subsidiaries,
including, among other things, enhanced internal control and auditor independence requirements,
financial statement certification requirements, more frequent SEC reviews of financial statements,
and accelerated and additional SEC filing requirements. New accounting and disclosure requirements
have changed the way Southern Company and its subsidiaries are required to record revenues,
expenses, assets, and liabilities. Southern Company expects continued regulatory focus on
accounting and financial reporting issues. Disruptions in the industry and any resulting
additional regulations may have a negative impact on the net income or access to capital of
Southern Company and its subsidiaries.
General Risks Related to Operation of Southern Companys Utility Subsidiaries
The regional power market in which Southern Company and its utility subsidiaries compete may have
changing transmission regulatory structures, which could affect the ownership of these assets and
related
I-13
revenues and expenses.
The traditional operating companies currently own and operate transmission facilities as part of a
vertically integrated utility. Transmission revenues are not separated from generation and
distribution revenues in their approved retail rates. Current FERC efforts that may potentially
change the regulatory and/or operational structure of transmission include rules related to the
standardization of generation interconnection, as well as an inquiry into, among other things,
market power by vertically integrated utilities. The financial condition, net income, and cash
flows of Southern Company and its utility subsidiaries could be adversely affected by future
changes in the federal regulatory or operational structure of transmission.
Deregulation or restructuring in the electric industry may result in increased competition and
unrecovered costs which could negatively impact the net income of Southern Company and the
traditional operating companies and the value of their respective assets.
Increased competition resulting from restructuring efforts, could have a significant adverse
financial impact on Southern Company and the traditional operating companies. Any adoption in the
territories served by the traditional operating companies of retail competition and the unbundling
of regulated energy service could have a significant adverse financial impact on Southern Company
and the traditional operating companies due to an impairment of assets, a loss of retail customers,
lower profit margins, an inability to recover reasonable costs, or increased costs of capital.
Southern Company and the traditional operating companies cannot predict if or when they may be
subject to changes in legislation or regulation, nor can Southern Company and the traditional
operating companies predict the impact of these changes.
Additionally, the electric utility industry has experienced a substantial increase in competition
at the wholesale level. As a result of changes in federal law and regulatory policy, competition
in the wholesale electricity market has greatly increased due to a greater participation by
traditional electricity suppliers, non-utility generators, IPPs, wholesale power marketers, and
brokers and due to the trading of energy futures contracts on various commodities exchanges. In
addition, FERC rules on transmission service are designed to facilitate competition in the
wholesale market on a nationwide basis by providing greater flexibility and more choices to
wholesale power customers.
Changes to the criteria used by the FERC for approval of market-based rate authority may negatively
impact the traditional operating companies and Southern Powers ability to charge market-based
rates which could negatively impact the net income and cash flow of Southern Company, the
traditional operating companies, and Southern Power.
Each of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power have authorization from the FERC to
sell power to nonaffiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices.
Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based sale to an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Companys generation dominance
within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is
not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by any subsidiary of Southern
Company in Southern Companys retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period
that ended in May 2006 could be subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In late June and July 2007, hearings were held in this proceeding and the presiding administrative
law judge issued an initial decision on November 9, 2007 regarding the methodology to be used in
the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this
generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a
final order could require the traditional operating companies and Southern Power to charge
cost-based rates for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory,
which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in refunds of up to
$19.7 million, plus interest. Southern Company and its subsidiaries believe that there is no
meritorious basis for this proceeding and are vigorously defending themselves in this matter.
I-14
On June 21, 2007, the FERC issued its final rule regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC
generally retained its current market-based rate standards. The impact of this order and its
effect on the generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined.
Risks Related to Environmental and Climate Change Legislation and Regulation
Southern Companys and the traditional operating companies costs of compliance with environmental
laws are significant. The costs of compliance with future environmental laws, including laws and
regulations designed to address global climate change, and the incurrence of environmental
liabilities could affect unit retirement decisions and negatively impact the net income, cash
flows, and financial condition of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or
Southern Power.
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are subject to extensive
federal, state, and local environmental requirements which, among other things, regulate air
emissions, water discharges, and the management of hazardous and solid waste in order to adequately
protect the environment. Compliance with these legal requirements requires Southern Company, the
traditional operating companies, and Southern Power to commit significant expenditures for
installation of pollution control equipment, environmental monitoring, emissions fees, and permits
at all of their respective facilities. These expenditures are significant and Southern Company,
the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power expect that they will increase in the
future. Through 2007, Southern Company had invested approximately $4.7 billion in capital projects
to comply with these requirements, with annual totals of $1.5 billion, $661 million, and $423
million for 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. Southern Company expects that capital expenditures
to assure compliance with existing and new statutes and regulations will be an additional $1.8
billion, $1.5 billion, and $0.6 billion for 2008, 2009, and 2010, respectively. Because Southern
Companys compliance strategy is impacted by changes to existing environmental laws, statutes, and
regulations, the cost, availability, and existing inventory of emission allowances, and Southern
Companys fuel mix, the ultimate outcome cannot be determined at this time.
Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage,
personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements, such
as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United
States. In particular, personal injury claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous
materials have become more frequent.
If Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power fail to comply with
environmental laws and regulations, even if caused by factors beyond their control, that failure
may result in the assessment of civil or criminal penalties and fines. The EPA has filed civil
actions against Alabama Power and Georgia Power alleging violations of the new source review
provisions of the Clean Air Act. Southern Company is a party to suits alleging its emissions of
carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, contribute to global warming. An adverse outcome in either of
these cases could require substantial capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time,
and could possibly require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect unit
retirement and replacement decisions, and results of operations, cash flows, and financial
condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
Existing environmental laws and regulations may be revised or new laws and regulations related to
global climate change, air quality, or other environmental and health concerns may be adopted or
become applicable to Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power.
For example, legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements on greenhouse gas
emissions continue to be considered in Congress. In addition, some states are considering or have
undertaken actions to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In July 2007, for example, the
Governor of the State of Florida signed three executive orders addressing reduction of greenhouse
gas emissions within the state, including statewide emission reduction targets beginning in 2017.
In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate
greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles. The EPA is currently developing its response to
this decision. Regulatory decisions that will follow from this response may have implications for
both new and existing stationary sources, such as power plants.
New or revised laws and regulations or new interpretations of existing laws and regulations, such
as those related to climate change, could affect unit retirement and replacement decisions and/or
result in significant additional expense and operating restrictions on the facilities of the
traditional operating companies or Southern Power or increased
I-15
compliance costs which may not be fully recoverable from customers and would therefore reduce the
net income of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power. The cost
impact of such legislation, regulation, or new interpretations would depend upon the specific
requirements enacted and cannot be determined at this time.
Risks Related to Southern Company and its Business
Southern Company may be unable to meet its ongoing and future financial obligations and to pay
dividends on its common stock if its subsidiaries are unable to pay upstream dividends or repay
funds to Southern Company.
Southern Company is a holding company and, as such, Southern Company has no operations of its own.
Substantially all of Southern Companys consolidated assets are held by subsidiaries. Southern
Companys ability to meet its financial obligations and to pay dividends on its common stock at the
current rate is primarily dependent on the net income and cash flows of its subsidiaries and their
ability to pay upstream dividends or to repay funds to Southern Company. Prior to funding Southern
Company, Southern Companys subsidiaries have financial obligations that must be satisfied,
including among others, debt service and preferred and preference stock dividends. Southern
Companys subsidiaries are separate legal entities and have no obligation to provide Southern
Company with funds for its payment obligations.
The financial performance of Southern Company and its subsidiaries may be adversely affected if its
subsidiaries are unable to successfully operate their facilities.
Southern Companys financial performance depends on the successful operation of its subsidiaries
electric generating, transmission, and distribution facilities. Operating these facilities
involves many risks, including:
|
|
|
operator error or failure of equipment or processes; |
|
|
|
|
operating limitations that may be imposed by environmental or other regulatory
requirements; |
|
|
|
|
labor disputes; |
|
|
|
|
terrorist attacks; |
|
|
|
|
fuel or material supply interruptions; |
|
|
|
|
compliance with mandatory reliability standards; and |
|
|
|
|
catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, droughts,
hurricanes, pandemic health events such as an avian influenza, or other similar
occurrences. |
A decrease or elimination of revenues from power produced by the electric generating facilities or
an increase in the cost of operating the facilities would reduce the net income and cash flows and
could adversely impact the financial condition of the affected traditional operating company or
Southern Power and of Southern Company.
The revenues of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power depend in
part on sales under PPAs. The failure of a counterparty to one of these PPAs to perform its
obligations, or the failure to renew the PPAs, could have a negative impact on the net income and
cash flows of the affected traditional operating company or Southern Power and of Southern Company.
Most of Southern Powers generating capacity has been sold to purchasers under PPAs having initial
terms of five to 15 years. In addition, the traditional operating companies enter into PPAs with
non-affiliated parties. Revenues are dependent on the continued performance by the purchasers of
their obligations under these PPAs. Even though Southern Power and the traditional operating
companies have a rigorous credit evaluation process, the failure of one of the purchasers to
perform its obligations could have a negative impact on the net income and cash flows of the
affected traditional operating company or Southern Power and of Southern Company. Although these
credit
I-16
evaluations take into account the possibility of default by a purchaser, actual exposure to a
default by a purchaser may be greater than the credit evaluation predicts. Additionally, neither
Southern Power nor any traditional operating company can predict whether the PPAs will be renewed
at the end of their respective terms or on what terms any renewals may be made. If a PPA is not
renewed, a replacement PPA cannot be assured.
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power may incur additional
costs or delays in the construction of new plants or environmental facilities and may not be able
to recover their investment. The facilities of Southern Company, the traditional operating
companies, and Southern Power require ongoing capital expenditures.
Certain of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power are in the process of
constructing new generating facilities and adding environmental controls equipment at existing
generating facilities. Southern Company intends to continue its strategy of developing and
constructing other new facilities, expanding existing facilities and adding environmental control
equipment. The completion of these types of projects without delays or cost overruns is subject to
substantial risks, including:
|
|
|
shortages and inconsistent quality of equipment, materials, and labor,
including environmental laws and regulations; |
|
|
|
|
work stoppages; |
|
|
|
|
permits, approvals, and other regulatory matters; |
|
|
|
|
adverse weather conditions; |
|
|
|
|
unforeseen engineering problems; |
|
|
|
|
environmental and geological conditions; |
|
|
|
|
delays or increased costs to interconnect its facilities to transmission grids; |
|
|
|
|
unanticipated cost increases; and |
|
|
|
|
attention to other projects. |
Tightening labor markets in the Southeast and increasing costs of materials have resulted in
increasing cost estimates for Southern Companys subsidiaries construction projects. If a
traditional operating company or Southern Power is unable to complete the development or
construction of a facility or decides to delay or cancel construction of a facility, it may not be
able to recover its investment in that facility. In addition, construction delays and contractor
performance shortfalls can result in the loss of revenues and may, in turn, adversely affect the
net income and financial position of a traditional operating company or Southern Power and of
Southern Company. Furthermore, if construction projects are not completed according to
specification, a traditional operating company or Southern Power and Southern Company may incur
liabilities and suffer reduced plant efficiency, higher operating costs, and reduced net income.
Once facilities come into commercial operation, ongoing capital expenditures are required to
maintain reliable levels of operation. Significant portions of the traditional operating
companies existing facilities were constructed many years ago. Older generation equipment, even
if maintained in accordance with good engineering practices, may require significant capital
expenditures to maintain efficiency, to comply with changing environmental requirements, or to
provide reliable operations.
Changes in technology may make Southern Companys electric generating facilities owned by the
traditional operating companies, and Southern Power less competitive.
A key element of the business model of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and
Southern Power is that generating power at central station power plants achieves economies of scale
and produces power at a
I-17
competitive cost. There are distributed generation technologies that produce power, including fuel
cells, microturbines, wind turbines, and solar cells. It is possible that advances in technology
will reduce the cost of alternative methods of producing power to a level that is competitive with
that of most central station power electric production. If this were to happen and if these
technologies achieved economies of scale, the market share of Southern Company, the traditional
operating companies, and Southern Power could be eroded, and the value of their respective electric
generating facilities could be reduced. It is also possible that rapid advances in central station
power generation technology could reduce the value of the current electric generating facilities
owned by Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power. Changes in
technology could also alter the channels through which retail electric customers buy or utilize
power, which could reduce the revenues or increase the expenses of Southern Company, the
traditional operating companies, or Southern Power.
Operation of nuclear facilities involves inherent risks, including environmental, health,
regulatory, terrorism and financial risks that could result in fines or the closure of Southern
Companys nuclear units owned by Alabama Power or Georgia Power, and which may present potential
exposures in excess of insurance coverage.
Alabama Power owns two nuclear units and Georgia Power holds undivided interests in, and contracts
for operation of, four nuclear units. These six units are operated by Southern Nuclear and
represent approximately 3,680 megawatts, or 8.8%, of Southern Companys generation capacity as of
December 31, 2007. These nuclear facilities are subject to environmental, health and financial
risks such as on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel, the ability to dispose of such spent nuclear
fuel, the ability to maintain adequate reserves for decommissioning, potential liabilities arising
out of the operation of these facilities, and the threat of a possible terrorist attack. Alabama
Power and Georgia Power maintain decommissioning trusts and external insurance coverage to minimize
the financial exposure to these risks; however, it is possible that damages could exceed the amount
of insurance coverage.
The NRC has broad authority under federal law to impose licensing and safety-related requirements
for the operation of nuclear generation facilities. In the event of non-compliance, the NRC has
the authority to impose fines or shut down a unit, or both, depending upon its assessment of the
severity of the situation, until compliance is achieved. NRC orders or new regulations related to
increased security measures and any future safety requirements promulgated by the NRC could require
Alabama Power and Georgia Power to make substantial operating and capital expenditures at their
nuclear plants. In addition, although Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Southern Company have no
reason to anticipate a serious nuclear incident at their plants, if an incident did occur, it could
result in substantial costs to Alabama Power or Georgia Power and Southern Company. A major
incident at a nuclear facility anywhere in the world could cause the NRC to limit or prohibit the
operation or licensing of any domestic nuclear unit.
In addition, potential terrorist threats and increased public scrutiny of utilities could result in
increased nuclear licensing or compliance costs that are difficult or impossible to predict.
The generation and energy marketing operations of Southern Company, the traditional operating
companies, and Southern Power are subject to risks, many of which are beyond their control,
including changes in power prices and fuel costs, that may reduce Southern Companys, the
traditional operating companies, and Southern Powers revenues and increase costs.
The generation and energy marketing operations of Southern Company, the traditional operating
companies, and Southern Power are subject to changes in power prices or fuel costs, which could
increase the cost of producing power or decrease the amount Southern Company, the traditional
operating companies, and Southern Power receive from the sale of power. The market prices for
these commodities may fluctuate significantly over relatively short periods of time. Southern
Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power attempt to mitigate risks
associated with fluctuating fuel costs by passing these costs on to customers through the
traditional operating companies fuel cost recovery clauses or through PPAs. Among the factors
that could influence power prices and fuel costs are:
|
|
|
prevailing market prices for coal, natural gas, uranium, fuel oil, and other
fuels used in the generation facilities of the traditional operating companies and
Southern Power including associated transportation costs, and supplies of such
commodities; |
I-18
|
|
|
demand for energy and the extent of additional supplies of energy available
from current or new competitors; |
|
|
|
|
liquidity in the general wholesale electricity market; |
|
|
|
|
weather conditions impacting demand for electricity; |
|
|
|
|
seasonality; |
|
|
|
|
transmission or transportation constraints or inefficiencies; |
|
|
|
|
availability of competitively priced alternative energy sources; |
|
|
|
|
forced or unscheduled plant outages for the Southern Company system, its
competitors, or third party providers; |
|
|
|
|
the financial condition of market participants; |
|
|
|
|
the economy in the service territory, nation and worldwide, including the
impact of economic conditions on industrial and commercial demand for electricity and
the worldwide demand for fuels; |
|
|
|
|
natural disasters, wars, embargos, acts of terrorism, and other catastrophic
events; and |
|
|
|
|
federal, state, and foreign energy and environmental regulation and
legislation. |
Certain of these factors could increase the expenses of the traditional operating companies or
Southern Power and Southern Company. For the traditional operating companies, such increases may
not be fully recoverable through rates. Other of these factors could reduce the revenues of the
traditional operating companies or Southern Power and Southern Company.
As a result of increasing fuel costs, the traditional operating companies have accrued significant
underrecovered fuel cost balances. In addition, Gulf Power has a significant underrecovered
balance in its storm cost recovery reserve as a result of Hurricanes Dennis and Katrina. The
traditional operating companies may experience similar deficit balances following future storms.
While the traditional operating companies are generally authorized to recover underrecovered fuel
costs through fuel cost recovery clauses and storm recovery costs through special rate provisions
administered by the respective PSCs, recovery may be denied if costs are deemed to be imprudently
incurred and delays in the authorization of such recovery could negatively impact the cash flows of
the affected traditional operating company and Southern Company.
The use of derivative contracts by Southern Company and its subsidiaries in the normal course of
business could result in financial losses that negatively impact the net income of Southern Company
and its subsidiaries.
Southern Company and its subsidiaries, including the traditional operating companies and Southern
Power, use derivative instruments, such as swaps, options, futures, and forwards, to manage their
commodity and financial market risks and, to a lesser extent, engage in limited trading activities.
Southern Company and its subsidiaries could recognize financial losses as a result of volatility
in the market values of these contracts or if a counterparty fails to perform. In the absence of
actively quoted market prices and pricing information from external sources, the valuation of these
financial instruments can involve managements judgment or use of estimates. As a result, changes
in the underlying assumptions or use of alternative valuation methods could affect the value of the
reported fair value of these contracts.
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power may not be able to obtain adequate fuel
supplies, which could limit their ability to operate their facilities.
I-19
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power purchase fuel, including coal, natural gas,
uranium, and fuel oil, from a number of suppliers. Disruption in the delivery of fuel, including
disruptions as a result of, among other things, transportation delays, weather, labor relations,
force majeure events, or environmental regulations affecting any of these fuel suppliers, could
limit the ability of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power to operate their
respective facilities, and thus reduce the net income of the affected traditional operating company
or Southern Power and Southern Company.
The traditional operating companies are dependent on coal for much of their electric generating
capacity. Each traditional operating company has coal supply contracts in place; however, there
can be no assurance that the counterparties to these agreements will fulfill their obligations to
supply coal to the traditional operating companies. The suppliers under these agreements may
experience financial or technical problems which inhibit their ability to fulfill their obligations
to the traditional operating companies. In addition, the suppliers under these agreements may not
be required to supply coal to the traditional operating companies under certain circumstances, such
as in the event of a natural disaster. If the traditional operating companies are unable to obtain
their coal requirements under these contracts, the traditional operating companies may be required
to purchase their coal requirements at higher prices, which may not be fully recoverable through
rates.
In addition, Southern Power in particular, and the traditional operating companies to a lesser
extent, are dependent on natural gas for a portion of their electric generating capacity. Natural
gas supplies can be subject to disruption in the event production or distribution is curtailed.
For example, in connection with the 2005 hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, production and
distribution of natural gas was limited for a period of time, resulting in shortages and
significant increases in the price of natural gas. In addition, world market conditions for fuels,
including the policies of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, can impact the price
and availability of natural gas.
Demand for power could exceed supply capacity, resulting in increased costs for purchasing capacity
in the open market or building additional generation capabilities.
Through the traditional operating companies and Southern Power, Southern Company is currently
obligated to supply power to retail customers and wholesale customers under long-term PPAs. At
peak times, the demand for power required to meet this obligation could exceed Southern Companys
available generation capacity. Market or competitive forces may require that the traditional
operating companies or Southern Power purchase capacity on the open market or build additional
generation capabilities. Because regulators may not permit the traditional operating companies to
pass all of these purchase or construction costs on to their customers, the traditional operating
companies may not be able to recover any of these costs or may have exposure to regulatory lag
associated with the time between the incurrence of costs of purchased or constructed capacity and
the traditional operating companies recovery in customers rates. Under Southern Powers
long-term fixed price PPAs, Southern Power would not have the ability to recover any of these
costs. These situations could have negative impacts on net income and cash flows for the affected
traditional operating company or Southern Power and Southern Company.
The operating results of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power
are affected by weather conditions and may fluctuate on a seasonal and quarterly basis.
Electric power supply is generally a seasonal business. In many parts of the country, demand for
power peaks during the summer months, with market prices also peaking at that time. In other
areas, power demand peaks during the winter. As a result, the overall operating results of
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power in the future may
fluctuate substantially on a seasonal basis. In addition, Southern Company, the traditional
operating companies, and Southern Power have historically sold less power when weather conditions
are milder. Unusually mild weather in the future could reduce the revenues, net income, available
cash and borrowing ability of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern
Power.
Mirant and The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Mirant Corporation have filed a claim
against Southern Company seeking substantial monetary damages in connection with transfers made by
Mirant to Southern Company prior to the Mirant spin-off.
I-20
Mirant was an energy company with businesses that included independent power projects and energy
trading and risk management companies in the U.S. and selected other countries. It was a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Southern Company until its initial public offering in October 2000. In
April 2001, Southern Company completed a spin-off to its shareholders of its remaining ownership,
and Mirant became an independent corporate entity.
In July 2003, Mirant and certain of its affiliates filed for voluntary reorganization under
Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. In January 2006, Mirants plan of reorganization became
effective, and Mirant emerged from bankruptcy. As part of the plan, Mirant transferred
substantially all of its assets and its restructured debt to a new corporation that adopted the
name Mirant Corporation (Reorganized Mirant).
In December 2004, as a result of concluding an IRS audit for the tax years 2000 and 2001, Southern
Company paid approximately $39 million in additional tax and interest related to Mirant tax items
and filed a claim in Mirants bankruptcy case for that amount. Through December 2007, Southern
Company received from the IRS approximately $36 million in refunds related to Mirant. Southern
Company believes it has a right to recoup the $39 million tax payment owed by Mirant from such tax
refunds. As a result, Southern Company intends to retain the tax refunds and reduce its claim
against Mirant for the payment of Mirant taxes by the amount of such refunds. MC Asset Recovery, a
special purpose subsidiary of Reorganized Mirant, has objected to and sought to equitably
subordinate the Southern Company tax claim in its fraudulent transfer litigation against Southern
Company. Southern Company has reserved the approximately $3 million amount remaining with respect
to its Mirant tax claim.
If Southern Company is ultimately required to make any additional payments either with respect to
the IRS audit or its contingent obligations under guarantees of Mirant subsidiaries, Mirants
indemnification obligation to Southern Company for these additional payments, if allowed, would
constitute unsecured claims against Mirant, entitled to stock in Reorganized Mirant.
In June 2005, Mirant, as a debtor in possession, and The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors
of Mirant Corporation filed a complaint against Southern Company in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for
the Northern District of Texas, which was amended in July 2005, February 2006, May 2006, and March
2007. In January 2006, MC Asset Recovery was substituted as plaintiff. The fourth amended
complaint alleges that Southern Company caused Mirant to engage in certain fraudulent transfers and
to pay illegal dividends to Southern Company prior to the spin-off. The complaint also seeks to
recharacterize certain advances from Southern Company to Mirant for investments in energy
facilities from debt to equity. The complaint further alleges that Southern Company is liable to
Mirants creditors for the full amount of Mirants liability and that Southern Company breached its
fiduciary duties to Mirant and its creditors, caused Mirant to breach fiduciary duties to its
creditors, and aided and abetted breaches of fiduciary duties by Mirants directors and officers.
The complaint also seeks recoveries under theories of restitution, unjust enrichment, and alter
ego. In addition, the complaint alleges a claim under the Federal Debt Collection Procedure Act
(FDCPA) to void certain transfers from Mirant to Southern Company. MC Asset Recovery claims to
have standing to assert violations of the FDCPA and to recover property on behalf of the Mirant
debtors estates. The complaint seeks monetary damages in excess of $2 billion plus interest,
punitive damages, attorneys fees, and costs. Finally, the complaint includes an objection to
Southern Companys pending claims against Mirant in the Bankruptcy Court (which relate to
reimbursement under the separation agreements of payments such as income taxes, interest, legal
fees, and other guarantees described in Note 7 to the financial statements of Southern Company in
Item 8 herein) and seeks equitable subordination of Southern Companys claims to the claims of all
other creditors. Southern Company served an answer to the complaint in April 2007.
In February 2006, Southern Companys motion to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia was granted. In May 2006, Southern Company filed a motion for summary
judgment seeking entry of judgment against the plaintiff as to all counts in the complaint. In
December 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted in part and
denied in part the motion. As a result, certain breach of fiduciary duty claims alleged in earlier
versions of the complaint were barred; all other claims may proceed. Southern Company believes
there is no meritorious basis for the claims in the complaint and is vigorously defending itself in
this action. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
IRS challenges to Southern Companys income tax deductions taken in connection with three
international leveraged lease transactions could result in the payment of substantial additional
interest and penalties and
I-21
could materially impact Southern Companys cash flow and net income.
Southern Company undergoes audits by the IRS for each of its tax years. The IRS has completed its
audits of Southern Companys consolidated federal income tax returns for all years prior to 2004.
The IRS challenged Southern Companys deductions related to three international lease transactions
(SILO or sale-in-lease-out transactions), in connection with its audits of Southern Companys 2000
through 2003 tax returns. In the third quarter 2006, Southern Company paid the full amount of the
disputed tax and the applicable interest on the SILO issue for tax years 2000 and 2001 and filed a
claim for refund which was denied by the IRS. The disputed tax amount was $79 million and the
related interest approximately $24 million for these tax years. This payment, and the subsequent
IRS disallowance of the refund claim, closed the issue with the IRS and Southern Company initiated
litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia for a complete refund of
tax and interest paid for the 2000 and 2001 tax years. The IRS also challenged the SILO deductions
for the tax years 2002 and 2003. The estimated amount of disputed tax and interest for these tax
years was approximately $83 million and $15 million, respectively. The tax and interest for these
tax years was paid to the IRS in the fourth quarter 2006. Southern Company has accounted for both
payments in 2006 as deposits. For the tax years 2000 through 2007, Southern Company has claimed
approximately $330 million in tax benefits related to these SILO transactions challenged by the
IRS. These tax benefits relate to timing differences and do not impact total net income. Southern
Company believes these transactions are valid leases for U.S. tax purposes and the related
deductions are allowable. Southern Company is continuing to pursue resolution of these matters;
however, the ultimate outcome cannot now be determined. In addition, the U.S. Senate is currently
considering legislation that would disallow tax benefits after December 31, 2007 for SILO losses
and other international leveraged lease transactions (such as lease-in-lease-out transactions).
The ultimate impact on Southern Companys net income will be dependent on the outcome of the
pending litigation and proposed legislation, but could be significant, and potentially material.
Risks Related to Market and Economic Volatility
The business of Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power is
dependent on their ability to successfully access capital markets. The inability of Southern
Company, any traditional operating company or Southern Power to access capital may limit its
ability to execute its business plan or pursue improvements and make acquisitions that Southern
Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power may otherwise rely on for future
growth.
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power rely on access to both
short-term money markets and longer-term capital markets as a significant source of liquidity for
capital requirements not satisfied by the cash flow from their respective operations. If Southern
Company, any traditional operating company, or Southern Power is not able to access capital at
competitive rates, its ability to implement its business plan or pursue improvements and make
acquisitions that Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, or Southern Power may
otherwise rely on for future growth will be limited. Each of Southern Company, the traditional
operating companies, and Southern Power believes that it will maintain sufficient access to these
financial markets based upon current credit ratings. However, certain market disruptions or a
downgrade of the credit rating of Southern Company, any traditional operating company, or Southern
Power may increase its cost of borrowing or adversely affect its ability to raise capital through
the issuance of securities or other borrowing arrangements. Such disruptions could include:
|
|
|
an economic downturn or uncertainty; |
|
|
|
|
the bankruptcy of an unrelated energy company; |
|
|
|
|
capital market conditions generally; |
|
|
|
|
market prices for electricity and gas; |
|
|
|
|
terrorist attacks or threatened attacks on Southern Companys facilities or
unrelated energy companies; |
|
|
|
|
war or threat of war; or |
I-22
|
|
|
the overall health of the utility industry. |
Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are subject to risks
associated with a changing economic environment, including their ability to obtain insurance, the
financial stability of their respective customers, and their ability to raise capital.
The threat of terrorism and the hurricanes that affected the Gulf Coast, among other things, have
had disruptive effects on the insurance industry. The availability of insurance covering risks
that Southern Company, the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and their respective
competitors typically insure against may decrease, and the insurance that Southern Company, the
traditional operating companies, and Southern Power are able to obtain may have higher deductibles,
higher premiums, and more restrictive policy terms. Any economic downturn or disruption of
financial markets could negatively affect the financial stability of their respective customers and
counterparties. These factors could adversely affect Southern Companys subsidiaries ability to
achieve energy sales growth, thereby decreasing Southern Companys level of future net income.
Certain of the traditional operating companies have substantial investments in the Gulf Coast
region which can be subject to major storm activity. The ability of the traditional operating
companies to recover costs and replenish reserves in the event of a major storm, other natural
disaster, terrorist attack, or other catastrophic event generally will require regulatory action.
Each traditional operating company maintains a reserve for property damage to cover the cost of
damages from major storms to its transmission and distribution lines and the cost of uninsured
damages to its generating facilities and other property. In September 2004, Hurricane Ivan hit the
Gulf coast of Florida and Alabama, causing significant damage to the service areas of Alabama Power
and Gulf Power. In July and August 2005, Hurricanes Dennis and Katrina, respectively, hit the Gulf
coast of the United States and caused significant damage in the service areas of Gulf Power,
Alabama Power, and Mississippi Power. In each case, costs to the respective traditional operating
companies exceeded their respective storm cost reserves and insurance coverage and were
subsequently approved for recovery by their respective state PSCs. In the event a traditional
operating company experiences a natural disaster, terrorist attack, or other catastrophic event,
recovery of costs in excess of reserves and insurance coverage is subject to the approval of its
state PSC. While the traditional operating companies generally are entitled to recover prudently
incurred costs incurred in connection with such an event, any denial by the applicable state PSC or
delay in recovery of any portion of such costs could have a material negative impact on a
traditional operating companys and Southern Companys results of operations and/or cash flows.
Item 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.
None.
I-23
Item 2. PROPERTIES
Electric Properties The Electric Utilities
The traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO, at December 31, 2007, owned and/or
operated 34 hydroelectric generating stations, 34 fossil fuel generating stations, 3 nuclear
generating stations, and 12 combined cycle/cogeneration stations. The amounts of capacity for each
company are shown in the table below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nameplate |
Generating Station |
|
Location |
|
Capacity (1) |
|
|
|
|
(Kilowatts) |
FOSSIL STEAM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gadsden |
|
Gadsden, AL |
|
|
120,000 |
|
Gorgas |
|
Jasper, AL |
|
|
1,221,250 |
|
Barry |
|
Mobile, AL |
|
|
1,525,000 |
|
Greene County |
|
Demopolis, AL |
|
|
300,000 |
(2) |
Gaston Unit 5 |
|
Wilsonville, AL |
|
|
880,000 |
|
Miller |
|
Birmingham, AL |
|
|
2,532,288 |
(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alabama Power Total |
|
|
|
|
6,578,538 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bowen |
|
Cartersville, GA |
|
|
3,160,000 |
|
Branch |
|
Milledgeville, GA |
|
|
1,539,700 |
|
Hammond |
|
Rome, GA |
|
|
800,000 |
|
Kraft |
|
Port Wentworth, GA |
|
|
281,136 |
|
McDonough |
|
Atlanta, GA |
|
|
490,000 |
|
McIntosh |
|
Effingham County, GA |
|
|
163,117 |
|
McManus |
|
Brunswick, GA |
|
|
115,000 |
|
Mitchell |
|
Albany, GA |
|
|
125,000 |
|
Scherer |
|
Macon, GA |
|
|
750,924 |
(4) |
Wansley |
|
Carrollton, GA |
|
|
925,550 |
(5) |
Yates |
|
Newnan, GA |
|
|
1,250,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Georgia Power Total |
|
|
|
|
9,600,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crist |
|
Pensacola, FL |
|
|
970,000 |
|
Daniel |
|
Pascagoula, MS |
|
|
500,000 |
(6) |
Lansing Smith |
|
Panama City, FL |
|
|
305,000 |
|
Scholz |
|
Chattahoochee, FL |
|
|
80,000 |
|
Scherer Unit 3 |
|
Macon, GA |
|
|
204,500 |
(4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gulf Power Total |
|
|
|
|
2,059,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel |
|
Pascagoula, MS |
|
|
500,000 |
(6) |
Eaton |
|
Hattiesburg, MS |
|
|
67,500 |
|
Greene County |
|
Demopolis, AL |
|
|
200,000 |
(2) |
Sweatt |
|
Meridian, MS |
|
|
80,000 |
|
Watson |
|
Gulfport, MS |
|
|
1,012,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mississippi Power Total |
|
|
|
|
1,859,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gaston Units 1-4 |
|
Wilsonville, AL |
|
|
|
|
SEGCO Total |
|
|
|
|
1,000,000 |
(7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fossil Steam |
|
|
|
|
21,097,965 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NUCLEAR STEAM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Farley |
|
Dothan, AL |
|
|
|
|
Alabama Power Total |
|
|
|
|
1,720,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hatch |
|
Baxley, GA |
|
|
899,612 |
(8) |
Vogtle |
|
Augusta, GA |
|
|
1,060,240 |
(9) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Georgia Power Total |
|
|
|
|
1,959,852 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Nuclear Steam |
|
|
|
|
3,679,852 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMBUSTION TURBINES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greene County |
|
Demopolis, AL |
|
|
|
|
Alabama Power Total |
|
|
|
|
720,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boulevard |
|
Savannah, GA |
|
|
59,100 |
|
Bowen |
|
Cartersville, GA |
|
|
39,400 |
|
Intercession City |
|
Intercession City, FL |
|
|
47,667 |
(10) |
Kraft |
|
Port Wentworth, GA |
|
|
22,000 |
|
McDonough |
|
Atlanta, GA |
|
|
78,800 |
|
McIntosh Units 1 through 8 |
|
Effingham County, GA |
|
|
640,000 |
|
McManus |
|
Brunswick, GA |
|
|
481,700 |
|
Mitchell |
|
Albany, GA |
|
|
118,200 |
|
Robins |
|
Warner Robins, GA |
|
|
158,400 |
|
Wansley |
|
Carrollton, GA |
|
|
26,322 |
|
Wilson |
|
Augusta, GA |
|
|
354,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Georgia Power Total |
|
|
|
|
2,025,689 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lansing Smith Unit A |
|
Panama City, FL |
|
|
39,400 |
|
Pea Ridge Units 1-3 |
|
Pea Ridge, FL |
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gulf Power Total |
|
|
|
|
54,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chevron Cogenerating
Station |
|
Pascagoula, MS |
|
|
147,292 |
(11) |
Sweatt |
|
Meridian, MS |
|
|
39,400 |
|
I-24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nameplate |
Generating Station |
|
Location |
|
Capacity (1) |
|
|
|
|
(Kilowatts) |
Watson |
|
Gulfport, MS |
|
|
39,360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mississippi Power Total |
|
|
|
|
226,052 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dahlberg |
|
Jackson County, GA |
|
|
756,000 |
|
DeSoto |
|
Arcadia, FL |
|
|
343,760 |
|
Oleander |
|
Cocoa, FL |
|
|
791,301 |
|
Rowan |
|
Salisbury, NC |
|
|
455,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southern Power Total |
|
|
|
|
2,346,311 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gaston (SEGCO) |
|
Wilsonville, AL |
|
|
19,680 |
(7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Combustion Turbines |
|
|
|
|
5,392,132 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COGENERATION |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Washington County |
|
Washington County, AL |
|
|
123,428 |
|
GE Plastics Project |
|
Burkeville, AL |
|
|
104,800 |
|
Theodore |
|
Theodore, AL |
|
|
236,418 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cogeneration |
|
|
|
|
464,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMBINED CYCLE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barry |
|
Mobile, AL |
|
|
|
|
Alabama Power Total |
|
|
|
|
1,070,424 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
McIntosh Units 10&11 |
|
Effingham County, GA |
|
|
|
|
Georgia Power Total |
|
|
|
|
1,318,920 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Smith |
|
Lynn Haven, FL |
|
|
|
|
Gulf Power Total |
|
|
|
|
545,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel (Leased) |
|
Pascagoula, MS |
|
|
|
|
Mississippi Power Total |
|
|
|
|
1,070,424 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Franklin |
|
Smiths, AL |
|
|
1,198,360 |
|
Harris |
|
Autaugaville, AL |
|
|
1,318,920 |
|
Rowan |
|
Salisbury, NC |
|
|
530,550 |
|
Stanton Unit A |
|
Orlando, FL |
|
|
428,649 |
(12) |
Wansley |
|
Carrollton, GA |
|
|
1,073,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Southern Power Total |
|
|
|
|
4,549,479 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Combined Cycle |
|
|
|
|
8,554,747 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HYDROELECTRIC FACILITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bankhead |
|
Holt, AL |
|
|
53,985 |
|
Bouldin |
|
Wetumpka, AL |
|
|
225,000 |
|
Harris |
|
Wedowee, AL |
|
|
132,000 |
|
Henry |
|
Ohatchee, AL |
|
|
72,900 |
|
Holt |
|
Holt, AL |
|
|
46,944 |
|
Jordan |
|
Wetumpka, AL |
|
|
100,000 |
|
Lay |
|
Clanton, AL |
|
|
177,000 |
|
Lewis Smith |
|
Jasper, AL |
|
|
157,500 |
|
Logan Martin |
|
Vincent, AL |
|
|
135,000 |
|
Martin |
|
Dadeville, AL |
|
|
182,000 |
|
Mitchell |
|
Verbena, AL |
|
|
170,000 |
|
Thurlow |
|
Tallassee, AL |
|
|
81,000 |
|
Weiss |
|
Leesburg, AL |
|
|
87,750 |
|
Yates |
|
Tallassee, AL |
|
|
47,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alabama Power Total |
|
|
|
|
1,668,079 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barnett Shoals (Leased) |
|
Athens, GA |
|
|
2,800 |
|
Bartletts Ferry |
|
Columbus, GA |
|
|
173,000 |
|
Goat Rock |
|
Columbus, GA |
|
|
38,600 |
|
Lloyd Shoals |
|
Jackson, GA |
|
|
14,400 |
|
Morgan Falls |
|
Atlanta, GA |
|
|
16,800 |
|
North Highlands |
|
Columbus, GA |
|
|
29,600 |
|
Oliver Dam |
|
Columbus, GA |
|
|
60,000 |
|
Rocky Mountain |
|
Rome, GA |
|
|
215,256 |
(13) |
Sinclair Dam |
|
Milledgeville, GA |
|
|
45,000 |
|
Tallulah Falls |
|
Clayton, GA |
|
|
72,000 |
|
Terrora |
|
Clayton, GA |
|
|
16,000 |
|
Tugalo |
|
Clayton, GA |
|
|
45,000 |
|
Wallace Dam |
|
Eatonton, GA |
|
|
321,300 |
|
Yonah |
|
Toccoa, GA |
|
|
22,500 |
|
6 Other Plants |
|
|
|
|
18,080 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Georgia Power Total |
|
|
|
|
1,090,336 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Hydroelectric
Facilities |
|
|
|
|
2,758,415 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Generating Capacity |
|
|
|
|
41,947,757 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes: |
|
(1) |
|
See Jointly-Owned Facilities herein for additional information. |
|
(2) |
|
Owned by Alabama Power and Mississippi Power as tenants in common in
the proportions of 60% and 40%, respectively. |
|
(3) |
|
Capacity shown is Alabama Powers portion (91.84%) of total plant
capacity. |
|
(4) |
|
Capacity shown for Georgia Power is 8.4% of Units 1 and 2 and 75% of
Unit 3. Capacity shown for Gulf Power is 25% of Unit 3. |
|
(5) |
|
Capacity shown is Georgia Powers portion (53.5%) of total plant
capacity. |
I-25
|
|
|
(6) |
|
Represents 50% of the plant which is owned as tenants in common by
Gulf Power and Mississippi Power. |
|
(7) |
|
SEGCO is jointly-owned by Alabama Power and Georgia Power. See
BUSINESS in Item 1 herein for additional information. |
|
(8) |
|
Capacity shown is Georgia Powers portion (50.1%) of total plant
capacity. |
|
(9) |
|
Capacity shown is Georgia Powers portion (45.7%) of total plant
capacity. |
|
(10) |
|
Capacity shown represents 33 1/3% of total plant capacity. Georgia
Power owns a 1/3 interest in the unit with 100% use of the unit from
June through September. Progress Energy Florida operates the unit. |
|
(11) |
|
Generation is dedicated to a single industrial customer. |
|
(12) |
|
Capacity shown is Southern Powers portion (65%) of total plant
capacity. |
|
(13) |
|
Capacity shown is Georgia Powers portion (25.4%) of total plant
capacity. OPC operates the plant. |
Except as discussed below under Titles to Property, the principal plants and other important
units of the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO are owned in fee by the
respective companies. It is the opinion of management of each such company that its operating
properties are adequately maintained and are substantially in good operating condition.
Mississippi Power owns a 79-mile length of 500-kilovolt transmission line which is leased to
Entergy Gulf States. The line, completed in 1984, extends from Plant Daniel to the Louisiana state
line. Entergy Gulf States is paying a use fee over a 40-year period covering all expenses and the
amortization of the original $57 million cost of the line. At December 31, 2007, the unamortized
portion of this cost was approximately $25 million.
The all-time maximum demand on the traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO was
38,777,000 kilowatts and occurred on August 22, 2007. This amount excludes demand served by
capacity retained by MEAG, OPC, and SEPA. The reserve margin for the traditional operating
companies, Southern Power, and SEGCO at that time was 11.2%. See SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA in Item 6
herein for additional information on peak demands.
I-26
Jointly-Owned Facilities
Alabama Power, Georgia Power, and Southern Power have undivided interests in certain generating
plants and other related facilities to or from non-affiliated parties. The percentages of
ownership are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage Ownership |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Progress |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
Alabama |
|
Power |
|
Georgia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Energy |
|
Southern |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capacity |
|
Power |
|
South |
|
Power |
|
OPC |
|
MEAG |
|
Dalton |
|
Florida |
|
Power |
|
OUC |
|
FMPA |
|
KUA |
|
|
(Megawatts) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant Miller
Units
1 and 2 |
|
|
1,320 |
|
|
|
91.8 |
% |
|
|
8.2 |
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
Plant Hatch |
|
|
1,796 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50.1 |
|
|
|
30.0 |
|
|
|
17.7 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant Vogtle |
|
|
2,320 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45.7 |
|
|
|
30.0 |
|
|
|
22.7 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant Scherer
Units 1 and 2 |
|
|
1,636 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.4 |
|
|
|
60.0 |
|
|
|
30.2 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant Wansley |
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53.5 |
|
|
|
30.0 |
|
|
|
15.1 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rocky Mountain |
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25.4 |
|
|
|
74.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intercession City,
FL |
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant Stanton A |
|
|
660 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65 |
% |
|
|
28 |
% |
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
Alabama Power and Georgia Power have contracted to operate and maintain the respective units in
which each has an interest (other than Rocky Mountain and Intercession City) as agent for the joint
owners. SCS provides operation and maintenance services for Plant Stanton A.
In addition, Georgia Power has commitments regarding a portion of a five percent interest in Plant
Vogtle owned by MEAG that are in effect until the later of retirement of the plant or the latest
stated maturity date of MEAGs bonds issued to finance such ownership interest. The payments for
capacity are required whether any capacity is available. The energy cost is a function of each
units variable operating costs. Except for the portion of the capacity payments related to the
Georgia PSCs disallowances of Plant Vogtle costs, the cost of such capacity and energy is included
in purchased power from non-affiliates in Georgia Powers statements of income in Item 8 herein.
Titles to Property
The traditional operating companies, Southern Powers, and SEGCOs interests in the principal
plants (other than certain pollution control facilities, one small hydroelectric generating station
leased by Georgia Power, combined cycle units at Plant Daniel leased by Mississippi Power and the
land on which five combustion turbine generators of Mississippi Power are located, which is held by
easement) and other important units of the respective companies are owned in fee by such companies,
subject only to the liens pursuant to pollution control bonds of Alabama Power and Gulf Power on
specific pollution control facilities. As of January 26, 2007, Gulf Powers mortgage indenture and
the lien on its principal property were discharged. See Note 6 to the financial statements of
Southern Company, Alabama Power, and Gulf Power under Assets Subject to Lien and Note 7 to the
financial statements of Mississippi Power under Operating Leases Plant Daniel Combined Cycle
Generating Units in Item 8 herein for additional information. The traditional operating companies
own the fee interests in certain of their principal plants as tenants in common. See
Jointly-Owned Facilities herein for additional information. Properties such as electric
transmission and distribution lines and steam heating mains are constructed principally on
rights-of-way which are maintained under franchise or are held by easement only. A substantial
portion of lands submerged by reservoirs is held under flood right easements.
I-27
Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
(1) United States of America v. Alabama Power (United States District Court for the Northern
District of Alabama)
United States of America v. Georgia Power and Savannah Electric (United States District
Court for the Northern District of Georgia)
See Environmental Matters New Source Review Actions in Note 3 to Southern Companys and each
traditional operating companys financial statements in Item 8 herein for information.
(2) Environmental Remediation
See Environmental Matters Environmental Remediation in Note 3 to the financial statements of
Southern Company, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power and Retail Regulatory Matters
Environmental Compliance Overview Plan in Note 3 to the
financial statements of Mississippi Power in Item 8 herein for
information related to environmental remediation.
(3) In re: Mirant Corporation, et al. (United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District
of Texas)
See Mirant Matters Mirant Bankruptcy in Note 3 to Southern Companys financial statements in
Item 8 herein for information.
(4) MC Asset Recovery, LLC v. Southern Company (United States District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia) (formerly styled In re: Mirant Corporation, et al. in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas)
See Mirant Matters MC Asset Recovery Litigation in Note 3 to Southern Companys financial
statements in Item 8 herein for information.
(5) In re: Mirant Corporation Securities Litigation (United States District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia)
See Mirant Matters Mirant Securities Litigation in Note 3 to Southern Companys financial
statements in Item 8 herein for information.
(6) Right of Way Litigation
See Right of Way Litigation in Note 3 to Southern Companys, Georgia Powers, Gulf Powers, and
Mississippi Powers financial statements in Item 8 herein for information.
See Note 3 to each registrants financial statements in Item 8 herein for descriptions of
additional legal and administrative proceedings discussed therein.
I-28
Item 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
Southern Company, Alabama Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and Southern Power
None.
Georgia Power
By written consent, in lieu of a special meeting of the sole common shareholder of Georgia Power,
effective October 8, 2007, the sole shareholder approved an amendment to the Charter of Georgia
Power to establish a new series of preference stock designated as the 6.50% Series 2007A
Preference Stock, Non-Cumulative, Par Value $100 Per Share (Amendment).
All of the 9,261,500 outstanding shares of Georgia Powers common stock were owned by Southern
Company and were voted in favor of the Amendment.
I-29
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF SOUTHERN COMPANY
(Identification of executive officers of Southern Company is inserted in Part I in accordance with
Regulation S-K, Item 401(b), Instruction 3.) The ages of the officers set forth below are as of
December 31, 2007.
David M. Ratcliffe
Chairman, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
Age 59
Elected in 1999. President since April 2004; Chairman and Chief Executive Officer since July 2004.
Previously served as Chief Executive Officer of Georgia Power from June 1999 to April 2004; and
President of Georgia Power from June 1999 to December 2003.
W. Paul Bowers
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Age 51
Elected in 2001. Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since February 1, 2008 and
Executive Vice President since May 2007. Previously served as President of Southern Company
Generation, a business unit of Southern Company, and Executive Vice President of SCS since May
2001; and President and Chief Executive Officer of Southern Power from May 2001 through March 2005.
Thomas A. Fanning
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
Age 50
Elected in 2003. Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer since February 1, 2008.
Previously served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from May 2007 through
January 2008; Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer from April 2003 to
May 2007; and President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director of Gulf Power from 2002 to April
2003.
Michael D. Garrett
Executive Vice President
Age 58
Elected in 2004. Executive Vice President since January 1, 2004. He also serves as President and
Director of Georgia Power since January 1, 2004 and Chief Executive Officer of Georgia Power since
April 2004. Previously served as President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director of Mississippi
Power from 2001 to 2003.
G. Edison Holland, Jr.
Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary
Age 55
Elected in 2001. Executive Vice President and General Counsel since 2001.
C. Alan Martin
President and Chief Executive Officer of SCS
Age 59
Elected in 2008. President and Chief Executive Officer of SCS since February 1, 2008. Previously
served as Executive Vice President of the Customer Service Organization at Alabama Power from May
2001 through January 2008.
Charles D. McCrary
Executive Vice President
Age 56
Elected in 1998. Executive Vice President of Southern Company since February 2002; President,
Chief Executive Officer, and Director of Alabama Power since October 2001.
I-30
J. Barnie Beasley
President and Chief Executive Officer of Southern Nuclear
Age 56
Elected in 2004. President and Chief Executive Officer of Southern Nuclear since September 2004.
Previously served as Executive Vice President of Southern Nuclear from January 2004 to September
2004; and Vice President from July 1998 through December 2003.
The officers of Southern Company were elected for a term running from the first meeting of the
directors following the last annual meeting (May 23, 2007) for one year until the first board
meeting after the next annual meeting or until their successors are elected and have qualified,
except for Mr. Martin whose election was effective on February 1, 2008.
I-31
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF ALABAMA POWER
(Identification of executive officers of Alabama Power is inserted in Part I in accordance with
Regulation S-K, Item 401(b), Instruction 3.) The ages of the officers set forth below are as of
December 31, 2007.
Charles D. McCrary
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
Age 56
Elected in 2001. President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director since October 2001; Executive
Vice President of Southern Company since February 2002.
Art P. Beattie
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer
Age 53
Elected in 2004. Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer since February
2005. Previously served as Vice President and Comptroller of Alabama Power from 1998 through
January 2005.
Mark A. Crosswhite
Executive Vice President
Age 45
Elected in 2008. Executive Vice President of External Affairs since February 1, 2008. Previously
served as Senior Vice President and Counsel of Alabama Power from July 2006 through January 2008;
Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Assistant Secretary of Southern Power from March 2004
through January 2005; and
Vice President of SCS from March 2004 through January 2008. Prior to March 2004, Mr. Crosswhite
was a partner at the law firm of Balch & Bingham LLP.
Steven R. Spencer
Executive Vice President
Age 52
Elected in 2001. Executive Vice President of the Customer Service Organization since February 1,
2008. Previously served as Executive Vice President of External Affairs from 2001 through January
2008.
Jerry L. Stewart
Senior Vice President
Age 58
Elected in 1999. Senior Vice President of Fossil and Hydro Generation since 1999.
The officers of Alabama Power were elected for a term running from the last annual organizational
meeting of the directors (July 27, 2007) for one year until the next annual meeting or until their
successors are elected and have qualified, except for Mr. Crosswhite whose election was effective
February 1, 2008.
I-32
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF GEORGIA POWER
(Identification of executive officers of Georgia Power is inserted in Part I in accordance with
Regulation S-K, Item 401(b), Instruction 3.) The ages of the officers set forth below are as of
December 31, 2007.
Michael D. Garrett
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
Age 58
Elected in 2003. President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director of Georgia Power since April
2004. Previously served as President and Director of Georgia Power from January 2004 to April
2004; President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director of Mississippi Power from May 2001 through
December 2003.
Mickey A. Brown
Executive Vice President
Age 60
Elected in 2001. Executive Vice President of the Customer Service Organization since January 2005.
Previously served as Senior Vice President of Distribution from May 2001 through December 2004.
Cliff S. Thrasher
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer
Age 57
Elected in 2005. Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer since March
2005. Previously served as Senior Vice President, Comptroller, and Chief Financial Officer of
Southern Power from November 2002 to March 2005 and Vice President of SCS from June 2002 to March
2005.
Christopher C. Womack
Executive Vice President
Age 49
Elected in 2001. Executive Vice President of External Affairs since March 2006. Previously served
as Senior Vice President of Fossil and Hydro Generation and Senior Production Officer from December
2001 to February 2006.
Judy M. Anderson
Senior Vice President
Age 59
Elected in 2001. Senior Vice President of Charitable Giving since 2001.
Douglas E. Jones
Senior Vice President
Age 49
Elected in 2005. Senior Vice President of Fossil and Hydro Generation since March 2006.
Previously served as Senior Vice President of Customer Service and Sales from January 2005 to
February 2006; Executive Vice President of Southern Power from January 2004 to January 2005; Senior
Vice President of SCS from December 2001 to January 2004.
James H. Miller, III
Senior Vice President and General Counsel
Age 58
Elected in 2004. Senior Vice President and General Counsel since March 2004. Previously served as
Vice President and Associate General Counsel for SCS and Senior Vice President, General Counsel,
and Assistant Secretary of Southern Power from August 2001 through February 2004.
Each of the above is currently an executive officer of Georgia Power, serving a term running from
the last annual organizational meeting of the directors (May 16, 2007) for one year until the next
annual meeting or until their successors are elected and qualified.
I-33
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF MISSISSIPPI POWER
(Identification of executive officers of Mississippi Power is inserted in Part I in accordance with
Regulation S-K, Item 401(b), Instruction 3.) The ages of the officers set forth below are as of
December 31, 2007.
Anthony J. Topazi
President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director
Age 57
Elected in 2003. President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director since January 1, 2004.
Previously served as Executive Vice President of Southern Company Generation and Energy Marketing
from November 2000 to December 2003; and Senior Vice President of Southern Power from November 2002
to December 2003.
John W. Atherton
Vice President
Age 47
Elected in 2004. Vice President of External Affairs since January 2005. Previously served as the
Director of Economic Development from September 2003 to January 2005; and Manager, Sales and
Marketing Services from April 2002 to August 2003.
Kimberly D. Flowers
Vice President
Age 44
Elected in 2005. Vice President and Senior Production Officer since March 2005. Previously served
as Plant Manager, Plant Bowen, Georgia Power from November 2000 until March 2005.
Donald R. Horsley
Vice President
Age 53
Elected in 2006. Vice President of Customer Services and Retail Marketing since April 2006.
Previously served as Vice President of Transmission at Alabama Power from March 2005 to March 2006
and Manager, Transmission Lines at Alabama Power from February 2001 to March 2005.
Frances V. Turnage
Vice President, Treasurer, and
Chief Financial Officer
Age 59
Elected in 2005. Vice President, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer since March 2005.
Previously served as Comptroller from 1993 to March 2005.
The officers of Mississippi Power were elected for a term running from the last annual
organizational meeting of the directors (April 11, 2007) for one year until the next annual meeting
or until their successors are elected and have qualified.
I-34
PART II
|
|
|
Item 5. |
|
MARKET FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF
EQUITY SECURITIES |
(a)(1) The common stock of Southern Company is listed and traded on the New York Stock Exchange.
The common stock is also traded on regional exchanges across the United States. The high and low
stock prices for each quarter of the past two years were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High |
|
Low |
2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
37.25 |
|
|
$ |
34.85 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
|
38.90 |
|
|
|
33.50 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
|
37.70 |
|
|
|
33.16 |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
|
39.35 |
|
|
|
35.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
35.89 |
|
|
$ |
32.34 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
|
33.25 |
|
|
|
30.48 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
|
35.00 |
|
|
|
32.01 |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
|
37.40 |
|
|
|
34.49 |
|
|
There is no market for the other registrants common stock, all of which is owned by Southern
Company.
(a)(2) Number of Southern Companys common stockholders of record at December 31, 2007: 102,903
Each of the other registrants have one common stockholder, Southern Company.
(a)(3) Dividends on each registrants common stock are payable at the discretion of their
respective board of directors. The dividends on common stock declared by Southern Company and the
traditional operating companies to their stockholder(s) for the past two years were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registrant |
|
Quarter |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
Southern Company |
|
First |
|
$ |
290,292 |
|
|
$ |
276,442 |
|
|
|
Second |
|
|
303,699 |
|
|
|
287,704 |
|
|
|
Third |
|
|
304,775 |
|
|
|
287,845 |
|
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
306,039 |
|
|
|
288,440 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alabama Power |
|
First |
|
|
116,250 |
|
|
|
110,150 |
|
|
|
Second |
|
|
116,250 |
|
|
|
110,150 |
|
|
|
Third |
|
|
116,250 |
|
|
|
110,150 |
|
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
116,250 |
|
|
|
110,150 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Georgia Power |
|
First |
|
|
172,475 |
|
|
|
157,500 |
|
|
|
Second |
|
|
172,475 |
|
|
|
157,500 |
|
|
|
Third |
|
|
172,475 |
|
|
|
157,500 |
|
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
172,475 |
|
|
|
157,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gulf Power |
|
First |
|
|
18,525 |
|
|
|
17,575 |
|
|
|
Second |
|
|
18,525 |
|
|
|
17,575 |
|
|
|
Third |
|
|
18,525 |
|
|
|
17,575 |
|
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
18,525 |
|
|
|
17,575 |
|
|
Mississippi Power |
|
First |
|
|
16,825 |
|
|
|
16,300 |
|
|
|
Second |
|
|
16,825 |
|
|
|
16,300 |
|
|
|
Third |
|
|
16,825 |
|
|
|
16,300 |
|
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
16,825 |
|
|
|
16,300 |
|
II-1
In 2006 and 2007, Southern Power paid dividends to Southern Company as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Registrant |
|
Quarter |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Southern Power |
|
First |
|
$ |
22.45 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
Second |
|
|
22.45 |
|
|
|
38.9 |
|
|
|
Third |
|
|
22.45 |
|
|
|
19.4 |
|
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
22.45 |
|
|
|
19.4 |
|
The dividend paid per share of Southern Companys common stock was 37.25¢ in the first quarter of
2006 and 38.75¢ for the remaining quarters of 2006 and the first quarter of 2007. For the second,
third, and fourth quarters of 2007, the dividend paid per share of Southern Companys common stock
was 40.25¢.
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power can only pay dividends to Southern Company
out of retained earnings or paid-in-capital.
Southern Powers credit facility contains potential limitations on the payment of common stock
dividends. At December 31, 2007, Southern Power was in compliance with the conditions of this
credit facility and thus had no restrictions on its ability to pay common stock dividends. See Note
8 to the financial statements of Southern Company under Common Stock Dividend Restrictions and
Note 6 to the financial statements of Southern Power under
Dividend Restrictions in Item 8 herein
for additional information regarding these restrictions.
(a)(4) Securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans.
See Part III, Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related
Stockholder Matters under the heading Equity Compensation Plan Information herein.
(b) Use of Proceeds
Not applicable.
(c) Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
None.
Item 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
Southern Company. See SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA, contained herein at
pages II-97 and II-98.
Alabama Power. See SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA, contained herein at pages II-159 and
II-160.
Georgia Power. See SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA, contained herein at pages II-225 and
II-226.
Gulf Power. See SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA, contained herein at pages II-282 and
II-283.
Mississippi Power. See SELECTED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA, contained herein at pages II-343
and II-344.
Southern Power. See SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA, contained herein at
page II-382.
Item 7. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Southern Company. See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS, contained herein at pages II-12 through II-45.
II-2
Alabama Power. See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS, contained herein at pages II-102 through II-122.
Georgia Power. See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS, contained herein at pages II-164 through II-185.
Gulf Power. See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS, contained herein at pages II-230 through II-250.
Mississippi Power. See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS, contained herein at pages II-287 through II-309.
Southern Power. See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS, contained herein at pages II-348 through II-364.
Item 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
See MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS - FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY Market Price Risk
of each of the registrants in Item 7 herein and Note 1 of each of the registrants financial
statements under Financial Instruments in Item 8 herein. See also Note 6 to the financial
statements of Southern Company, each traditional operating company, and Southern Power under
Financial Instruments in Item 8 herein.
II-3
Item 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
INDEX TO 2007 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
The Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
II-9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
II-10 |
|
|
II-11 |
|
|
II-46 |
|
|
II-47 |
|
|
II-48 |
|
|
II-50 |
|
|
II-52 |
|
|
II-52 |
|
|
II-53 |
|
|
|
|
|
Alabama Power: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
II-100 |
|
|
II-101 |
|
|
II-123 |
|
|
II-124 |
|
|
II-125 |
|
|
II-127 |
|
|
II-129 |
|
|
II-129 |
|
|
II-130 |
|
|
|
|
|
Georgia Power: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
II-162 |
|
|
II-163 |
|
|
II-186 |
|
|
II-187 |
|
|
II-188 |
|
|
II-190 |
|
|
II-191 |
|
|
II-191 |
|
|
II-192 |
|
|
|
|
|
Gulf Power: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
II-228 |
|
|
II-229 |
|
|
II-251 |
|
|
II-252 |
|
|
II-253 |
|
|
II-255 |
|
|
II-256 |
|
|
II-256 |
|
|
II-257 |
II-4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
Mississippi Power: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
II-285 |
|
|
II-286 |
|
|
II-310 |
|
|
II-311 |
|
|
II-312 |
|
|
II-314 |
|
|
II-315 |
|
|
II-315 |
|
|
II-316 |
|
|
|
|
|
Southern Power and Subsidiary Companies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
II-346 |
|
|
II-347 |
|
|
II-365 |
|
|
II-366 |
|
|
II-367 |
|
|
II-369 |
|
|
II-369 |
|
|
II-370 |
Item 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
None.
II-5
Item 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Disclosure Controls And Procedures.
As of the end of the period covered by this annual report, Southern Company conducted an evaluation
under the supervision and with the participation of Southern Companys management, including the
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and
operation of the disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Sections 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Based upon this evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer
and the Chief Financial Officer concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures are effective
in alerting them in a timely manner to material information relating to Southern Company (including
its consolidated subsidiaries) required to be included in periodic filings with the SEC.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
(a) Managements Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
Southern Companys Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on
page II-9 of this Form 10-K.
(b) Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm.
The report of Deloitte & Touche LLP, Southern Companys independent registered public accounting
firm, regarding Southern Companys internal control over financial reporting is included on
page II-10 of this Form 10-K.
(c) Changes in internal controls.
There have been no changes in Southern Companys internal control over financial reporting (as such
term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) during
the fourth quarter 2007 that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect
Southern Companys internal control over financial reporting.
Item 9A(T). CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Disclosure Controls And Procedures.
As of the end of the period covered by this annual report, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf
Power, Mississippi Power, and Southern Power conducted separate evaluations under the supervision
and with the participation of each companys management, including the Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Sections 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934). Based upon these evaluations, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial
Officer, in each case, concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures are effective in
alerting them in a timely manner to material information relating to their company (including its
consolidated subsidiaries, if any) required to be included in periodic filings with the SEC.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
(a) Managements Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
Alabama Powers Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on
page II-100 of this Form 10-K.
Georgia Powers Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on
page II-162 of this Form 10-K.
Gulf Powers Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on
page II-228 of this Form 10-K.
II-6
Mississippi Powers Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on
page II-285 of this Form 10-K.
Southern Powers Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting is included on
page II-346 of this Form 10-K.
(b) Changes in internal controls.
There have been no changes in Alabama Powers, Georgia Powers, Gulf Powers, Mississippi Powers,
or Southern Powers internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) during the fourth quarter
2007 that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect Alabama Powers,
Georgia Powers, Gulf Powers, Mississippi Powers, or Southern Powers internal control over
financial reporting.
Item 9B. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
II-7
THE SOUTHERN COMPANY
AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES
FINANCIAL SECTION
II-8
MANAGEMENTS REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Southern Companys management is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate
system of internal control over financial reporting as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
and as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). A control system can provide only reasonable, not
absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
Under managements supervision, an evaluation of the design and effectiveness of Southern Companys
internal control over financial reporting was conducted based on the framework in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that Southern Companys internal
control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2007.
Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as auditors of Southern
Companys financial statements, has issued an attestation report on the effectiveness of Southern
Companys internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007. Deloitte & Touche
LLPs report on Southern Companys internal control over financial reporting is included herein.
/s/ David
M. Ratcliffe
David M. Ratcliffe
Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer
/s/ W. Paul Bowers
W. Paul Bowers
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
February 25, 2008
II-9
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Southern Company
We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of Southern Company and
Subsidiary Companies (the Company) as of December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in
Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission. The Companys management is responsible for maintaining effective internal
control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting (page II-9). Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Companys
internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was
maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal
control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and
evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk,
and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe
that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the
supervision of, the companys principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons
performing similar functions, and effected by the companys board of directors, management, and
other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles. A companys internal control over financial reporting includes
those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable
detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles,
and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with
authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance
regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including the
possibility of collusion or improper management override of controls, material misstatements due to
error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Also, projections of any
evaluation of the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting to future periods
are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions,
or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on the criteria established in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December
31, 2007 of the Company and our report dated February 25, 2008 expressed an unqualified opinion on
those financial statements and included an explanatory paragraph regarding changes in the method of
accounting for uncertainty in income taxes and the method of accounting for the impact of changes
in the timing of income tax cash flows generated by leveraged leases in 2007 and a change in the
method of accounting for the funded status of defined benefit pension and other postretirement
plans in 2006.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 2008
II-10
Consolidated Financial Statements
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Southern Company
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and consolidated statements of
capitalization of Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies (the Company) as of December 31, 2007
and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, common
stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31,
2007. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An
audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements (pages II-46 to II-95) present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies at
December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of
the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America.
As discussed in Notes 3 and 5 to the financial statements, in 2007 the Company changed its method
of accounting for uncertainty in income taxes and its method of accounting for the impact of
changes in the timing of income tax cash flows generated by leveraged leases. As discussed in Note
2 to the financial statements, in 2006 the Company changed its method of accounting for the funded
status of defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), the Companys internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2007, based on the criteria established in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 25,
2008 expressed an unqualified opinion on the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Atlanta, Georgia
February 25, 2008
II-11
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
OVERVIEW
Business Activities
The primary business of Southern Company (the Company) is electricity sales in the Southeast
by the traditional operating companies Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi
Power and Southern Power. The four traditional operating companies are vertically integrated
utilities providing electric service in four Southeastern states. Southern Power constructs,
acquires, and manages generation assets and sells electricity at market-based rates in the
wholesale market.
Many factors affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of Southern Companys electricity
business. These factors include the traditional operating companies ability to maintain a stable
regulatory environment, to achieve energy sales growth, and to effectively manage and secure timely
recovery of rising costs. Each of the traditional operating companies has various regulatory
mechanisms that operate to address cost recovery. Since 2005, the traditional operating companies
have completed a number of regulatory proceedings that provide for the timely recovery of costs.
Appropriately balancing required costs and capital expenditures with customer prices will continue
to challenge the Company for the foreseeable future.
Another major factor is the profitability of the competitive market-based wholesale generating
business and federal regulatory policy, which may impact Southern Companys level of participation
in this market. Southern Power continues to execute its regional strategy through a combination of
acquiring and constructing new power plants and by entering into power purchase agreements (PPAs)
with investor owned utilities, independent power producers, municipalities, and electric
cooperatives. The Company continues to face regulatory challenges related to transmission and
market power issues at the national level.
Southern Companys other business activities include leveraged lease projects, telecommunications,
energy-related services, and an investment in a synthetic fuel producing entity which claimed
federal income tax credits designed to offset its operating losses. The availability of synthetic
fuel tax credits and the Companys investment in these activities ended on December 31, 2007.
Management continues to evaluate the contribution of each of these remaining activities to total
shareholder return and may pursue acquisitions and dispositions accordingly.
Key Performance Indicators
In striving to maximize shareholder value while providing cost-effective energy to more than four
million customers, Southern Company continues to focus on several key indicators. These indicators
include customer satisfaction, plant availability, system reliability, and earnings per share
(EPS), excluding earnings from synthetic fuel investments. Southern Companys financial success is
directly tied to the satisfaction of its customers. Key elements of ensuring customer satisfaction
include outstanding service, high reliability, and competitive prices. Management uses customer
satisfaction surveys and reliability indicators to evaluate the Companys results.
Peak season equivalent forced outage rate (Peak Season EFOR) is an indicator of fossil/hydro plant
availability and efficient generation fleet operations during the months when generation needs are
greatest. The rate is calculated by dividing the number of hours of forced outages by total
generation hours. The fossil/hydro 2007 Peak Season EFOR of 1.60% was better than the target. The
nuclear generating fleet also uses Peak Season EFOR as an indicator of availability and efficient
generation fleet operations during the peak season. The nuclear 2007 Peak Season EFOR of 0.94% was
also better than target. Transmission and distribution system reliability performance is measured
by the frequency and duration of outages. Performance targets for reliability are set internally
based on historical performance, expected weather conditions, and expected capital expenditures.
The performance for 2007 was better than target for these reliability measures.
II-12
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Southern Companys synthetic fuel investments have generated tax credits as a result of synthetic
fuel production. Due to higher oil prices in 2006 and 2007, these tax credits were partially
phased out and one synthetic fuel investment was terminated in 2006. These tax credits were no
longer available after December 31, 2007. Southern Company management uses EPS, excluding earnings
from synthetic fuel investments, to evaluate the performance of Southern Companys ongoing business
activities. Southern Company believes the presentation of earnings and EPS excluding the results
of the synthetic fuel investments also is useful for investors because it provides investors with
additional information for purposes of comparing Southern Companys performance for such periods.
The presentation of this additional information is not meant to be considered a substitute for
financial measures prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Southern Companys 2007 results compared with its targets for some of these key indicators are
reflected in the following chart:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 Target |
|
2007 Actual |
Key Performance Indicator |
|
Performance |
|
Performance |
|
|
Top quartile in |
|
|
Customer
Satisfaction |
|
customer surveys |
|
Top quartile |
Peak Season EFOR fossil/hydro |
|
2.75% or less |
|
|
1.60 |
% |
Peak Season EFOR nuclear |
|
2.00% or less |
|
|
0.94 |
% |
Basic EPS |
|
$ |
2.18 $2.25 |
|
|
$ |
2.29 |
|
EPS, excluding earnings from synthetic
fuel investments |
|
$ |
2.13 $2.18 |
|
|
$ |
2.21 |
|
See RESULTS OF OPERATIONS herein for additional information on the Companys financial performance.
The financial performance achieved in 2007 reflects the continued emphasis that management places
on these indicators as well as the commitment shown by employees in achieving or exceeding
managements expectations.
Earnings
Southern Companys net income was $1.73 billion in 2007, an increase of 10.2% from the prior year.
The higher earnings compared with the prior year were primarily the result of a warm summer and
state regulatory actions. These positive factors were offset in part by higher non-fuel operations
and maintenance expenses, higher interest expense, and higher asset depreciation primarily
associated with increased investment in environmental equipment at generating plants and
transmission and distribution related to maintaining reliability. Net income was $1.57 billion in
2006 and $1.59 billion in 2005, reflecting a 1.1% decrease and a 3.8% increase over the prior year,
respectively. Basic EPS was $2.29 in 2007, $2.12 in 2006, and $2.14 in 2005. Diluted EPS, which
factors in additional shares related to stock options, was $2.28 for 2007, $2.10 for 2006, and
$2.13 for 2005.
Dividends
Southern Company has paid dividends on its common stock since 1948. Dividends paid per share of
common stock were $1.595 in 2007, $1.535 in 2006, and $1.475 in 2005. In January 2008, Southern
Company declared a quarterly dividend of 40.25 cents per share. This is the 241st consecutive
quarter that Southern Company has paid a dividend equal to or higher than the previous quarter.
The Company targets a dividend payout ratio of approximately 70% of net income, excluding earnings
from synthetic fuel investments. For 2007, the actual payout ratio was 72%, excluding earnings
from synthetic fuel investments, and 69.5% overall.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Electricity Business
Southern Companys electric utilities generate and sell electricity to retail and wholesale
customers in the Southeast.
II-13
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
A condensed income statement for the electricity business follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (Decrease) |
|
|
Amount |
|
from Prior Year |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
|
|
|
Electric operating revenues |
|
$ |
15,140 |
|
|
$ |
1,052 |
|
|
$ |
810 |
|
|
$ |
1,813 |
|
|
Fuel |
|
|
5,844 |
|
|
|
701 |
|
|
|
655 |
|
|
|
1,089 |
|
Purchased power |
|
|
515 |
|
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
(188 |
) |
|
|
88 |
|
Other operations and maintenance |
|
|
3,473 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
1,215 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
229 |
|
Taxes other than income taxes |
|
|
738 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
Total electric operating expenses |
|
|
11,785 |
|
|
|
930 |
|
|
|
603 |
|
|
|
1,673 |
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
3,355 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
Other income, net |
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
38 |
|
Interest expense and dividends |
|
|
812 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
Income taxes |
|
|
950 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
1,714 |
|
|
$ |
128 |
|
|
$ |
73 |
|
|
$ |
92 |
|
|
Electric Operating Revenues
Details of electric operating revenues were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Retail prior year |
|
$ |
11,800.6 |
|
|
$ |
11,164.9 |
|
|
$ |
9,732.1 |
|
Estimated change in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rates and pricing |
|
|
161.3 |
|
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
309.0 |
|
Sales growth |
|
|
59.6 |
|
|
|
114.4 |
|
|
|
105.0 |
|
Weather |
|
|
54.0 |
|
|
|
34.9 |
|
|
|
33.8 |
|
Fuel and other cost recovery |
|
|
563.0 |
|
|
|
477.4 |
|
|
|
985.0 |
|
|
Retail current year |
|
|
12,638.5 |
|
|
|
11,800.6 |
|
|
|
11,164.9 |
|
Wholesale revenues |
|
|
1,988.3 |
|
|
|
1,821.7 |
|
|
|
1,667.0 |
|
Other electric operating revenues |
|
|
513.7 |
|
|
|
465.7 |
|
|
|
446.2 |
|
|
Electric operating revenues |
|
$ |
15,140.5 |
|
|
$ |
14,088.0 |
|
|
$ |
13,278.1 |
|
|
Percent change |
|
|
7.5 |
% |
|
|
6.1 |
% |
|
|
15.8 |
% |
|
Retail revenues increased $838 million, $636 million, and $1.4 billion in 2007, 2006, and 2005,
respectively. The significant factors driving these changes are shown in the preceding table. The
increase in rates and pricing in 2007 was primarily due to Alabama Powers increase under its Rate
Stabilization and Equalization Plan (Rate RSE), as ordered by the Alabama Public Service Commission
(PSC). See Note 3 to the financial statements under Alabama Power Retail Regulatory Matters for
additional information. Partially offsetting the 2007 increase was a decrease in contributions
from market-based rates to large commercial and industrial customers at Georgia Power. The 2006
increase in rates and pricing when compared to the prior year was not material. The increase in
rates and pricing in 2005 was primarily due to approval by the Georgia PSC of a retail base rate
increase at Georgia Power. See Energy Sales below for a discussion of changes in the volume of
energy sold, including changes related to sales growth and weather.
Electric rates for the traditional operating companies include provisions to adjust billings for
fluctuations in fuel costs, including the energy component of purchased power costs. Under these
provisions, fuel revenues generally
II-14
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
equal fuel expenses, including the fuel component of purchased power, and do not affect net income.
The traditional operating companies may also have one or more regulatory mechanisms to recover
other costs such as environmental, storm damage, new plants, and PPAs.
Wholesale revenues consist of PPAs with investor-owned utilities and electric cooperatives,
short-term opportunity sales, and unit power sales contracts. Southern Companys average wholesale
contract extends more than 11 years and, as a result, the Company has significantly limited its
remarketing risk.
In 2007, wholesale revenues increased $166 million primarily as a result of a 9.5% increase in the
average cost of fuel per net kilowatt-hour (KWH) generated. Excluding fuel, wholesale revenues
were flat when compared to the prior year.
In 2006, wholesale revenues increased $155 million primarily as a result of a 10.5% increase in the
average cost of fuel per net KWH generated, as well as revenues resulting from new PPAs in 2006.
In addition, Southern Company assumed four PPAs through the acquisitions of Plants DeSoto and Rowan
in June and September 2006, respectively. The 2006 increase was partially offset by a decrease in
short-term opportunity sales.
In 2005, wholesale revenues increased $326 million primarily due to a 26.5% increase in the average
cost of fuel per net KWH generated. In addition, Southern Company entered into new PPAs with 30
electric membership cooperatives (EMCs) and Flint EMC, both beginning in January 2005, and assumed
two PPAs in June 2005 in connection with the acquisition of Plant Oleander.
Short-term opportunity sales are made at market-based rates that generally provide a margin above
the Companys variable cost to produce the energy. Revenues associated with PPAs and opportunity
sales were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Other power sales |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capacity and other |
|
$ |
533 |
|
|
$ |
499 |
|
|
$ |
430 |
|
Energy |
|
|
989 |
|
|
|
841 |
|
|
|
799 |
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,522 |
|
|
$ |
1,340 |
|
|
$ |
1,229 |
|
|
Capacity revenues under unit power sales contracts, principally sales to Florida utilities, reflect
the recovery of fixed costs and a return on investment. Unit power KWH sales decreased 0.8% in
2007 and increased 0.2% and 1.7% in 2006 and 2005, respectively. Fluctuations in oil and natural
gas prices, which are the primary fuel sources for unit power sales customers, influence changes in
these sales. However, because the energy is generally sold at variable cost, these fluctuations
have a minimal effect on earnings. The capacity and energy components of the unit power sales
contracts were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Unit power sales |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capacity |
|
$ |
202 |
|
|
$ |
208 |
|
|
$ |
201 |
|
Energy |
|
|
264 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
237 |
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
466 |
|
|
$ |
482 |
|
|
$ |
438 |
|
|
Energy Sales
Changes in revenues are influenced heavily by the change in the volume of energy sold from year to
year. KWH sales for 2007 and the percent change by year were as follows:
II-15
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
KWHs |
|
Percent Change |
|
|
2007 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(in billions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential |
|
|
53.3 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
% |
|
|
2.5 |
% |
|
|
2.8 |
% |
Commercial |
|
|
54.7 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
Industrial |
|
|
54.7 |
|
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
Other |
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
(7.6 |
) |
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
Total retail |
|
|
163.6 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
Wholesale |
|
|
40.8 |
|
|
|
5.9 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
Total energy sales |
|
|
204.4 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
Retail energy sales in 2007 increased 2.3 billion KWHs as a result of 1.3% customer growth and
favorable weather in 2007 when compared to 2006. The 2007 decrease in industrial sales primarily
resulted from reduced demand and closures within the textile industry, as well as decreased demand
in the primary metals sector and the stone, clay, and glass sector. Retail energy sales in 2006
increased 2.3 billion KWHs as a result of customer growth of 1.7%, sustained economic growth
primarily in the residential and commercial customer classes, and favorable weather in 2006 when
compared to 2005. Retail energy sales in 2005 increased 1.9 billion KWHs as a result of sustained
economic growth and customer growth of 1.2%. Hurricane Katrina dampened customer growth from
previous years and was the primary contributor to the decrease in industrial sales in 2005. In
addition, in 2005, some Georgia Power industrial customers were reclassified from industrial to
commercial to be consistent with the rate structure approved by the Georgia PSC resulting in higher
commercial sales and lower industrial sales in 2005 when compared with 2004.
Wholesale energy sales increased by 2.3 billion KWHs, 1.4 billion KWHs, and 2.5 billion KWHs in
2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. The increase in wholesale energy sales in 2007 was primarily
related to new PPAs acquired by Southern Company through the acquisition of Plant Rowan in
September 2006, as well as new contracts with EnergyUnited Electric Membership Corporation that
commenced in September 2006 and January 2007. An increase in KWH sales under existing PPAs also
contributed to the 2007 increase. The increases in wholesale energy sales in 2006 and 2005 were
related primarily to the new PPAs discussed previously under Electric Operating Revenues.
Fuel and Purchased Power Expenses
Fuel costs constitute the single largest expense for the electric utilities. The mix of fuel
sources for generation of electricity is determined primarily by demand, the unit cost of fuel
consumed, and the availability of generating units. Additionally, the electric utilities purchase
a portion of their electricity needs from the wholesale market. Details of Southern Companys
electricity generated and purchased were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
Total generation (billions of KWHs) |
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
Total purchased power (billions of KWHs) |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
Sources of generation (percent) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coal |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
Nuclear |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Gas |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Hydro |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
Cost of fuel, generated (cents per net KWH) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coal |
|
|
2.61 |
|
|
|
2.40 |
|
|
|
1.93 |
|
Nuclear |
|
|
0.50 |
|
|
|
0.47 |
|
|
|
0.47 |
|
Gas |
|
|
6.64 |
|
|
|
6.63 |
|
|
|
8.52 |
|
|
Average cost of fuel, generated (cents per net KWH) |
|
|
2.89 |
|
|
|
2.64 |
|
|
|
2.39 |
|
Average cost of purchased power (cents per net KWH) |
|
|
7.20 |
|
|
|
6.82 |
|
|
|
8.04 |
|
|
II-16
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
In 2007, fuel and purchased power expenses were $6.4 billion, an increase of $673 million or 11.8%
above 2006 costs. This increase was primarily the result of a $543 million net increase in the
average cost of fuel and purchased power partially resulting from a 51.4% decrease in hydro
generation as a result of a severe drought. Also contributing to this increase was a $130 million
increase related to an increase in net KWHs generated and purchased.
Fuel and purchased power expenses were $5.7 billion in 2006, an increase of $467 million or 8.9%
above the prior year costs. This increase was primarily the result of a $367 million net increase
in the average cost of fuel and purchased power and a $100 million increase related to an increase
in net KWHs generated and purchased.
In 2005, fuel and purchased power expenses were $5.2 billion, an increase of $1.2 billion or 29.1%
above 2004 costs. This increase was the result of a $1.3 billion net increase in the average cost
of fuel and purchased power, partially offset by $67 million related to a decrease in net KWHs
generated and purchased.
While there has been a significant upward trend in the cost of coal and natural gas since 2003,
prices moderated somewhat in 2006 and 2007. Coal prices have been influenced by a worldwide
increase in demand from developing countries, as well as increases in mining and fuel
transportation costs. While demand for natural gas in the United States continued to increase in
2007, natural gas supplies have also risen due to increased production and higher storage levels.
During 2007, uranium prices were volatile and increased over the course of the year due to
increasing long-term demand with primary production levels at approximately 55% to 60% of demand.
Secondary supplies and inventories were sufficient to fill the primary production shortfall.
Fuel expenses generally do not affect net income, since they are offset by fuel revenues under the
traditional operating companies fuel cost recovery provisions. Likewise, Southern Powers PPAs
generally provide that the purchasers are responsible for substantially all of the cost of fuel.
Other Operations and Maintenance Expenses
Other operations and maintenance expenses were $3.5 billion, $3.3 billion, and $3.2 billion,
increasing $183 million, $70 million, and $215 million in 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
Discussion of significant variances for components of other operations and maintenance expenses
follows.
Other production expenses at fossil, hydro, and nuclear plants increased $128 million, $3 million,
and $58 million in 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. Production expenses fluctuate from year to
year due to variations in outage schedules and normal increases in costs. Other production
expenses increased in 2007 primarily due to a $40 million increase related to expenses incurred for
maintenance outages at generating units and a $29 million increase related to new facilities,
mainly costs associated with the write-off of Southern Powers integrated coal gasification
combined cycle (IGCC) project and the acquisitions of Plants DeSoto and Rowan by Southern Power in
June and September 2006, respectively. A $25 million increase related to labor and materials
expenses and a $22 million increase in nuclear refueling costs also contributed to the 2007
increase. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL Construction Projects Integrated Coal Gasification
Combined Cycle herein for additional information regarding the write-off of Southern Powers IGCC
project and Note 1 to the financial statements under Property, Plant, and Equipment for
additional information regarding the amortization of nuclear refueling costs. The 2006 increase in
other production expenses when compared to the prior year was not material. Other production
expenses increased in 2005 due to a $50 million increase related primarily to expenses incurred for
maintenance outages at generating units.
Administrative and general expenses increased $28 million, $29 million, and $73 million in 2007,
2006, and 2005, respectively. Administrative and general expenses increased in 2007 primarily as a
result of a $16 million increase in legal costs and expenses associated with an increase in
employees. Also contributing to the 2007 increase was a
II-17
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
$14 million increase in accrued expenses for the litigation and workers compensation reserve,
partially offset by an $8 million decrease in property damage expense. Administrative and general
expenses increased in 2006 primarily as a result of a $17 million increase in salaries and wages
and a $24 million increase in pension expense, partially offset by a $16 million reduction in
medical expenses. Administrative and general expenses increased in 2005 primarily related to a $33
million increase in employee benefits; a $22 million increase in Sarbanes-Oxley Act compliance
costs, legal costs, and other corporate expenses; and a $9 million increase in property damage
expense.
Transmission and distribution expenses increased $21 million, $30 million, and $60 million in 2007,
2006, and 2005, respectively. Transmission and distribution expenses fluctuate from year to year
due to variations in maintenance schedules and normal increases in costs. Transmission and
distribution expenses increased in 2007 primarily as a result of increases in labor and materials
costs and maintenance associated with additional investment to meet customer growth. Transmission
and distribution expenses increased in 2006 primarily due to expenses associated with recovery of
prior year storm costs through natural disaster recovery clauses and maintenance associated with
additional investment in distribution to meet customer growth. Transmission and distribution
expenses increased in 2005 primarily as a result of $48 million of expenses recorded by Alabama
Power in accordance with an accounting order approved by the Alabama PSC primarily to offset the
costs of Hurricane Ivan and restore the natural disaster reserve. In accordance with the
accounting order, Alabama Power also returned certain regulatory liabilities related to deferred
income taxes to its retail customers; therefore, the combined effect of the accounting order had no
impact on net income. See Note 3 to the financial statements under Storm Damage Cost Recovery
for additional information.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization increased $51 million in 2007 primarily as a result of additional
investments in environmental equipment at generating plants and transmission and distribution
projects mainly at Alabama Power and Georgia Power and an increase in the amortization expense of a
regulatory liability recorded in 2003 in connection with the Mississippi PSCs accounting order on
Plant Daniel capacity. Partially offsetting the 2007 increase was a reduction in amortization
expense due to a Georgia Power regulatory liability related to the levelization of certain
purchased power capacity costs as ordered by the Georgia PSC under the terms of the retail rate
order effective January 1, 2005. See Note 1 to the financial statements under Depreciation and
Amortization for additional information.
Depreciation and amortization increased $27 million in 2006 primarily as a result of the
acquisitions of Plants DeSoto, Rowan, and Oleander in June 2006, September 2006, and June 2005,
respectively, and an increase in the amortization expense of the Mississippi Power regulatory
liability related to Plant Daniel capacity. An increase in depreciation rates at Southern Power
associated with adoption of a new depreciation study also contributed to the 2006 increase.
Partially offsetting the 2006 increase was a reduction in the amortization expense of a Georgia
Power regulatory liability related to the levelization of certain purchased power capacity costs.
Depreciation and amortization increased $229 million in 2005 primarily as a result of additional
plant in service and from the expiration in 2004 of certain provisions related to the amortization
of regulatory liabilities associated with purchased power capacity costs in Georgia Powers retail
rate plan for the three years ended December 31, 2004.
Taxes Other than Income Taxes
Taxes other than income taxes increased $23 million in 2007 primarily as a result of increases in
franchise and municipal gross receipts taxes associated with increases in revenues from energy
sales, partially offset by a decrease in property taxes resulting from the resolution of a dispute
with Monroe County, Georgia. Taxes other than income taxes increased $39 million in 2006 primarily
as a result of increases in franchise and municipal gross receipts taxes associated with increases
in revenues from energy sales, as well as increases in property taxes associated with
II-18
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
additional plant in service. Taxes other than income taxes increased $52 million in 2005 primarily
as a result of increases in franchise and municipal gross receipts taxes associated with increases
in revenues from energy sales.
Other Income, Net
Other income, net increased $68 million in 2007 primarily as a result of a $56 million increase in
allowance for equity funds used during construction related to additional investments in
environmental equipment at generating plants and transmission and distribution projects mainly at
Alabama Power and Georgia Power. The 2006 decrease in other income, net when compared to the prior
year was not material. Other income, net increased $38 million in 2005 primarily as a result of a
$19 million reduction largely related to the disallowance of certain Plant McIntosh costs by the
Georgia PSC in 2004, a $10 million increase related primarily to changes in the value of derivative
transactions, and a $6 million increase in interest income.
Interest Expense and Dividends
Total interest charges and other financing costs increased by $61 million in 2007 primarily as a
result of a $72 million increase associated with $1.2 billion in additional debt and preference
stock outstanding at December 31, 2007 compared to December 31, 2006 and higher interest rates
associated with the issuance of new long-term debt. Also contributing to the 2007 increase was $7
million related to higher average interest rates on existing variable rate debt and $19 million in
other interest costs. These increases were partially offset by $38 million more capitalized
interest as compared to 2006.
Total interest charges and other financing costs increased by $75 million in 2006 primarily due to
a $78 million increase associated with $708 million in additional debt outstanding at December 31,
2006 compared to December 31, 2005 and higher interest rates associated with the issuance of new
long-term debt. Also contributing to the 2006 increase was $7 million associated with higher
average interest rates on existing variable rate debt, partially offset by $6 million more
capitalized interest associated with construction projects and $3 million in lower other interest
costs.
Total interest charges and other financing costs increased by $62 million in 2005 associated with
an additional $863 million in debt outstanding at December 31, 2005 as compared to December 31,
2004 and an increase in average interest rates on variable rate debt. Variable rates on pollution
control bonds are highly correlated with the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association
Municipal Swap Index, which averaged 2.5% in 2005 and 1.2% in 2004. Variable rates on commercial
paper and senior notes are highly correlated with the one-month London Interbank Offer Rate, which
averaged 3.4% in 2005 and 1.5% in 2004. An additional $17 million increase in 2005 was the result
of a lower percentage of interest costs capitalized as construction projects reached completion.
Income Taxes
Income taxes were relatively flat in 2007 as higher pre-tax earnings were largely offset due to a
deduction for a Georgia Power land donation, the tax benefit associated with an increase in
allowance for equity funds used during construction, and an increase in the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code), Section 199 production activities deduction. See Note
5 to the financial statements under Effective Tax Rate for additional information.
Income taxes increased $50 million in 2006 primarily due to higher pre-tax earnings and the impact
of the accounting order approved by the Alabama PSC discussed previously under Other Operations
and Maintenance Expenses. See Note 3 to the financial statements under Storm Damage Cost
Recovery for additional information.
II-19
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Income taxes increased $24 million in 2005 primarily as a result of higher pre-tax earnings,
partially offset by the impact of the accounting order approved by the Alabama PSC discussed above.
Other Business Activities
Southern Companys other business activities include the parent company (which does not allocate
operating expenses to business units), investments in leveraged lease and synthetic fuel projects,
telecommunications, and energy-related services. These businesses are classified in general
categories and may comprise one or more of the following subsidiaries: Southern Company Holdings
invests in various energy-related projects, including leveraged lease and synthetic fuel projects
that receive tax benefits, which contribute significantly to the economic results of these
investments; SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications to the traditional
operating companies and also markets these services to the public and provides fiber cable services
within the Southeast. Southern Companys investment in the synthetic fuel projects ended at
December 31, 2007. A condensed income statement for Southern Companys other business activities
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (Decrease) |
|
|
Amount |
|
from Prior Year |
|
|
2007 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
(in millions) |
Operating revenues |
|
$ |
213 |
|
|
$ |
(55 |
) |
|
$ |
(8 |
) |
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
Other operations and maintenance |
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Taxes other than income taxes |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
11 |
|
|
Operating income/(loss) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Equity in losses of
unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
Leveraged lease income |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
Other income, net |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Income taxes |
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
Net income/(loss) |
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
$ |
(91 |
) |
|
$ |
(33 |
) |
|
Operating Revenues
Southern Companys non-electric operating revenues from these other businesses decreased $55
million in 2007 primarily as a result of a $13 million decrease in revenues at SouthernLINC
Wireless related to lower average revenue per subscriber and fewer subscribers due to increased
competition in the industry. Also contributing to the 2007 decrease was a $14 million decrease in
fuel procurement service revenues following a contract termination and an $11 million decrease in
revenues from Southern Companys energy-related services business. The $8 million decrease in 2006
primarily resulted from a $21 million decrease in revenues at SouthernLINC Wireless related to
lower average revenue per subscriber and lower equipment and accessory sales. The 2006 decrease
was partially offset by a $12 million increase in fuel procurement service revenues. Higher
production and increased fees in the synthetic fuel business contributed to the $12 million
increase in 2005.
Other Operations and Maintenance Expenses
Other operations and maintenance expenses for these other businesses decreased $29 million in 2007
primarily as a result of $11 million of lower production expenses related to the termination of
Southern Companys membership interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities and $8 million
attributed to the wind-down of one of the Companys
II-20
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
energy-related services businesses. Other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $59
million in 2006 primarily as a result of $32 million of lower production expenses related to the
termination of Southern Companys membership interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities, $13
million attributed to the wind-down of one of the Companys energy-related services businesses, and
$7 million of lower expenses resulting from the March 2006 sale of a subsidiary that provided rail
car maintenance services. Other operations and maintenance expenses increased by $12 million in
2005 primarily as a result of $9 million of higher losses for property damage, $2 million in higher
network costs at SouthernLINC Wireless, and an $11 million increase in shared service expenses,
partially offset by the $12.5 million bad debt reserve in 2004 related to additional federal income
taxes and interest Southern Company paid on behalf of Mirant Corporation (Mirant). See FUTURE
EARNINGS POTENTIAL Mirant Matters herein and Note 3 to the financial statements under Mirant
Matters Mirant Bankruptcy for additional information.
Equity in Losses of Unconsolidated Subsidiaries
Southern Company made investments in two synthetic fuel production facilities that generated
operating losses. These investments allowed Southern Company to claim federal income tax credits
that offset these operating losses and made the projects profitable. The 2007 decrease in equity
in losses of unconsolidated subsidiaries was the result of terminating Southern Companys
membership interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities which reduced the amount of the Companys
share of the losses and, therefore, the funding obligation for the year. Also contributing to the
2007 decrease were adjustments related the phase-out of the related federal income tax credits,
partially offset by higher operating expenses due to idled production in 2006 and decreased
production in 2007 in anticipation of exiting the business. The 2006 decrease in equity in losses
of unconsolidated subsidiaries was the result of terminating Southern Companys membership interest
in one of the synthetic fuel entities which reduced the amount of the Companys share of the losses
and, therefore, the funding obligation for the year. The 2006 decrease also resulted from lower
operating expenses while the production facilities at the other synthetic fuel entity were idled
from May to September 2006 due to higher oil prices. The increase in equity in losses of
unconsolidated subsidiaries in 2005 resulted from additional production expenses at the synthetic
fuel production facilities. The net synthetic fuel tax credits resulting from these investments
totaled $36 million in 2007, $65 million in 2006, and $177 million in 2005.
Leveraged Lease Income
Southern Company has several leveraged lease agreements which relate to international and domestic
energy generation, distribution, and transportation assets. Southern Company receives federal
income tax deductions for depreciation and amortization, as well as interest on long-term debt
related to these investments. Leveraged lease income decreased $29 million in 2007 as a result of
the adoption of Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Staff Position No. FAS 13-2,
Accounting for a Change or Projected Change in the Timing of Cash Flows Relating to Income Taxes
Generated by a Leveraged Lease Transaction (FSP 13-2), as well as an expected decline in leveraged
lease income over the terms of the leases. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL Income Tax Matters
Leveraged Lease Transactions herein for further information. The 2006 and 2005 changes in
leveraged lease income when compared to the prior year were not material.
Other Income, Net
Other income, net for these other businesses increased $73 million in 2007 primarily as a result of
a $60 million increase related to changes in the value of derivative transactions in the synthetic
fuel business and a $16 million increase related to the 2006 impairment of investments in the
synthetic fuel entities, partially offset by the release of $6 million in certain contractual
obligations associated with these investments in 2006. The $19 million decrease in other income,
net in 2006 as compared with 2005 primarily resulted from a $25 million decrease related to changes
in the value of derivative transactions in the synthetic fuel business and the previously mentioned
impairment and
II-21
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
release of contractual obligations. The 2005 decrease in other income, net when compared to the
prior year was not material.
Interest Expense
Total interest charges and other financing costs for these other businesses decreased by $27
million in 2007 primarily as a result of $16 million of losses on debt that was reacquired in 2006.
Also contributing to the 2007 decrease was $97 million less debt outstanding at December 31, 2007
compared to December 31, 2006, lower interest rates associated with the issuance of new long-term
debt, and a $4 million decrease in other interest costs. Total interest charges and other
financing costs increased by $48 million in 2006 primarily due to a $19 million increase associated
with $149 million in additional debt outstanding at December 31, 2006 as compared to December 31,
2005 and higher interest rates associated with the issuance of new long-term debt. Also
contributing to the increase were $12 million associated with higher average interest rates on
existing variable rate debt, a $6 million loss on the early redemption of long-term debt payable to
affiliated trusts in January 2006, and a $16 million loss on the repayment of long-term debt
payable to affiliated trusts in December 2006. The 2006 increase was partially offset by $4
million in lower other interest costs. Interest expense increased by $18 million in 2005
associated with an additional $283 million in debt outstanding and a 164 basis point increase in
average interest rates on variable rate debt.
Income Taxes
Income taxes for these other businesses increased $53 million in 2007 primarily as a result of a
$30 million decrease in net synthetic fuel tax credits as a result of terminating Southern
Companys membership interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities in 2006 and increasing the
synthetic fuel tax credit reserves due to an anticipated phase-out of synthetic fuel tax credits
due to higher oil prices. The $136 million increase in income taxes in 2006 as compared with 2005
primarily resulted from a $111 million decrease in net synthetic fuel tax credits as a result of
terminating Southern Companys membership interest in one of the synthetic fuel entities,
curtailing production at the other synthetic fuel entity from May to September 2006, and increasing
the synthetic fuel tax credit reserves due to an anticipated phase-out of synthetic fuel tax
credits due to higher oil prices. See Note 5 to the financial statements under Effective Tax
Rate for further information. The 2005 decrease in income taxes when compared to the prior year
was not material.
Effects of Inflation
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power are subject to rate regulation and party to
long-term contracts that are generally based on the recovery of historical costs. When historical
costs are included, or when inflation exceeds projected costs used in rate regulation or in
market-based prices, the effects of inflation can create an economic loss since the recovery of
costs could be in dollars that have less purchasing power. In addition, the income tax laws are
based on historical costs. While the inflation rate has been relatively low in recent years, it
continues to have an adverse effect on Southern Company because of the large investment in utility
plant with long economic lives. Conventional accounting for historical cost does not recognize
this economic loss nor the partially offsetting gain that arises through financing facilities with
fixed-money obligations such as long-term debt, preferred securities, preferred stock, and
preference stock. Any recognition of inflation by regulatory authorities is reflected in the rate
of return allowed in the traditional operating companies approved electric rates.
II-22
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL
General
The four traditional operating companies operate as vertically integrated utilities providing
electricity to customers within their service areas in the southeastern United States. Prices for
electricity provided to retail customers are set by state PSCs under cost-based regulatory
principles. Prices for wholesale electricity sales, interconnecting transmission lines, and the
exchange of electric power are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).
Retail rates and earnings are reviewed and may be adjusted periodically within certain limitations.
Southern Power continues to focus on long-term capacity contracts, optimized by limited energy
trading activities. See ACCOUNTING POLICIES Application of Critical Accounting Policies and
Estimates Electric Utility Regulation herein and Note 3 to the financial statements for
additional information about regulatory matters.
The results of operations for the past three years are not necessarily indicative of future
earnings potential. The level of Southern Companys future earnings depends on numerous factors
that affect the opportunities, challenges, and risks of Southern Companys primary business of
selling electricity. These factors include the traditional operating companies ability to
maintain a stable regulatory environment that continues to allow for the recovery of all prudently
incurred costs during a time of increasing costs. Other major factors include the profitability of
the competitive wholesale supply business and federal regulatory policy (including the FERCs
market-based rate proceeding), which may impact Southern Companys level of participation in this
market. Future earnings for the electricity business in the near term will depend, in part, upon
growth in energy sales, which is subject to a number of factors. These factors include weather,
competition, new energy contracts with neighboring utilities, energy conservation practiced by
customers, the price of electricity, the price elasticity of demand, and the rate of economic
growth in the service area. In addition, the level of future earnings for the wholesale supply
business also depends on numerous factors including creditworthiness of customers, total generating
capacity available in the Southeast, and the successful remarketing of capacity as current
contracts expire.
Southern Company system generating capacity increased 163 megawatts due to Southern Powers
completion of Plant Oleander Unit 5 in December 2007. In general, Southern Company has constructed
or acquired new generating capacity only after entering into long-term capacity contracts for the
new facilities or to meet requirements of Southern Companys regulated retail markets, both of
which are optimized by limited energy trading activities.
To adapt to a less regulated, more competitive environment, Southern Company continues to evaluate
and consider a wide array of potential business strategies. These strategies may include business
combinations, acquisitions involving other utility or non-utility businesses or properties,
disposition of certain assets, internal restructuring, or some combination thereof. Furthermore,
Southern Company may engage in new business ventures that arise from competitive and regulatory
changes in the utility industry. Pursuit of any of the above strategies, or any combination
thereof, may significantly affect the business operations, risks, and financial condition of
Southern Company.
Environmental Matters
Compliance costs related to the Clean Air Act and other environmental statutes and regulations
could affect earnings if such costs cannot continue to be fully recovered in rates on a timely
basis. Environmental compliance spending over the next several years may exceed amounts estimated.
Some of the factors driving the potential for such an increase are higher commodity costs, market
demand for labor, and scope additions and clarifications. The timing, specific requirements, and
estimated costs could also change as environmental statutes and regulations are adopted or
modified. See Note 3 to the financial statements under Environmental Matters for additional
information.
II-23
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brought a civil action in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries,
including Alabama Power and Georgia Power, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New
Source Review (NSR) provisions of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired
generating facilities. Through subsequent amendments and other legal procedures, the EPA filed a
separate action in January 2001 against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Alabama after Alabama Power was dismissed from the original action. In these lawsuits,
the EPA alleged that NSR violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by
Alabama Power and Georgia Power. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief,
including an order requiring the installation of the best available control technology at the
affected units. The action against Georgia Power has been administratively closed since the
spring of 2001, and the case has not been reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree
between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The
consent decree required Alabama Power to pay $100,000 to resolve the governments claim for a civil
penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable
organization and formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by Alabama Power,
consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006,
the district court in Alabama granted Alabama Powers motion for summary judgment and entered final
judgment in favor of Alabama Power on the EPAs claims related to all of the remaining plants:
Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district courts decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit, and the appeal was stayed by the Appeals Court pending the U.S. Supreme Courts decision
in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy
case in April 2007. On October 5, 2007, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Alabama issued an order in the Alabama Power case indicating a willingness to re-evaluate its
previous decision in light of the Supreme Courts Duke Energy opinion. On December 21, 2007, the
Eleventh Circuit vacated the district courts decision in the Alabama Power case and remanded the
case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme
Courts decision in the Duke Energy case. The final outcome of these matters cannot be determined
at this time.
Southern Company believes that the traditional operating companies complied with applicable laws
and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place.
The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $32,500 per day, per violation
at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in
either of these cases could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of
currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly
require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of
operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated
rates.
The EPA has issued a series of proposed and final revisions to its NSR regulations under the Clean
Air Act, many of which have been subject to legal challenges by environmental groups and states.
In June 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld, in part, the
EPAs revisions to NSR regulations that were issued in December 2002 but vacated portions of those
revisions addressing the exclusion of certain pollution control projects. These regulatory
revisions have been adopted by each of the states within Southern Companys service territory. In
March 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit also vacated an EPA rule
which sought to clarify the scope of the existing routine maintenance, repair, and replacement
exclusion. The EPA has also published proposed rules clarifying the test for determining when an
emissions increase subject to the NSR permitting requirements has occurred. The impact of these
proposed rules will depend on adoption of the final rules by the EPA and the individual state
implementation of such rules, as well as the outcome of any additional legal challenges, and,
therefore, cannot be determined at this time.
II-24
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
In July 2004, attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Companys service
territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed a complaint in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power
companies. A nearly identical complaint was filed by three environmental groups in the same court.
The complaints allege that the companies emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas,
contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law
public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each
defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global
warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then
reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each year for at least a decade. Plaintiffs have
not, however, requested that damages be awarded in connection with their claims. Southern Company
believes these claims are without merit and notes that the complaint cites no statutory or
regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York granted Southern Companys and the other defendants motions to dismiss these
cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in
October 2005, and no decision has been issued. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be
determined at this time.
Environmental Statutes and Regulations
General
Southern Companys operations are subject to extensive regulation by state and federal
environmental agencies under a variety of statutes and regulations governing environmental media,
including air, water, and land resources. Applicable statutes include the Clean Air Act; the Clean
Water Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act; the Emergency Planning & Community
Right-to-Know Act; and the Endangered Species Act. Compliance with these environmental
requirements involves significant capital and operating costs, a major portion of which is expected
to be recovered through existing ratemaking provisions. Through 2007, Southern Company had
invested approximately $4.7 billion in capital projects to comply with these requirements, with
annual totals of $1.5 billion, $661 million, and $423 million for 2007, 2006, and 2005,
respectively. The Company expects that capital expenditures to assure compliance with existing and
new statutes and regulations will be an additional $1.8 billion, $1.5 billion, and $0.6 billion for
2008, 2009, and 2010, respectively. The Companys compliance strategy is impacted by changes to
existing environmental laws, statutes, and regulations, the cost, availability, and existing
inventory of emission allowances, and the Companys fuel mix. Environmental costs that are known
and estimable at this time are included in capital expenditures discussed under FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND LIQUIDITY Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations herein.
Compliance with possible additional federal or state legislation or regulations related to global
climate change, air quality, or other environmental and health concerns could also significantly
affect Southern Company. New environmental legislation or regulations, or changes to existing
statutes or regulations, could affect many areas of Southern Companys operations; however, the
full impact of any such changes cannot be determined at this time.
Air Quality
Compliance with the Clean Air Act and resulting regulations has been and will continue to be a
significant focus for Southern Company. Through 2007, the Company had spent approximately $3.8
billion in reducing sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions
and in monitoring emissions pursuant to the Clean Air Act. Additional controls have been announced
and are currently being installed at several plants to further reduce SO2,
NOx, and mercury emissions, maintain compliance with existing regulations, and meet new
requirements.
II-25
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
In 2004, the EPA designated nonattainment areas under an eight-hour ozone standard. Areas within
Southern Companys service area that were designated as nonattainment under the eight-hour ozone
standard included Macon (Georgia), Jefferson and Shelby Counties, near and including Birmingham
(Alabama), and a 20-county area within metropolitan Atlanta. The Macon area was redesignated by
the EPA as an attainment area on September 19, 2007. The Birmingham area was redesignated to
attainment by the EPA in June 2006, and the EPA subsequently approved a maintenance plan for the
area to address future exceedances of the standard. In December 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the first set of implementation rules adopted in 2004
and remanded the rules to the EPA for further refinement. On June 20, 2007, the EPA proposed
additional revisions to the current eight-hour ozone standard which, if enacted, could result in
designation of new nonattainment areas within Southern Companys service territory. The EPA has
requested comment and is expected to publish final revisions to the standard in 2008. The impact
of this decision, if any, cannot be determined at this time and will depend on subsequent legal
action and/or future nonattainment designations and state regulatory plans.
During 2005, the EPAs fine particulate matter nonattainment designations became effective for
several areas within Southern Companys service area in Alabama and Georgia. State plans for
addressing the nonattainment designations under the existing standard are required by April 2008
and could require further reductions in SO2 and NOx emissions from power
plants. In September 2006, the EPA published a final rule which increased the stringency of the
24-hour average fine particulate matter air quality standard. In December 2007, state agencies
recommended to the EPA that Jefferson County (Birmingham) and Etowah County (Gadsden) in Alabama
and an area encompassing all or parts of 22 counties within metropolitan Atlanta in Georgia be
designated as nonattainment for this standard. The EPA plans to designate nonattainment areas
based on the new standard by December 2009. The ultimate outcome of this matter depends on the
development and submittal of the required state plans and resolution of pending legal challenges
and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.
The EPA issued the final Clean Air Interstate Rule in March 2005. This cap-and-trade rule
addresses power plant SO2 and NOx emissions that were found to contribute to
nonattainment of the eight-hour ozone and fine particulate matter standards in downwind states.
Twenty-eight eastern states, including each of the states within Southern Companys service area,
are subject to the requirements of the rule. The rule calls for additional reductions of
NOx and/or SO2 to be achieved in two phases, 2009/2010 and 2015. States in
the Southern Company service territory have completed plans to implement this program. These
reductions will be accomplished by the installation of additional emission controls at Southern
Companys coal-fired facilities and/or by the purchase of emission allowances from a cap-and-trade
program.
The Clean Air Visibility Rule (formerly called the Regional Haze Rule) was finalized in July 2005.
The goal of this rule is to restore natural visibility conditions in certain areas (primarily
national parks and wilderness areas) by 2064. The rule involves (1) the application of Best
Available Retrofit Technology (BART) to certain sources built between 1962 and 1977 and (2) the
application of any additional emissions reductions which may be deemed necessary for each
designated area to achieve reasonable progress by 2018 toward the natural conditions goal.
Thereafter, for each 10-year planning period, additional emissions reductions will be required to
continue to demonstrate reasonable progress in each area during that period. For power plants, the
Clean Air Visibility Rule allows states to determine that the Clean Air Interstate Rule satisfies
BART requirements for SO2 and NOx. Extensive studies were performed for each
of the Companys affected units to demonstrate that additional particulate matter controls are not
necessary under BART. At the request of the State of Georgia, additional analyses were performed
for certain units in Georgia to demonstrate that no additional SO2 controls were
required. Additional analyses will be required for one of the Companys plants in Florida. States
are currently completing implementation plans that contain strategies for BART and any other
measures required to achieve the first phase of reasonable progress.
The impacts of the eight-hour ozone and the fine particulate matter nonattainment designations and
the Clean Air Visibility Rule on the Company will depend on the development and implementation of
rules at the state level. For
II-26
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
example, while it has implemented the Clean Air Interstate Rule, in June 2007 the State of Georgia
approved a multi-pollutant rule that will require plant-specific emission controls on all but the
smallest generating units in Georgia according to a schedule set forth in the rule. The rule is
designed to ensure reductions in emissions of SO2, NOx, and mercury in
Georgia. Therefore, the full effects of these regulations on the Company cannot be determined at
this time. The Company has developed and continually updates a comprehensive environmental
compliance strategy to comply with the continuing and new environmental requirements discussed
above. As part of this strategy, the Company plans to install additional SO2 and
NOx emission controls within the next several years to assure continued compliance with
applicable air quality requirements.
In March 2005, the EPA published the final Clean Air Mercury Rule, a cap-and-trade program for the
reduction of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. The rule sets caps on mercury
emissions to be implemented in two phases, 2010 and 2018, and provides for an emission allowance
trading market. The final Clean Air Mercury Rule was challenged in the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit. The petitioners alleged that the EPA was not authorized to
establish a cap-and-trade program for mercury emissions and instead the EPA must establish maximum
achievable control technology standards for coal-fired electric utility steam generating units. On
February 8, 2008, the court issued its ruling and vacated the Clean Air Mercury Rule. The
Companys overall environmental compliance strategy relies primarily on a combination of
SO2 and NOx controls to reduce mercury emissions. Any significant changes in the
strategy will depend on the outcome of any appeals and/or future federal and state rulemakings.
Future rulemakings could require emission reductions more stringent than required by the Clean Air
Mercury Rule.
Water Quality
In July 2004, the EPA published its final technology-based regulations under the Clean Water Act
for the purpose of reducing impingement and entrainment of fish, shellfish, and other forms of
aquatic life at existing power plant cooling water intake structures. The rules require baseline
biological information and, perhaps, installation of fish protection technology near some intake
structures at existing power plants. On January 25, 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit overturned and remanded several provisions of the rule to the EPA for revisions. Among
other things, the court rejected the EPAs use of cost-benefit analysis and suggested some ways
to incorporate cost considerations. The full impact of these regulations will depend on subsequent
legal proceedings, further rulemaking by the EPA, the results of studies and analyses performed as
part of the rules implementation, and the actual requirements established by state regulatory
agencies and, therefore, cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Remediation
Southern Company must comply with other environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling
and disposal of waste and release of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and
regulations, the traditional operating companies could incur substantial costs to clean up
properties. The traditional operating companies conduct studies to determine the extent of any
required cleanup and have recognized in their respective financial statements the costs to clean up
known sites. Amounts for cleanup and ongoing monitoring costs were not material for any year
presented. The traditional operating companies may be liable for some or all required cleanup
costs for additional sites that may require environmental remediation. See Note 3 to the financial
statements under Environmental Matters Environmental Remediation for additional information.
Global Climate Issues
Federal legislative proposals that would impose mandatory requirements related to greenhouse gas
emissions continue to be considered in Congress. The ultimate outcome of these proposals cannot be
determined at this time; however, mandatory restrictions on the Companys greenhouse gas emissions
could result in significant additional
II-27
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement and replacement decisions and results of
operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated
rates.
In April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act to
regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles. The EPA is currently developing its
response to this decision. Regulatory decisions that will follow from this response may have
implications for both new and existing stationary sources, such as power plants. The ultimate
outcome of these rulemaking activities cannot be determined at this time; however, as with the
current legislative proposals, mandatory restrictions on the Companys greenhouse gas emissions
could result in significant additional compliance costs that could affect future unit retirement
and replacement decisions and results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such
costs are not recovered through regulated rates.
In addition, some states are considering or have undertaken actions to regulate and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. For example, on July 13, 2007, the Governor of the State of Florida
signed three executive orders addressing reduction of greenhouse gas emissions within the state,
including statewide emission reduction targets beginning in 2017. Included in the orders is a
directive to the Florida Secretary of Environmental Protection to develop rules adopting maximum
allowable emissions levels of greenhouse gases for electric utilities, consistent with the
statewide emission reduction targets, and a request to the Florida PSC to initiate rulemaking
requiring utilities to produce at least 20% of their electricity from renewable sources. The
impact of these orders on Southern Company will depend on the development, adoption, and
implementation of any rules governing greenhouse gas emissions, and the ultimate outcome cannot be
determined at this time.
International climate change negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change also continue. Current efforts focus on a potential successor to the Kyoto Protocol for
the post 2008 through 2012 timeframe. The outcome and impact of the international negotiations
cannot be determined at this time.
The Company continues to evaluate its future energy and emission profiles and is participating in
voluntary programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to help develop and advance technology
to reduce emissions.
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
Each of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power has authorization from the FERC to
sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices.
Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Companys generation dominance
within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is
not an issue in the proceeding. Any new market-based rate sales by any subsidiary of Southern
Company in Southern Companys retail service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period
that ended in May 2006 could be subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In late June and July 2007, hearings were held in this proceeding and the presiding administrative
law judge issued an initial decision on November 9, 2007 regarding the methodology to be used in
the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this
generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a
final order could require the traditional operating companies and Southern Power to charge
cost-based rates for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory,
which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates, and could also result in refunds of up to
$19.7
II-28
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
million, plus interest. Southern Company and its subsidiaries believe that there is no meritorious
basis for this proceeding and are vigorously defending themselves in this matter.
On June 21, 2007, the FERC issued its final rule regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC
generally retained its current market-based rate standards. The impact of this order and its
effect on the generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined.
Intercompany Interchange Contract
The Companys generation fleet in its retail service territory is operated under the Intercompany
Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the FERC. In May 2005, the FERC initiated a new
proceeding to examine (1) the provisions of the IIC among the traditional operating companies,
Southern Power, and Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), as agent, under the terms of which the
power pool of Southern Company is operated, (2) whether any parties to the IIC have violated the
FERCs standards of conduct applicable to utility companies that are transmission providers, and
(3) whether Southern Companys code of conduct defining Southern Power as a system company rather
than a marketing affiliate is just and reasonable. In connection with the formation of Southern
Power, the FERC authorized Southern Powers inclusion in the IIC in 2000. The FERC also previously
approved Southern Companys code of conduct.
In October 2006, the FERC issued an order accepting a settlement resolving the proceeding subject
to Southern Companys agreement to accept certain modifications to the settlements terms and
Southern Company notified the FERC that it accepted the modifications. The modifications largely
involve functional separation and information restrictions related to marketing activities
conducted on behalf of Southern Power. Southern Company filed with the FERC in November 2006 a
compliance plan in connection with the order. On April 19, 2007, the FERC approved, with certain
modifications, the plan submitted by Southern Company. Implementation of the plan is not expected
to have a material impact on the Companys financial statements. On November 19, 2007, Southern
Company notified the FERC that the plan had been implemented and the FERC division of audits
subsequently began an audit pertaining to compliance implementation and related matters, which is
ongoing.
Generation Interconnection Agreements
In November 2004, generator company subsidiaries of Tenaska, Inc. (Tenaska), as counterparties to
three previously executed interconnection agreements with subsidiaries of Southern Company, filed
complaints at the FERC requesting that the FERC modify the agreements and that those Southern
Company subsidiaries refund a total of $19 million previously paid for interconnection facilities.
No other similar complaints are pending with the FERC.
On January 19, 2007, the FERC issued an order granting Tenaskas requested relief. Although the
FERCs order required the modification of Tenaskas interconnection agreements, under the
provisions of the order, Southern Company determined that no refund was payable to Tenaska.
Southern Company requested rehearing asserting that the FERC retroactively applied a new principle
to existing interconnection agreements. Tenaska requested rehearing of FERCs methodology for
determining the amount of refunds. The requested rehearings were denied, and Southern Company and
Tenaska have appealed the orders to the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia. The final
outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
PSC Matters
Alabama Power
In October 2005, the Alabama PSC approved a revision to the Rate Stabilization and Equalization
Plan (Rate RSE) requested by Alabama Power. Effective January 2007, Rate RSE adjustments are based
on forward-looking
II-29
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
information for the applicable upcoming calendar year. Rate adjustments for any two-year period,
when averaged together, cannot exceed 4% per year and any annual adjustment is limited to 5%.
Rates remain unchanged when the retail return on common equity (ROE) is projected to be between 13%
and 14.5%. If Alabama Powers actual retail ROE is above the allowed equity return range, customer
refunds will be required; however, there is no provision for additional customer billings should
the actual retail ROE fall below the allowed equity return range. The Rate RSE increase for 2008
is 3.24%, or $147 million annually, and was effective in January 2008. Under the terms of Rate
RSE, the maximum increase for 2009 cannot exceed 4.76%. See Note 3 to the financial statements
under Alabama Power Retail Regulatory Matters for further information.
Georgia Power
In December 2007, the Georgia PSC approved the retail rate plan for the years 2008 through 2010
(2007 Retail Rate Plan). Under the 2007 Retail Rate Plan, Georgia Powers earnings will continue
to be evaluated against a retail ROE range of 10.25% to 12.25%. Two-thirds of any earnings above
12.25% will be applied to rate refunds with the remaining one-third applied to an environmental
compliance cost recovery (ECCR) tariff. Georgia Power has agreed that it will not file for a
general base rate increase during this period unless its projected retail ROE falls below 10.25%.
Retail base rates increased by approximately $99.7 million effective January 1, 2008 to provide for
cost recovery of transmission, distribution, generation, and other investments, as well as
increased operating costs. In addition, the ECCR tariff was implemented to allow for the recovery
of costs for required environmental projects mandated by state and federal regulations. The ECCR
tariff increased rates by approximately $222 million effective January 1, 2008. Georgia Power is
required to file a general rate case by July 1, 2010, in response to which the Georgia PSC would be
expected to determine whether the 2007 Retail Rate Plan should be continued, modified, or
discontinued. See Note 3 to the financial statements under Georgia Power Retail Regulatory
Matters for additional information.
Fuel Cost Recovery
The traditional operating companies each have established fuel cost recovery rates approved by
their respective state PSCs. Over the past several years, the traditional operating companies have
continued to experience higher than expected fuel costs for coal, natural gas, and uranium. The
traditional operating companies continuously monitor the under recovered fuel cost balance in light
of these higher fuel costs. Each of the traditional operating companies received approval in 2006
and/or 2007 to increase its fuel cost recovery factor to recover existing under recovered amounts
as well as projected future costs. At December 31, 2007, the amount of under recovered fuel costs
included in the balance sheets was $1.1 billion compared to $1.3 billion at December 31, 2006.
Fuel cost recovery revenues as recorded on the financial statements are adjusted for differences in
actual recoverable costs and amounts billed in current regulated rates. Accordingly, changing the
billing factor has no significant effect on the Companys revenues or net income, but does impact
annual cash flow. Based on their respective state PSC orders, a portion of the under recovered
regulatory clause revenues for Alabama Power and Georgia Power was reclassified from current assets
to deferred charges and other assets in the balance sheets. See Note 1 to the financial statements
under Revenues and Note 3 to the financial statements under Alabama Power Retail Regulatory
Matters and Georgia Power Retail Regulatory Matters for additional information.
Storm Damage Cost Recovery
Each traditional operating company maintains a reserve to cover the cost of damages from major
storms to its transmission and distribution lines and generally the cost of uninsured damages to
its generation facilities and other property. In addition, each of the traditional operating
companies has been authorized by its state PSC to defer the portion of the major storm restoration
costs that exceeded the balance in its storm damage reserve account. As of December 31, 2007, the
under recovered balance in Southern Companys storm damage reserve accounts totaled
II-30
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
approximately $43 million, of which approximately $40 million and $3 million, respectively, are
included in the balance sheets herein under Other Current Assets and Other Regulatory Assets.
See Notes 1 and 3 to the financial statements under Storm Damage Reserves and Storm Damage Cost
Recovery, respectively, for additional information on these reserves. The final outcome of these
matters cannot now be determined.
Mirant Matters
Mirant was an energy company with businesses that included independent power projects and energy
trading and risk management companies in the U.S. and selected other countries. It was a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Southern Company until its initial public offering in October 2000. In
April 2001, Southern Company completed a spin-off to its shareholders of its remaining ownership,
and Mirant became an independent corporate entity.
In July 2003, Mirant and certain of its affiliates filed for voluntary reorganization under Chapter
11 of the Bankruptcy Code. In January 2006, Mirants plan of reorganization became effective, and
Mirant emerged from bankruptcy. As part of the plan, Mirant transferred substantially all of its
assets and its restructured debt to a new corporation that adopted the name Mirant Corporation
(Reorganized Mirant). Southern Company has certain contingent liabilities associated with
guarantees of contractual commitments made by Mirants subsidiaries discussed in Note 7 to the
financial statements under Guarantees and with various lawsuits discussed in Note 3 to the
financial statements under Mirant Matters.
In December 2004, as a result of concluding an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) audit for the tax
years 2000 and 2001, Southern Company paid approximately $39 million in additional tax and interest
related to Mirant tax items and filed a claim in Mirants bankruptcy case for that amount. Through
December 2007, Southern Company received from the IRS approximately $36 million in refunds related
to Mirant. Southern Company believes it has a right to recoup the $39 million tax payment owed by
Mirant from such tax refunds. As a result, Southern Company intends to retain the tax refunds and
reduce its claim against Mirant for the payment of Mirant taxes by the amount of such refunds. MC
Asset Recovery, a special purpose subsidiary of Reorganized Mirant, has objected to and sought to
equitably subordinate the Southern Company tax claim in its fraudulent transfer litigation against
Southern Company. Southern Company has reserved the approximately $3 million amount remaining with
respect to its Mirant tax claim.
If Southern Company is ultimately required to make any additional payments either with respect to
the IRS audit or its contingent obligations under guarantees of Mirant subsidiaries, Mirants
indemnification obligation to Southern Company for these additional payments, if allowed, would
constitute unsecured claims against Mirant, entitled to stock in Reorganized Mirant. See Note 3 to
the financial statements under Mirant Matters Mirant Bankruptcy.
In June 2005, Mirant, as a debtor in possession, and The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors
of Mirant Corporation filed a complaint against Southern Company in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for
the Northern District of Texas, which was amended in July 2005, February 2006, May 2006, and March
2007. In January 2006, MC Asset Recovery was substituted as plaintiff. The fourth amended
complaint (the complaint) alleges that Southern Company caused Mirant to engage in certain
fraudulent transfers and to pay illegal dividends to Southern Company prior to the spin-off. The
complaint also seeks to recharacterize certain advances from Southern Company to Mirant for
investments in energy facilities from debt to equity. The complaint further alleges that Southern
Company is liable to Mirants creditors for the full amount of Mirants liability and that Southern
Company breached its fiduciary duties to Mirant and its creditors, caused Mirant to breach
fiduciary duties to its creditors, and aided and abetted breaches of fiduciary duties by Mirants
directors and officers. The complaint also seeks recoveries under theories of restitution, unjust
enrichment, and alter ego. In addition, the complaint alleges a claim under the Federal Debt
Collection Procedure Act (FDCPA) to void certain transfers from Mirant to Southern Company. MC
Asset
II-31
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Recovery claims to have standing to assert violations of the FDCPA and to recover property on
behalf of the Mirant debtors estates. The complaint seeks monetary damages in excess of $2
billion plus interest, punitive damages, attorneys fees, and costs. Finally, the complaint
includes an objection to Southern Companys pending claims against Mirant in the Bankruptcy Court
(which relate to reimbursement under the separation agreements of payments such as income taxes,
interest, legal fees, and other guarantees described in Note 7 to the financial statements) and
seeks equitable subordination of Southern Companys claims to the claims of all other creditors.
Southern Company served an answer to the complaint in April 2007.
In February 2006, the Companys motion to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia was granted. In May 2006, Southern Company filed a motion for summary
judgment seeking entry of judgment against the plaintiff as to all counts in the complaint. In
December 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted in part and
denied in part the motion. As a result, certain breach of fiduciary duty claims alleged in earlier
versions of the complaint were barred; all other claims may proceed. Southern Company believes
there is no meritorious basis for the claims in the complaint and is vigorously defending itself in
this action. See Note 3 to the financial statements under Mirant Matters MC Asset Recovery
Litigation for additional information. The ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be determined
at this time.
Mirant Securities Litigation
In November 2002, Southern Company, certain former and current senior officers of Southern Company,
and 12 underwriters of Mirants initial public offering were added as defendants in a class action
lawsuit that several Mirant shareholders originally filed against Mirant and certain Mirant
officers in May 2002. Several other similar lawsuits filed subsequently were consolidated into
this litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The amended
complaint is based on allegations related to alleged improper energy trading and marketing
activities involving the California energy market, alleged false statements and omissions in
Mirants prospectus for its initial public offering and in subsequent public statements by Mirant,
and accounting-related issues previously disclosed by Mirant. The lawsuit purports to include
persons who acquired Mirant securities between September 26, 2000 and September 5, 2002.
In July 2003, the court dismissed all claims based on Mirants alleged improper energy trading and
marketing activities involving the California energy market. The other claims do not allege any
improper trading and marketing activity, accounting errors, or material misstatements or omissions
on the part of Southern Company but seek to impose liability on Southern Company based on
allegations that Southern Company was a control person as to Mirant prior to the spin-off date.
Southern Company filed an answer to the consolidated amended class action complaint in September
2003. Plaintiffs have also filed a motion for class certification.
During Mirants Chapter 11 proceeding, the securities litigation was stayed, with the exception of
limited discovery. Since Mirants plan of reorganization has become effective, the stay has been
lifted. In March 2006, the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration requesting that the court
vacate that portion of its July 2003 order dismissing the plaintiffs claims based upon Mirants
alleged improper energy trading and marketing activities involving the California energy market.
Southern Company and the other defendants have opposed the plaintiffs motion. On March 6, 2007,
the court granted plaintiffs motion for reconsideration, reinstated the California energy market
claims, and granted in part and denied in part defendants motion to compel certain class
certification discovery. On March 21, 2007, defendants filed renewed motions to dismiss the
California energy claims on grounds originally set forth in their 2003 motions to dismiss, but
which were not addressed by the court. On July 27, 2007, certain defendants, including Southern
Company, filed motions for reconsideration of the courts denial of a motion seeking dismissal of
certain federal securities laws claims based upon, among other things, certain alleged errors
included in financial statements issued by Mirant. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be
determined at this time.
II-32
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
The plaintiffs have also stated that they intend to request that the court grant leave for them to
amend the complaint to add allegations based upon claims asserted against Southern Company in the
MC Asset Recovery litigation.
Under certain circumstances, Southern Company will be obligated under its Bylaws to indemnify the
four current and/or former Southern Company officers who served as directors of Mirant at the time
of its initial public offering through the date of the spin-off and who are also named as
defendants in this lawsuit. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Income Tax Matters
Leveraged Lease Transactions
Southern Company undergoes audits by the IRS for each of its tax years. The IRS has completed its
audits of Southern Companys consolidated federal income tax returns for all years prior to 2004.
The IRS challenged Southern Companys deductions related to three international lease transactions
(SILO or sale-in-lease-out transactions), in connection with its audits of Southern Companys 2000
through 2003 tax returns. In the third quarter 2006, Southern Company paid the full amount of the
disputed tax and the applicable interest on the SILO issue for tax years 2000 and 2001 and filed a
claim for refund which was denied by the IRS. The disputed tax amount was $79 million and the
related interest approximately $24 million for these tax years. This payment, and the subsequent
IRS disallowance of the refund claim, closed the issue with the IRS and Southern Company initiated
litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia for a complete refund of
tax and interest paid for the 2000 and 2001 tax years. The IRS also challenged the SILO deductions
for the tax years 2002 and 2003. The estimated amount of disputed tax and interest for these tax
years was approximately $83 million and $15 million, respectively. The tax and interest for these
tax years was paid to the IRS in the fourth quarter 2006. Southern Company has accounted for both
payments in 2006 as deposits. For tax years 2000 through 2007, Southern Company has claimed
approximately $330 million in tax benefits related to these SILO transactions challenged by the
IRS. These tax benefits relate to timing differences and do not impact total net income. Southern
Company believes these transactions are valid leases for U.S. tax purposes and the related
deductions are allowable. Southern Company is continuing to pursue resolution of these matters;
however, the ultimate outcome cannot now be determined. In addition, the U.S. Senate is currently
considering legislation that would disallow tax benefits after December 31, 2007 for SILO losses
and other international leveraged lease transactions (such as lease-in-lease-out transactions).
The ultimate impact on Southern Companys net income and cash flow will be dependent on the outcome
of the pending litigation and proposed legislation, but could be significant, and potentially
material.
FSP 13-2 amended FASB Statement No. 13, Accounting for Leases to require recalculation of the
rate of return and the allocation of income whenever the projected timing of the income tax cash
flows generated by a leveraged lease is revised. Southern Company adopted FSP 13-2 effective
January 1, 2007. The initial adoption required Southern Company to recognize a cumulative effect
through retained earnings. Any future changes in the underlying lease assumptions that will change
the projected or actual income tax cash flows will result in an additional recalculation of the net
investment in the leases and will be recorded currently in income. See ACCOUNTING POLICIES New
Accounting Standards Leveraged Lease Transactions herein and Note 3 to the financial statements
under Income Tax Matters herein for further details.
Bonus Depreciation
On February 13, 2008, President Bush signed the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 (Stimulus Act) into
law. The Stimulus Act includes a provision that allows 50% bonus depreciation for certain property
acquired in 2008 and placed in service in 2008 or, in certain limited cases, 2009. Southern
Company is currently assessing the financial implications of the Stimulus Act; however, the
ultimate impact cannot be determined at this time.
II-33
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Georgia State Income Tax Credits
Georgia Powers 2005 through 2007 income tax filings for the State of Georgia include state income
tax credits for increased activity through Georgia ports. Georgia Power has also filed similar
claims for the years 2002 through 2004. The Georgia Department of Revenue has not responded to
these claims. On July 24, 2007, Georgia Power filed a complaint in the Superior Court of Fulton
County to recover the credits claimed for the years 2002 through 2004. If allowed, these claims
could have a significant, possibly material, positive effect on Southern Companys net income. If
Georgia Power is not successful, payment of the related state tax could have a significant,
possibly material, negative effect on Southern Companys cash flow. The ultimate outcome of this
matter cannot now be determined.
Internal Revenue Code Section 199 Domestic Production Deduction
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 created a tax deduction for a portion of income attributable
to U.S. production activities as defined in the Internal Revenue Code Section 199 (production
activities deduction). The deduction is equal to a stated percentage of qualified production
activities net income. The percentage is phased in over the years 2005 through 2010 with a 3% rate
applicable to the years 2005 and 2006, a 6% rate applicable for years 2007 through 2009, and a 9%
rate applicable for all years after 2009. See Note 5 to the financial statements under Effective
Tax Rate for additional information.
Construction Projects
Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle
In December 2005, Southern Power and the Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC) executed definitive
agreements for development of a 285-megawatt IGCC project in Orlando, Florida. The definitive
agreements provided that Southern Power would own at least 65% of the gasifier portion of the IGCC
project. OUC would own the remainder of the gasifier portion and 100% of the combined cycle
portion of the IGCC project. Southern Power signed cooperative agreements with the DOE that
provided up to $293.8 million in grant funding for the gasification portion of this project. The
IGCC project was expected to begin commercial operation in 2010. Due to continuing uncertainty
surrounding potential state regulations relating to greenhouse gas emissions, Southern Power and
OUC mutually agreed to terminate the construction of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project in
November 2007. Southern Power will continue construction of the gas-fired combined cycle
generating facility under a fixed price, long-term contract for engineering, procurement, and
construction services. The Company recorded an after-tax loss of approximately $10.7 million in
the fourth quarter of 2007 related to the cancellation of the gasifier portion of the IGCC project.
In June 2006, Mississippi Power filed an application with the United States Department of Energy
(DOE) for certain tax credits available to projects using clean coal technologies under the Energy
Policy Act of 2005. The proposed project is an advanced coal gasification facility located in
Kemper County, Mississippi that would use locally mined lignite coal. The proposed 693-megawatt
plant is expected to require an approximate investment of $1.5 billion, excluding the mine costs,
and is expected to be completed in 2013. The DOE subsequently certified the project and in
November 2006 the IRS allocated Internal Revenue Code tax credits to Mississippi Power of $133
million. The utilization of these credits is dependent upon meeting the certification requirements
for the project under the Internal Revenue Code. The plant would use an air-blown IGCC technology
that generates power from low-rank coals and coals with high moisture or high ash content. These
coals, which include lignite, make up half the proven U.S. and worldwide coal reserves.
Mississippi Power is undertaking a feasibility assessment of the project which could take up to two
years. Approval by various regulatory agencies, including the Mississippi PSC, will also be
required if the project proceeds. The Mississippi PSC has authorized Mississippi Power to create a
regulatory asset for the approved retail portion of the costs associated with the generation
resource planning, evaluation, and screening
II-34
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
activities up to approximately $23.8 million ($16 million for the retail portion). The retail
portion of these costs will be charged to and remain as a regulatory asset until the Mississippi
PSC determines the prudence and ultimate recovery, which decision is expected in January 2009.
The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined.
Nuclear
In August 2006, as part of a potential expansion of Plant Vogtle, Georgia Power and Southern
Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC) filed an application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) for an early site permit (ESP) on behalf of the owners of Plant Vogtle. In addition, Georgia
Power and SNC notified the NRC of their intent to apply for a combined construction and operating
license (COL) in 2008. Ownership agreements have been signed with each of the existing Plant
Vogtle co-owners. See Note 4 to the financial statements for additional information on these
co-owners. In June 2006, the Georgia PSC approved an accounting order that would allow Georgia
Power to defer for future recovery the ESP and COL costs, of which Georgia Powers portion is
estimated to total approximately $51 million. At December 31, 2007, approximately $28.4 million is
included in deferred charges and other assets. No final decision has been made regarding actual
construction. Any new generation resource must be certified by the Georgia PSC in a separate
proceeding.
Southern Company also is participating in NuStart Energy Development, LLC (NuStart Energy), a
broad-based nuclear industry consortium formed to share the cost of developing a COL and the
related NRC review. NuStart Energy was organized to complete detailed engineering design work and
to prepare COL applications for two advanced reactor designs. COLs for the two reactor designs were
submitted to the NRC during the fourth quarter of 2007. The COLs ultimately are expected to be
transferred to one or more of the consortium companies; however, at this time, none of them have
committed to build a new nuclear plant.
Southern Company is also exploring other possibilities relating to nuclear power projects, both on
its own or in partnership with other utilities. The final outcome of these matters cannot now be
determined.
Nuclear Relicensing
In January 2002, the NRC granted Georgia Power a 20-year extension of the licenses for both units
at Plant Hatch which permits the operation of Units 1 and 2 until 2034 and 2038, respectively.
Georgia Power filed an application with the NRC in June 2007 to extend the licenses for Plant
Vogtle Units 1 and 2 for an additional 20 years. Georgia Power anticipates the NRC may make a
decision regarding the license extension for Plant Vogtle as early as 2009.
Other Matters
Southern Company is involved in various other matters being litigated, regulatory matters, and
certain tax-related issues that could affect future earnings. In addition, Southern Company is
subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. Southern
Companys business activities are subject to extensive governmental regulation related to public
health and the environment. Litigation over environmental issues and claims of various types,
including property damage, personal injury, common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of
environmental requirements such as opacity and air and water quality standards, has increased
generally throughout the United States. In particular, personal injury claims for damages caused
by alleged exposure to hazardous materials have become more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such
pending or potential litigation against Southern Company and its subsidiaries cannot be predicted
at this time; however, for current proceedings not specifically reported herein, management does
not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising from such current
II-35
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
proceedings would have a material adverse effect on Southern Companys financial statements. See
Note 3 to the financial statements for information regarding material issues.
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Southern Company prepares its consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States. Significant accounting policies are described
in Note 1 to the financial statements. In the application of these policies, certain estimates are
made that may have a material impact on Southern Companys results of operations and related
disclosures. Different assumptions and measurements could produce estimates that are significantly
different from those recorded in the financial statements. Senior management has discussed the
development and selection of the critical accounting policies and estimates described below with
the Audit Committee of Southern Companys Board of Directors.
Electric Utility Regulation
Southern Companys traditional operating companies, which comprise approximately 91% of Southern
Companys total earnings for 2007, are subject to retail regulation by their respective state PSCs
and wholesale regulation by the FERC. These regulatory agencies set the rates the traditional
operating companies are permitted to charge customers based on allowable costs. As a result, the
traditional operating companies apply FASB Statement No. 71, Accounting for the Effects of Certain
Types of Regulation (SFAS No. 71), which requires the financial statements to reflect the effects
of rate regulation. Through the ratemaking process, the regulators may require the inclusion of
costs or revenues in periods different than when they would be recognized by a non-regulated
company. This treatment may result in the deferral of expenses and the recording of related
regulatory assets based on anticipated future recovery through rates or the deferral of gains or
creation of liabilities and the recording of related regulatory liabilities. The application of
SFAS No. 71 has a further effect on the Companys financial statements as a result of the estimates
of allowable costs used in the ratemaking process. These estimates may differ from those actually
incurred by the traditional operating companies; therefore, the accounting estimates inherent in
specific costs such as depreciation, nuclear decommissioning, and pension and postretirement
benefits have less of a direct impact on the Companys results of operations than they would on a
non-regulated company.
As reflected in Note 1 to the financial statements, significant regulatory assets and liabilities
have been recorded. Management reviews the ultimate recoverability of these regulatory assets and
liabilities based on applicable regulatory guidelines and accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States. However, adverse legislative, judicial, or regulatory actions could
materially impact the amounts of such regulatory assets and liabilities and could adversely impact
the Companys financial statements.
Contingent Obligations
Southern Company and its subsidiaries are subject to a number of federal and state laws and
regulations, as well as other factors and conditions that potentially subject them to
environmental, litigation, income tax, and other risks. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL herein and
Note 3 to the financial statements for more information regarding certain of these contingencies.
Southern Company periodically evaluates its exposure to such risks and records reserves for those
matters where a loss is considered probable and reasonably estimable in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles. The adequacy of reserves can be significantly affected by external
events or conditions that can be unpredictable; thus, the ultimate outcome of such matters could
materially affect Southern Companys financial statements. These events or conditions include the
following:
II-36
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
Changes in existing state or federal regulation by governmental authorities having
jurisdiction over air quality, water quality, control of toxic substances, hazardous and solid
wastes, and other environmental matters. |
|
|
|
Changes in existing income tax regulations or changes in IRS or state revenue department
interpretations of existing regulations. |
|
|
|
Identification of additional sites that require environmental remediation or the filing of
other complaints in which Southern Company or its subsidiaries may be asserted to be a
potentially responsible party. |
|
|
|
Identification and evaluation of other potential lawsuits or complaints in which Southern
Company or its subsidiaries may be named as a defendant. |
|
|
|
Resolution or progression of existing matters through the legislative process, the court
systems, the IRS, the FERC, or the EPA. |
Unbilled Revenues
Revenues related to the sale of electricity are recorded when electricity is delivered to
customers. However, the determination of KWH sales to individual customers is based on the
reading of their meters, which is performed on a systematic basis throughout the month. At the
end of each month, amounts of electricity delivered to customers, but not yet metered and billed,
are estimated. Components of the unbilled revenue estimates include total KWH territorial supply,
total KWH billed, estimated total electricity lost in delivery, and customer usage. These
components can fluctuate as a result of a number of factors including weather, generation
patterns, and power delivery volume and other operational constraints. These factors can be
unpredictable and can vary from historical trends. As a result, the overall estimate of unbilled
revenues could be significantly affected, which could have a material impact on the Companys
results of operations.
Leveraged Leases
FASB Staff Position No. FAS 13-2, Accounting for a Change or Projected Change in the Timing of
Cash Flows Relating to Income Taxes Generated by a Leveraged Lease Transaction (FSP 13-2) amended
FASB Statement No. 13, Accounting for Leases to require recalculation of the rate of return and
the allocation of income whenever the projected timing of the income tax cash flows generated by a
leveraged lease is revised. Southern Company adopted FSP 13-2 effective January 1, 2007. The
initial adoption required Southern Company to record a cumulative effect to retained earnings. Any
future changes in the underlying lease assumptions, such as the expected resolution date of the
ongoing SILO litigation, which will change the projected or actual income tax cash flows will
result in an additional recalculation of the net investment in the leases and will be recorded
currently in income. See FUTURE EARNINGS POTENTIAL Income Tax Matters Leveraged Lease
Transactions above and Note 3 to the financial statements under Income Tax Matters herein for
further details.
New Accounting Standards
Income Taxes
On January 1, 2007, Southern Company adopted FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes (FIN 48), which requires companies to determine whether it is more
likely than not that a tax position will be sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing
authorities before any part of the benefit can be recorded in the financial statements. It also
provides guidance on the recognition, measurement, and classification of income tax uncertainties,
along with any related interest and penalties. The provisions of FIN 48 were applied to all tax
positions beginning January 1, 2007. The impact on Southern Companys financial
II-37
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
statements was a reduction to beginning 2007 retained earnings of approximately $15 million related
to Southern Companys SILO transactions. See Note 5 to the financial statements for additional
information.
Leveraged Leases
Effective January 1, 2007, Southern Company adopted FSP 13-2. The cumulative effect of initially
adopting FSP 13-2 was recorded as a reduction to beginning retained earnings. For the LILO
(lease-in-lease-out) transaction settled with the IRS in February 2005, the cumulative effect of
adopting FSP 13-2 was a $17 million reduction in retained earnings. With respect to Southern
Companys SILO transactions, the adoption of FSP 13-2 reduced retained earnings by $108 million.
The adjustments to retained earnings are non-cash charges and will be recognized as income over the
remaining terms of the affected leases. The adoption of FSP 13-2 also resulted in a reduction to
net income of approximately $15 million during 2007. Any future changes in the projected or actual
income tax cash flows will result in an additional recalculation of the net investment in the
leases and will be recorded currently in income.
Pensions and Other Postretirement Plans
On December 31, 2006, Southern Company adopted FASB Statement No. 158, Employers Accounting for
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans (SFAS No. 158), which requires recognition
of the funded status of its defined benefit postretirement plans in the balance sheets.
Additionally, SFAS No. 158 will require Southern Company to change the measurement date for its
defined benefit postretirement plan assets and obligations from September 30 to December 31
beginning with the year ending December 31, 2008. See Note 2 to the financial statements for
additional information.
Fair Value Measurement
The FASB issued FASB Statement No. 157, Fair Value Measurements (SFAS No. 157) in September 2006.
SFAS No. 157 provides guidance on how to measure fair value where it is permitted or required
under other accounting pronouncements. SFAS No. 157 also requires additional disclosures about
fair value measurements. Southern Company adopted SFAS No. 157 in its entirety on January 1, 2008,
with no material effect on its financial condition or results of operations.
Fair Value Option
In February 2007, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 159, Fair Value Option for Financial Assets
and Financial Liabilities Including an Amendment of FASB Statement No. 115 (SFAS No. 159).
This standard permits an entity to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other
items at fair value. Southern Company adopted SFAS No. 159 on January 1, 2008, with no material
effect on its financial condition or results of operations.
Business Combinations
In December 2007, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 141 (revised 2007), Business Combinations
(SFAS No. 141R). SFAS No. 141R, when adopted, will significantly change the accounting for business
combinations, specifically the accounting for contingent consideration, contingencies, acquisition
costs, and restructuring costs. Southern Company plans to adopt SFAS No. 141R on January 1, 2009.
It is likely that the adoption of SFAS No. 141R will have a significant impact on the accounting
for any business combinations completed by Southern Company after January 1, 2009.
In December 2007, the FASB issued FASB Statement No. 160, Non-controlling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements (SFAS No. 160). SFAS No. 160 amends Accounting Research
Bulletin No. 51, Consolidated
II-38
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Financial Statements to establish accounting and reporting standards for the non-controlling
(minority) interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It clarifies that
a non-controlling interest in a subsidiary should be reported as equity in the consolidated
financial statements and establishes a single method of accounting for changes in a parents
ownership interest in a subsidiary that do not result in deconsolidation. Southern Company plans to
adopt SFAS No. 160 on January 1, 2009. Southern Company is currently assessing its impact, if any.
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND LIQUIDITY
Overview
Southern Companys financial condition remained stable at December 31, 2007. Net cash provided from
operating activities totaled $3.4 billion, an increase of $575 million as compared to 2006. The
increase was primarily due to an increase in net income as previously discussed, an increase in
cash collections from previously deferred fuel and storm damage costs, and a reduction in cash
outflows compared to the previous year in fossil fuel inventory. In 2006, net cash provided from
operating activities increased over the previous year by $290 million primarily as a result of a
decrease in under recovered storm restoration costs, a decrease in accounts payable from year-end
2005 amounts that included substantial hurricane-related expenditures, partially offset by an
increase in fossil fuel inventory. In 2005, net cash provided from operating activities totaled
$2.5 billion, a decrease of $165 million as compared to 2004 primarily due to higher fuel costs at
the traditional operating companies, partially offset by increases in base rates and fuel recovery
rates.
Net cash used for investing activities in 2007 totaled $3.7 billion primarily due to property
additions to utility plant of $3.5 billion. In 2006, net cash used for investing activities was
$2.8 billion primarily due to property additions to utility plant of $3.0 billion, partially offset
by proceeds from the sale of Southern Company Gas LLC and the receipt by Mississippi Power of
capital grant proceeds related to Hurricane Katrina. In 2005, net cash used for investing
activities was $2.6 billion primarily due to property additions to utility plant of $2.4 billion.
Net cash provided from financing activities totaled $348 million in 2007 primarily due to
replacement of short-term debt with longer term financing and cash raised from common stock
programs. In 2006 and 2005, net cash used for financing activities was $21 million and $67
million, respectively.
Significant balance sheet changes in 2007 include an increase in long-term debt of $1.6 billion
primarily to replace short-term debt and to provide funds for the Companys continuous construction
program. Balance sheet changes also include an increase in property, plant, and equipment of $2.2
billion and an increase in prepaid pension assets of $820 million with a corresponding increase in
other regulatory liabilities.
At the end of 2007, the closing price of Southern Companys common stock was $38.75 per share,
compared with book value of $16.23 per share. The market-to-book value ratio was 239% at the end
of 2007, compared with 242% at year-end 2006.
Southern Company, each of the traditional operating companies, and Southern Power have received
investment grade ratings from the major rating agencies with respect to debt, preferred securities,
preferred stock, and/or preference stock. SCS has an investment grade corporate credit rating.
Sources of Capital
Southern Company intends to meet its future capital needs through internal cash flow and external
security issuances. Equity capital can be provided from any combination of the Companys stock
plans, private placements, or public offerings. The amount and timing of additional equity capital
to be raised in 2008, as well as in subsequent years, will be contingent on Southern Companys
investment opportunities.
II-39
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
The traditional operating companies and Southern Power plan to obtain the funds required for
construction and other purposes from sources similar to those used in the past, which were
primarily from operating cash flows, security issuances, term loans, and short-term borrowings.
However, the type and timing of any financings, if needed, will depend upon prevailing market
conditions, regulatory approval, and other factors. The issuance of securities by the traditional
operating companies is generally subject to the approval of the applicable state PSC. In addition,
the issuance of all securities by Mississippi Power and Southern Power and short-term securities by
Georgia Power is generally subject to regulatory approval by the FERC. Additionally, with respect
to the public offering of securities, Southern Company and certain of its subsidiaries file
registration statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Securities Act
of 1933, as amended (1933 Act). The amounts of securities authorized by the appropriate regulatory
authorities, as well as the amounts, if any, registered under the 1933 Act, are continuously
monitored and appropriate filings are made to ensure flexibility in the capital markets.
Southern Company, each traditional operating company, and Southern Power obtain financing
separately without credit support from any affiliate. See Note 6 to the financial statements under
Bank Credit Arrangements for additional information. The Southern Company system does not
maintain a centralized cash or money pool. Therefore, funds of each company are not commingled
with funds of any other company.
Southern Companys current liabilities frequently exceed current assets because of the continued
use of short-term debt as a funding source to meet cash needs as well as scheduled maturities of
long-term debt. To meet short-term cash needs and contingencies, Southern Company has substantial
cash flow from operating activities and access to the capital markets, including commercial paper
programs, to meet liquidity needs.
At December 31, 2007, Southern Company and its subsidiaries had approximately $201 million of cash
and cash equivalents and $4.1 billion of unused credit arrangements with banks, of which $811
million expire in 2008 and $3.3 billion expire in 2012. Approximately $79 million of the credit
facilities expiring in 2008 allow for the execution of term loans for an additional two-year
period, and $500 million allow for the execution of one-year term loans. Most of these
arrangements contain covenants that limit debt levels and typically contain cross default
provisions that are restricted only to the indebtedness of the individual company. Southern
Company and its subsidiaries are currently in compliance with all such covenants. See Note 6 to
the financial statements under Bank Credit Arrangements for additional information.
Financing Activities
During 2007, Southern Company and its subsidiaries issued $3.4 billion of senior notes, $456
million of obligations related to tax-exempt bonds, and $470 million of preference stock. Interest
rate hedges of $1.4 billion notional amount were settled at a gain of $9 million related to the
issuances. The security issuances were used to redeem $2.6 billion of long-term debt, to reduce
short-term indebtedness, to fund Southern Companys ongoing construction program, and for general
corporate purposes.
Subsequent to December 31, 2007, Alabama Power issued $300 million of senior notes. The proceeds
from the sale of the senior notes were used to repay a portion of outstanding short-term
indebtedness and for other general corporate purposes, including Alabama Powers continuous
construction program.
Off-Balance Sheet Financing Arrangements
In 2001, Mississippi Power began the initial 10-year term of a lease agreement for a combined cycle
generating facility built at Plant Daniel for approximately $370 million. In 2003, the generating
facility was acquired by Juniper Capital L.P. (Juniper), a limited partnership whose investors are
unaffiliated with Mississippi Power. Simultaneously, Juniper entered into a restructured lease
agreement with Mississippi Power. Juniper has also entered into leases with other parties
unrelated to Mississippi Power. The assets leased by Mississippi Power comprise less than 50% of
Junipers assets. Mississippi Power is not required to consolidate the leased assets and
II-40
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
related liabilities, and the lease with Juniper is considered an operating lease. The lease also
provides for a residual value guarantee, approximately 73% of the acquisition cost, by Mississippi
Power that is due upon termination of the lease in the event that Mississippi Power does not renew
the lease or purchase the assets and that the fair market value is less than the unamortized cost
of the assets. See Note 7 to the financial statements under Operating Leases for additional
information.
Credit Rating Risk
Southern Company does not have any credit arrangements that would require material changes in
payment schedules or terminations as a result of a credit rating downgrade. There are certain
contracts that could require collateral, but not accelerated payment, in the event of a credit
rating change to BBB and Baa2, or BBB- or Baa3 or below. These contracts are primarily for
physical electricity purchases and sales. At December 31, 2007, the maximum potential collateral
requirements at a BBB and Baa2 rating were approximately $9 million and at a BBB- or Baa3 rating
were approximately $297 million. At December 31, 2007, the maximum potential collateral
requirements at a rating below BBB- or Baa3 were approximately $1.0 billion. Generally, collateral
may be provided by a Southern Company guaranty, letter of credit, or cash.
Southern Companys operating subsidiaries are also party to certain agreements that could require
collateral and/or accelerated payment in the event of a credit rating change to below investment
grade for Alabama Power and/or Georgia Power. These agreements are primarily for natural gas and
power price risk management activities. At December 31, 2007, Southern Companys total exposure to
these types of agreements was approximately $15 million.
Market Price Risk
Southern Company is exposed to market risks, primarily commodity price risk and interest rate risk.
To manage the volatility attributable to these exposures, the Company nets the exposures to take
advantage of natural offsets and enters into various derivative transactions for the remaining
exposures pursuant to the Companys policies in areas such as counterparty exposure and risk
management practices. Company policy is that derivatives are to be used primarily for hedging
purposes and mandates strict adherence to all applicable risk management policies. Derivative
positions are monitored using techniques including, but not limited to, market valuation, value at
risk, stress testing, and sensitivity analysis.
To mitigate future exposure to a change in interest rates, the Company enters into forward starting
interest rate swaps and other derivatives that have been designated as hedges. Derivatives
outstanding at December 31, 2007 have a notional amount of $505 million and are related to
anticipated debt issuances over the next two years. The weighted average interest rate on $3.4
billion of long-term variable interest rate exposure that has not been hedged at January 1, 2008
was 4.5%. On January 8, 2008, Georgia Power converted $115 million of floating rate pollution
control bonds to a fixed interest rate, reducing the Companys exposure to $3.3 billion. Beginning
in February 2008, Georgia Power and Alabama Power hedged a total of $601 million and $576 million,
respectively, of floating rate exposure, further reducing the Companys long-term variable interest
rate exposure to $2.1 billion. If Southern Company sustained a 100 basis point change in interest
rates for all unhedged variable rate long-term debt, the change would affect annualized interest
expense by approximately $33.7 million at January 1, 2008. Subsequent to the recently completed
transactions, a 100 basis point change in interest rates for all unhedged variable rate long-term
debt would affect annualized interest expense by approximately $22.2 million. For further
information, see Notes 1 and 6 to the financial statements under Financial Instruments.
Of the Companys remaining $2.1 billion of variable interest rate exposure, approximately $1.1
billion relates to tax-exempt auction rate pollution control bonds. Recent weakness in the auction
markets has resulted in failed auctions during February 2008 of some of the $1.1 billion auction
rate securities which results in significantly higher interest
II-41
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
rates
during the failed auctions period. The Company has sent notice of
conversion of $946 million
of these auction rate securities to alternative interest rate determination methods and plans to
remarket all remaining auction rate securities in a timely manner. None of the securities are
insured or backed by letters of credit that would require approval of a guarantor or security
provider. It is not expected that the higher rates as a result of the weakness in the auction
markets will be material.
Due to cost-based rate regulations, the traditional operating companies have limited exposure to
market volatility in interest rates, commodity fuel prices, and prices of electricity. In
addition, Southern Powers exposure to market volatility in commodity fuel prices and prices of
electricity is limited because its long-term sales contracts generally shift substantially all fuel
cost responsibility to the purchaser. To mitigate residual risks relative to movements in
electricity prices, the traditional operating companies enter into fixed-price contracts for the
purchase and sale of electricity through the wholesale electricity market and, to a lesser extent,
into financial hedge contracts for natural gas purchases. The traditional operating companies have
implemented fuel-hedging programs at the instruction of their respective state PSCs.
The changes in fair value of energy-related derivative contracts and year-end valuations were as
follows at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in Fair Value |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Contracts beginning of year |
|
$ |
(82 |
) |
|
$ |
101 |
|
Contracts realized or settled |
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
New contracts at inception |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in valuation techniques |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current period changes(a) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(276 |
) |
|
Contracts end of year |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
(82 |
) |
|
(a) |
|
Current period changes also include the changes in fair value of new contracts entered into
during the period, if any. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Source of 2007 Year-End |
|
|
Valuation Prices |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Maturity |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Year 1 |
|
1-3 Years |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Actively quoted |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
|
$ |
10 |
|
External sources |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
Models and other methods |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contracts end of year |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
Unrealized gains and losses from mark-to-market adjustments on derivative contracts related to the
traditional operating companies fuel hedging programs are recorded as regulatory assets and
liabilities. Realized gains and losses from these programs are included in fuel expense and are
recovered through the traditional operating companies fuel cost recovery clauses. In addition,
unrealized gains and losses on energy-related derivatives used by Southern Power to hedge
anticipated purchases and sales are deferred in other comprehensive income. Gains and losses on
derivative contracts that are not designated as hedges are recognized in the statements of income
as incurred. At December 31, 2007, the fair value gains/(losses) of energy-related derivative
contracts were reflected in the financial statements as follows:
II-42
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Regulatory assets, net |
|
$ |
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
1 |
|
Net income |
|
|
3 |
|
|
Total fair value |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
Unrealized pre-tax gains and losses from energy-related derivative contracts recognized in income
were not material for any year presented.
Southern Company is exposed to market price risk in the event of nonperformance by counterparties
to the energy-related derivative contracts. Southern Companys policy is to enter into agreements
with counterparties that have investment grade credit ratings by Moodys and Standard & Poors or
with counterparties who have posted collateral to cover potential credit exposure. Therefore,
Southern Company does not anticipate market risk exposure from nonperformance by the
counterparties. For additional information, see Notes 1 and 6 to the financial statements under
Financial Instruments.
To reduce Southern Companys exposure to changes in the value of synthetic fuel tax credits, which
were impacted by changes in oil prices, the Company entered into derivative transactions indexed to
oil prices. Because these transactions are not designated as hedges, the gains and losses are
recognized in the statements of income as incurred. For 2007, the fair value gain recognized in
income for mark to market transactions was $27 million. For 2006 and 2005, the fair value losses
recognized in income for mark to market transactions were $32 million and $7 million, respectively.
For further information, see Notes 1 and 6 to the financial statements under Financial
Instruments.
Capital Requirements and Contractual Obligations
The construction program of Southern Company is currently estimated to be $4.5 billion for 2008,
$4.8 billion for 2009, and $4.3 billion for 2010. Environmental expenditures included in these
estimated amounts are $1.8 billion, $1.5 billion, and $0.6 billion for 2008, 2009, and 2010,
respectively. Actual construction costs may vary from these estimates because of changes in such
factors as: business conditions; environmental statutes and regulations; nuclear plant regulations;
FERC rules and regulations; load projections; the cost and efficiency of construction labor,
equipment, and materials; and the cost of capital. In addition, there can be no assurance that
costs related to capital expenditures will be fully recovered.
As a result of NRC requirements, Alabama Power and Georgia Power have external trust funds for
nuclear decommissioning costs; however, Alabama Power currently has no additional funding
requirements. For additional information, see Note 1 to the financial statements under Nuclear
Decommissioning.
In addition, as discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, Southern Company provides
postretirement benefits to substantially all employees and funds trusts to the extent required by
the traditional operating companies respective regulatory commissions.
Other funding requirements related to obligations associated with scheduled maturities of long-term
debt and preferred securities, as well as the related interest, derivative obligations, preferred
and preference stock dividends, leases, and other purchase commitments are as follows. See Notes
1, 6, and 7 to the financial statements for additional information.
II-43
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Contractual Obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009- |
|
2011- |
|
After |
|
Uncertain |
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
2010 |
|
2012 |
|
2012 |
|
Timing(e) |
|
Total |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Long-term debt(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal |
|
$ |
1,053 |
|
|
$ |
900 |
|
|
$ |
1,909 |
|
|
$ |
11,353 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
15,215 |
|
Interest |
|
|
805 |
|
|
|
1,479 |
|
|
|
1,398 |
|
|
|
10,985 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,667 |
|
Preferred stock(b) |
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125 |
|
Preferred and preference stock dividends(c) |
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
355 |
|
Other derivative obligations(d) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
Interest |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
Operating leases |
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
597 |
|
Unrecognized tax benefits and interest(e) |
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
295 |
|
Purchase commitments(f) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital(g) |
|
|
4,275 |
|
|
|
8,779 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,054 |
|
Limestone(h) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
305 |
|
Coal |
|
|
3,413 |
|
|
|
3,766 |
|
|
|
1,359 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,221 |
|
Nuclear fuel |
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
358 |
|
|
|
313 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,014 |
|
Natural gas(i) |
|
|
1,735 |
|
|
|
1,773 |
|
|
|
948 |
|
|
|
3,530 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,986 |
|
Purchased power |
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
1,656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,650 |
|
Long-term service agreements(j) |
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
1,784 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,273 |
|
Trusts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nuclear decommissioning |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77 |
|
Postretirement benefits(k) |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
12,345 |
|
|
$ |
18,179 |
|
|
$ |
6,840 |
|
|
$ |
31,558 |
|
|
$ |
108 |
|
|
$ |
69,030 |
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
All amounts are reflected based on final maturity dates. Southern Company and its
subsidiaries plan to continue to retire higher-cost securities and replace these obligations
with lower-cost capital if market conditions permit. Variable rate interest obligations are
estimated based on rates as of January 1, 2008, as reflected in the statements of
capitalization. Fixed rates include, where applicable, the effects of interest rate
derivatives employed to manage interest rate risk. |
|
(b) |
|
On October 26, 2007, Alabama Power announced the redemption on January 1, 2008 of 1,250
shares of Flexible Money Market Class A Preferred Stock (Series 2003A), Cumulative, Par Value
$1 Per Share (Stated Capital $100,000 Per Share). |
|
(c) |
|
Preferred and preference stock do not mature; therefore, amounts are provided for the next five years only. |
|
(d) |
|
For additional information, see Notes 1 and 6 to the financial statements. |
|
(e) |
|
The timing related to the $108 million in unrecognized tax benefits and interest payments in
individual years beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably and reliably estimated due to
uncertainties in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions. Of this $108
million, $71 million is expected to represent cash payments. See Notes 3 and 5 to the
financial statements for additional information. |
|
(f) |
|
Southern Company generally does not enter into non-cancelable commitments for other
operations and maintenance expenditures. Total other operations and maintenance expenses for
2007, 2006, and 2005 were $3.7 billion, $3.5 billion, and $3.5 billion, respectively. |
|
(g) |
|
Southern Company forecasts capital expenditures over a three-year period. Amounts represent
current estimates of total expenditures excluding those amounts related to contractual
purchase commitments for nuclear fuel. At December 31, 2007, significant purchase commitments
were outstanding in connection with the construction program. |
|
(h) |
|
As part of Southern Companys program to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions from certain of its
coal plants, the traditional operating companies are constructing certain equipment and have
entered into various long-term commitments for the procurement of limestone to be used in such
equipment. |
|
(i) |
|
Natural gas purchase commitments are based on various indices at the time of delivery.
Amounts reflected have been estimated based on the New York Mercantile Exchange future prices
at December 31, 2007. |
|
(j) |
|
Long-term service agreements include price escalation based on inflation indices. |
|
(k) |
|
Southern Company forecasts postretirement trust contributions over a three-year period. No
contributions related to Southern Companys pension trust are currently expected during this
period. See Note 2 to the financial statements for additional information related to the
pension and postretirement plans, including estimated benefit payments. Certain benefit
payments will be made through the related trusts. Other benefit payments will be made from
Southern Companys corporate assets. |
II-44
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
Southern Companys 2007 Annual Report contains forward-looking statements. Forward-looking
statements include, among other things, statements concerning the strategic goals for the wholesale
business, customer growth, storm damage cost recovery and repairs, fuel cost recovery,
environmental regulations and expenditures, earnings growth, dividend payout ratios, access to
sources of capital, projections for postretirement benefit trust contributions, financing
activities, completion of construction projects, impacts of adoption of new accounting rules, and
estimated construction and other expenditures. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be
identified by terminology such as may, will, could, should, expects, plans,
anticipates, believes, estimates, projects, predicts, potential, or continue or the
negative of these terms or other similar terminology. There are various factors that could cause
actual results to differ materially from those suggested by the forward-looking statements;
accordingly, there can be no assurance that such indicated results will be realized. These factors
include:
|
|
the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory change, including legislative
and regulatory initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility
industry, implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, environmental laws including
regulation of water quality and emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon, soot, or
particulate matter and other substances, and also changes in tax and other laws and
regulations to which Southern Company and its subsidiaries are subject, as well as changes in
application of existing laws and regulations; |
|
|
|
current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings, or inquiries,
including the pending EPA civil actions against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, FERC
matters, IRS audits, and Mirant matters; |
|
|
|
the effects, extent, and timing of the entry of additional competition in the markets in
which Southern Companys subsidiaries operate; |
|
|
|
variations in demand for electricity, including those relating to weather, the general
economy, population, and business growth (and declines), and the effects of energy
conservation measures; |
|
|
|
available sources and costs of fuel; |
|
|
|
effects of inflation; |
|
|
|
ability to control costs; |
|
|
|
investment performance of Southern Companys employee benefit plans; |
|
|
|
advances in technology; |
|
|
|
state and federal rate regulations and the impact of pending and future rate cases and
negotiations, including rate actions relating to fuel and storm restoration cost recovery; |
|
|
|
the performance of projects undertaken by the non-utility businesses and the success of
efforts to invest in and develop new opportunities; |
|
|
|
internal restructuring or other restructuring options that may be pursued; |
|
|
|
potential business strategies, including acquisitions or dispositions of assets or
businesses, which cannot be assured to be completed or beneficial to Southern Company or its
subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
the ability of counterparties of Southern Company and its subsidiaries to make payments as
and when due; |
|
|
|
the ability to obtain new short- and long-term contracts with neighboring utilities; |
|
|
|
the direct or indirect effect on Southern Companys business resulting from terrorist
incidents and the threat of terrorist incidents; |
|
|
|
interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing
efforts, including Southern Companys and its subsidiaries credit ratings; |
|
|
|
the ability of Southern Company and its subsidiaries to obtain additional generating capacity
at competitive prices; |
|
|
|
catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, hurricanes, droughts,
pandemic health events such as an avian influenza, or other similar occurrences; |
|
|
|
the direct or indirect effects on Southern Companys business resulting from incidents
similar to the August 2003 power outage in the Northeast; |
|
|
|
the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard setting bodies; and |
|
|
|
other factors discussed elsewhere herein and in other reports (including the Form 10-K) filed
by the Company from time to time with the SEC. |
Southern Company expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.
II-45
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail revenues |
|
$ |
12,639 |
|
|
$ |
11,801 |
|
|
$ |
11,165 |
|
Wholesale revenues |
|
|
1,988 |
|
|
|
1,822 |
|
|
|
1,667 |
|
Other electric revenues |
|
|
513 |
|
|
|
465 |
|
|
|
446 |
|
Other revenues |
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
Total operating revenues |
|
|
15,353 |
|
|
|
14,356 |
|
|
|
13,554 |
|
|
Operating Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel |
|
|
5,856 |
|
|
|
5,152 |
|
|
|
4,495 |
|
Purchased power |
|
|
515 |
|
|
|
543 |
|
|
|
731 |
|
Other operations |
|
|
2,495 |
|
|
|
2,423 |
|
|
|
2,394 |
|
Maintenance |
|
|
1,175 |
|
|
|
1,096 |
|
|
|
1,116 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
1,245 |
|
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
|
1,176 |
|
Taxes other than income taxes |
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
718 |
|
|
|
680 |
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
12,027 |
|
|
|
11,132 |
|
|
|
10,592 |
|
|
Operating Income |
|
|
3,326 |
|
|
|
3,224 |
|
|
|
2,962 |
|
Other Income and (Expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for equity funds used during construction |
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
Equity in losses of unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
(119 |
) |
Leveraged lease income |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
Impairment loss on equity method investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized |
|
|
(886 |
) |
|
|
(866 |
) |
|
|
(747 |
) |
Preferred and preference dividends of subsidiaries |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
Total other income and (expense) |
|
|
(757 |
) |
|
|
(871 |
) |
|
|
(776 |
) |
|
Earnings Before Income Taxes |
|
|
2,569 |
|
|
|
2,353 |
|
|
|
2,186 |
|
Income taxes |
|
|
835 |
|
|
|
780 |
|
|
|
595 |
|
|
Consolidated Net Income |
|
$ |
1,734 |
|
|
$ |
1,573 |
|
|
$ |
1,591 |
|
|
Common Stock Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
2.29 |
|
|
$ |
2.12 |
|
|
$ |
2.14 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
2.28 |
|
|
|
2.10 |
|
|
|
2.13 |
|
|
Average number of shares of common stock outstanding (in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
756 |
|
|
|
743 |
|
|
|
744 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
761 |
|
|
|
748 |
|
|
|
749 |
|
|
Cash dividends paid per share of common stock |
|
$ |
1.595 |
|
|
$ |
1.535 |
|
|
$ |
1.475 |
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
II-46
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Operating Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated net income |
|
$ |
1,734 |
|
|
$ |
1,573 |
|
|
$ |
1,591 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile consolidated net income
to net cash provided from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
1,486 |
|
|
|
1,421 |
|
|
|
1,398 |
|
Deferred income taxes and investment tax credits |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
499 |
|
Allowance for equity funds used during construction |
|
|
(106 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
) |
Equity in losses of unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
Leveraged lease income |
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
(74 |
) |
Pension, postretirement, and other employee benefits |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
Stock option expense |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative fair value adjustments |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Hedge settlements |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
(19 |
) |
Hurricane Katrina grant proceeds-property reserve |
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Storm damage accounting order |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Changes in certain current assets and liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables |
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
(1,045 |
) |
Fossil fuel stock |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
(246 |
) |
|
|
(110 |
) |
Materials and supplies |
|
|
(71 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
(78 |
) |
Other current assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Accounts payable |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
(173 |
) |
|
|
71 |
|
Hurricane Katrina grant proceeds |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued taxes |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
|
28 |
|
Accrued compensation |
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
13 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
119 |
|
|
Net cash provided from operating activities |
|
|
3,395 |
|
|
|
2,820 |
|
|
|
2,530 |
|
|
Investing Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property additions |
|
|
(3,545 |
) |
|
|
(2,994 |
) |
|
|
(2,370 |
) |
Investment in restricted cash from pollution control bonds |
|
|
(157 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution of restricted cash from pollution control bonds |
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nuclear decommissioning trust fund purchases |
|
|
(783 |
) |
|
|
(751 |
) |
|
|
(606 |
) |
Nuclear decommissioning trust fund sales |
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
743 |
|
|
|
596 |
|
Proceeds from property sales |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Hurricane Katrina capital grant proceeds |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
(115 |
) |
Cost of removal net of salvage |
|
|
(108 |
) |
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
(128 |
) |
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
Net cash used for investing activities |
|
|
(3,709 |
) |
|
|
(2,834 |
) |
|
|
(2,629 |
) |
|
Financing Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in notes payable, net |
|
|
(669 |
) |
|
|
683 |
|
|
|
831 |
|
Proceeds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
3,826 |
|
|
|
1,564 |
|
|
|
1,608 |
|
Preferred and preference stock |
|
|
470 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
Common stock |
|
|
538 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
213 |
|
Redemptions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
(2,566 |
) |
|
|
(1,366 |
) |
|
|
(1,285 |
) |
Preferred and preference stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
Common stock repurchased |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(352 |
) |
Payment of common stock dividends |
|
|
(1,205 |
) |
|
|
(1,140 |
) |
|
|
(1,098 |
) |
Other |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
Net cash (used for) provided from financing activities |
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(67 |
) |
|
Net Change in Cash and Cash Equivalents |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
(166 |
) |
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year |
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
368 |
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year |
|
$ |
201 |
|
|
$ |
167 |
|
|
$ |
202 |
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
II-47
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 2007 and 2006
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Current Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
201 |
|
|
$ |
167 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer accounts receivable |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
943 |
|
Unbilled revenues |
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
283 |
|
Under recovered regulatory clause revenues |
|
|
716 |
|
|
|
517 |
|
Other accounts and notes receivable |
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
Accumulated provision for uncollectible accounts |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(35 |
) |
Fossil fuel stock, at average cost |
|
|
710 |
|
|
|
675 |
|
Materials and supplies, at average cost |
|
|
725 |
|
|
|
648 |
|
Vacation pay |
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
Prepaid expenses |
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
Other |
|
|
411 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
4,732 |
|
|
|
4,019 |
|
|
Property, Plant, and Equipment: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In service |
|
|
47,176 |
|
|
|
45,486 |
|
Less accumulated depreciation |
|
|
17,413 |
|
|
|
16,582 |
|
|
|
|
|
29,763 |
|
|
|
28,904 |
|
Nuclear fuel, at amortized cost |
|
|
336 |
|
|
|
317 |
|
Construction work in progress |
|
|
3,228 |
|
|
|
1,871 |
|
|
Total property, plant, and equipment |
|
|
33,327 |
|
|
|
31,092 |
|
|
Other Property and Investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nuclear decommissioning trusts, at fair value |
|
|
1,132 |
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
Leveraged leases |
|
|
984 |
|
|
|
1,139 |
|
Other |
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
296 |
|
|
Total other property and investments |
|
|
2,354 |
|
|
|
2,493 |
|
|
Deferred Charges and Other Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred charges related to income taxes |
|
|
910 |
|
|
|
895 |
|
Prepaid pension costs |
|
|
2,369 |
|
|
|
1,549 |
|
Unamortized debt issuance expense |
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
Unamortized loss on reacquired debt |
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
293 |
|
Deferred under recovered regulatory clause revenues |
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
845 |
|
Other regulatory assets |
|
|
768 |
|
|
|
936 |
|
Other |
|
|
460 |
|
|
|
564 |
|
|
Total deferred charges and other assets |
|
|
5,376 |
|
|
|
5,254 |
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
45,789 |
|
|
$ |
42,858 |
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
II-48
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
At December 31, 2007 and 2006
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Current Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities due within one year |
|
$ |
1,178 |
|
|
$ |
1,418 |
|
Notes payable |
|
|
1,272 |
|
|
|
1,941 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
1,214 |
|
|
|
1,081 |
|
Customer deposits |
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
249 |
|
Accrued taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes |
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
Other |
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
391 |
|
Accrued interest |
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
Accrued vacation pay |
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
Accrued compensation |
|
|
408 |
|
|
|
444 |
|
Other |
|
|
349 |
|
|
|
384 |
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
5,631 |
|
|
|
6,353 |
|
|
Long-term Debt (See accompanying statements) |
|
|
14,143 |
|
|
|
12,503 |
|
|
Deferred Credits and Other Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated deferred income taxes |
|
|
5,839 |
|
|
|
5,989 |
|
Deferred credits related to income taxes |
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
Accumulated deferred investment tax credits |
|
|
479 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
Employee benefit obligations |
|
|
1,492 |
|
|
|
1,567 |
|
Asset retirement obligations |
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
|
1,137 |
|
Other cost of removal obligations |
|
|
1,308 |
|
|
|
1,300 |
|
Other regulatory liabilities |
|
|
1,613 |
|
|
|
794 |
|
Other |
|
|
347 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
Total deferred credits and other liabilities |
|
|
12,550 |
|
|
|
11,887 |
|
|
Total Liabilities |
|
|
32,324 |
|
|
|
30,743 |
|
|
Preferred and Preference Stock of Subsidiaries (See accompanying statements) |
|
|
1,080 |
|
|
|
744 |
|
|
Common Stockholders Equity (See accompanying statements) |
|
|
12,385 |
|
|
|
11,371 |
|
|
Total Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
$ |
45,789 |
|
|
$ |
42,858 |
|
|
Commitments and Contingent Matters (See notes) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
II-49
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CAPITALIZATION
At December 31, 2007 and 2006
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
|
(percent of total) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term Debt: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt payable to affiliated trusts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity |
|
Interest Rates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2041 through 2044 |
|
4.75% to 7.20% |
|
$ |
412 |
|
|
$ |
1,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term senior notes and debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity |
|
Interest Rates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
3.50% to 7.13% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,204 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
2.54% to 7.00% |
|
|
459 |
|
|
|
460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
4.10% to 7.00% |
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
4.70% |
|
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
4.00% to 5.10% |
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012 |
|
4.85% to 6.25% |
|
|
1,478 |
|
|
|
778 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013 through 2047 |
|
4.35% to 8.12% |
|
|
8,060 |
|
|
|
5,952 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustable rates (at 1/1/08): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
5.62% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
4.94% to 5.00% |
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
5.09% to 5.33% |
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
6.35% |
|
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term senior notes and debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,720 |
|
|
|
9,755 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other long-term debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pollution control revenue bonds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity |
|
Interest Rates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012 through 2036 |
|
3.76% to 5.45% |
|
|
812 |
|
|
|
812 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable rates (at 1/1/08): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 through 2041 |
|
2.67% to 5.25% |
|
|
2,170 |
|
|
|
1,714 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other long-term debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,982 |
|
|
|
2,526 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized lease obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unamortized debt (discount), net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt (annual interest
requirement $805 million) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,196 |
|
|
|
13,921 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less amount due within one year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,053 |
|
|
|
1,418 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt excluding amount due within one year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,143 |
|
|
|
12,503 |
|
|
|
51.2 |
% |
|
|
50.8 |
% |
|
II-50
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CAPITALIZATION (continued)
At December 31, 2007 and 2006
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
|
(percent of total) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred and Preference Stock of Subsidiaries: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$100 par or stated value 4.20% to 5.44% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized 20 million shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding 1 million shares |
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$1 par value 4.95% to 5.83% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized 28 million shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding 12 million shares: $25 stated value |
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding 1,250 shares: $100,000 stated capital |
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cumulative preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$25 par value 6.00% to 6.13% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized 60 million shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding 2 million shares |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preference stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized 65 million shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding $1 par value 5.63% to 6.50% |
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007: 14 million shares (non-cumulative) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006: 6 million shares (non-cumulative) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$100 par or stated value 6.00% to 6.50% |
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007: 3 million shares (non-cumulative) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006: 1 million shares (non-cumulative) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(annual dividend requirement $71 million) |
|
|
1,205 |
|
|
|
744 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less amount due within one year |
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred and preference stock of subsidiaries
excluding amount due within one year |
|
|
1,080 |
|
|
|
744 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
Common Stockholders Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, par value $5 per share |
|
|
3,817 |
|
|
|
3,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized 1 billion shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issued 2007: 764 million shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006: 752 million shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury 2007: 0.4 million shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006: 5.6 million shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid-in capital |
|
|
1,454 |
|
|
|
1,096 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury, at cost |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(192 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
7,155 |
|
|
|
6,765 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total common stockholders equity |
|
|
12,385 |
|
|
|
11,371 |
|
|
|
44.9 |
|
|
|
46.2 |
|
|
Total Capitalization |
|
$ |
27,608 |
|
|
$ |
24,618 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
II-51
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMMON STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
Par |
|
Paid-In |
|
|
|
|
|
Retained |
|
Other Comprehensive |
|
|
|
|
Value |
|
Capital |
|
Treasury |
|
Earnings |
|
Income (Loss) |
|
Total |
|
(in millions) |
Balance at December 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
3,709 |
|
|
$ |
869 |
|
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
|
$ |
5,839 |
|
|
$ |
(133 |
) |
|
$ |
10,278 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Stock issued |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
266 |
|
Stock repurchased, at cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(352 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(352 |
) |
Cash dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,098 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,098 |
) |
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
Balance at December 31, 2005 |
|
|
3,759 |
|
|
|
1,085 |
|
|
|
(359 |
) |
|
|
6,332 |
|
|
|
(128 |
) |
|
|
10,689 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,573 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,573 |
|
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Adjustment to initially apply
FASB Statement No. 158, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
Stock issued |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
179 |
|
Cash dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,140 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,140 |
) |
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
Balance at December 31, 2006 |
|
|
3,759 |
|
|
|
1,096 |
|
|
|
(192 |
) |
|
|
6,765 |
|
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
11,371 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,734 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,734 |
|
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Stock issued |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
597 |
|
Adjustment to initially apply
FIN 48, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
Adjustment to initially apply
FSP 13-2,
net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125 |
) |
Cash dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,204 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,204 |
) |
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007 |
|
$ |
3,817 |
|
|
$ |
1,454 |
|
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
|
$ |
7,155 |
|
|
$ |
(30 |
) |
|
$ |
12,385 |
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Years Ended December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Consolidated Net Income |
|
$ |
1,734 |
|
|
$ |
1,573 |
|
|
$ |
1,591 |
|
|
Other comprehensive income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qualifying hedges: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $(3), $(5), and $11, respectively |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
18 |
|
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income,
net of tax of $6, $-, and $1, respectively |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Marketable securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in fair value, net of tax of $3, $4, and $(2), respectively |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income,
net of tax of $-, $-, and $-, respectively |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension and other postretirement benefit plans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit plan net gain (loss), net of tax of $13, $-, and $-, respectively |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional prior service costs from amendment to non-qualified
pension plans, net of tax of $(2), $-, and $-, respectively |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in additional minimum pension liability,
net of tax of $-, $10, and $(6), respectively |
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
Reclassification adjustment for amounts included in net income,
net of tax of $1, $-, and $-, respectively |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other comprehensive income |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
Consolidated Comprehensive Income |
|
$ |
1,761 |
|
|
$ |
1,592 |
|
|
$ |
1,596 |
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
II-52
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
General
The Southern Company (the Company) is the parent company of four traditional operating companies,
Southern Power Company (Southern Power), Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS), Southern
Communications Services, Inc. (SouthernLINC Wireless), Southern Company Holdings, Inc. (Southern
Holdings), Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (Southern Nuclear), and other direct and
indirect subsidiaries. The traditional operating companies, Alabama Power, Georgia Power, Gulf
Power, and Mississippi Power, are vertically integrated utilities providing electric service in
four Southeastern states. Southern Power constructs, acquires, and manages generation assets and
sells electricity at market-based rates in the wholesale market. SCS, the system service company,
provides, at cost, specialized services to Southern Company and the subsidiary companies.
SouthernLINC Wireless provides digital wireless communications services to the traditional
operating companies and also markets these services to the public and provides fiber cable services
within the Southeast. Southern Holdings is an intermediate holding company subsidiary for Southern
Companys investments in synthetic fuels and leveraged leases and various other energy-related
businesses. The investments in synthetic fuels ended on December 31, 2007. Southern Nuclear
operates and provides services to Southern Companys nuclear power plants.
The financial statements reflect Southern Companys investments in the subsidiaries on a
consolidated basis. The equity method is used for entities in which the Company has significant
influence but does not control and for variable interest entities where the Company is not the
primary beneficiary. All material intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
The traditional operating companies, Southern Power, and certain of their subsidiaries are subject
to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the traditional operating
companies are also subject to regulation by their respective state public service commissions
(PSC). The companies follow accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and
comply with the accounting policies and practices prescribed by their respective commissions. The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States requires the use of estimates, and the actual results may differ from those
estimates.
Reclassifications
Certain prior years data presented in the financial statements have been reclassified to conform
to the current year presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on total assets, net
income, cash flows, or earnings per share.
The balance sheets and the statements of cash flows have been modified to combine Long-term Debt
Payable to Affiliate Trusts into Long-term Debt. Correspondingly, the statements of income were
modified to report Interest expense to affiliate trusts together with Interest expense, net of
amounts capitalized. Due to the immateriality of earnings from discontinued operations during all
periods presented, the statements of income and the statements of comprehensive income have been
modified to report net income without a separate disclosure of the effect from discontinued
operations. Also, due to immateriality, the statements of cash flows were adjusted to reflect Tax
benefit of stock options together with the amounts reported in Other, net.
Related Party Transactions
Alabama Power and Georgia Power purchased synthetic fuel from Alabama Fuel Products, LLC (AFP), an
entity in which Southern Holdings held a 30% ownership interest until July 2006, when its ownership
interest was terminated. Total fuel purchases through June 2006 and for the year 2005 were $354
million and $507 million, respectively. Synfuel Services, Inc. (SSI), another subsidiary of
Southern Holdings, provided fuel transportation services to AFP that were ultimately reflected in
the cost of the synthetic fuel billed to Alabama Power and Georgia Power. In connection with these
services, the related revenues of approximately $62 million and $83 million through June 2006 and
for the year 2005, respectively, have been eliminated against fuel expense in the financial
II-53
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
statements. SSI also provided additional services to AFP, as well as to a related party of AFP.
Revenues from these transactions totaled approximately $24 million and $40 million through June
2006 and for the year 2005, respectively.
Subsequent to the termination of Southern Companys membership interest in AFP, Alabama Power and
Georgia Power continued to purchase an additional $750 million and $384 million in fuel from AFP in
2007 and 2006, respectively. SSI continued to provide fuel transportation services of $131 million
in 2007 and $62 million in 2006, which were eliminated against fuel expense in the financial
statements. SSI also provided other additional services to AFP and a related party of AFP totaling
$47 million and $21 million in 2007 and 2006, respectively. The synthetic fuel investments and
related party transactions were terminated on December 31, 2007.
Regulatory Assets and Liabilities
The traditional operating companies are subject to the provisions of Financial Accounting Standards
Board (FASB) Statement No. 71, Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation (SFAS
No. 71). Regulatory assets represent probable future revenues associated with certain costs that
are expected to be recovered from customers through the ratemaking process. Regulatory liabilities
represent probable future reductions in revenues associated with amounts that are expected to be
credited to customers through the ratemaking process. Regulatory assets and (liabilities)
reflected in the balance sheets at December 31 relate to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
Note |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Deferred income tax charges |
|
$ |
911 |
|
|
$ |
896 |
|
|
|
(a |
) |
Asset retirement obligations-asset |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
(a |
) |
Asset retirement obligations-liability |
|
|
(154 |
) |
|
|
(155 |
) |
|
|
(a |
) |
Other cost of removal obligations |
|
|
(1,308 |
) |
|
|
(1,300 |
) |
|
|
(a |
) |
Deferred income tax credits |
|
|
(275 |
) |
|
|
(293 |
) |
|
|
(a |
) |
Loss on reacquired debt |
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
(b |
) |
Vacation pay |
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
(c |
) |
Under recovered regulatory clause
revenues |
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
411 |
|
|
|
(d |
) |
Building lease |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
(d |
) |
Generating plant outage costs |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
(d |
) |
Under recovered storm damage costs |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
(d |
) |
Fuel hedging-asset |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
(d |
) |
Fuel hedging-liability |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(d |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
(d |
) |
Environmental remediation-asset |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
(d |
) |
Environmental remediation-liability |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(d |
) |
Deferred purchased power |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(d |
) |
Other liabilities |
|
|
(111 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(d |
) |
Plant Daniel capacity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(e |
) |
Overfunded retiree benefit plans |
|
|
(1,288 |
) |
|
|
(508 |
) |
|
|
(f |
) |
Underfunded retiree benefit plans |
|
|
547 |
|
|
|
697 |
|
|
|
(f |
) |
|
Total |
|
$ |
(577 |
) |
|
$ |
507 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note: The recovery and amortization periods for these regulatory assets and (liabilities) are as
follows:
(a) |
|
Asset retirement and removal liabilities are recorded, deferred income tax
assets are recovered, and deferred tax liabilities are amortized over the
related property lives, which may range up to 65 years. Asset retirement and
removal liabilities will be settled and trued up following completion of the related
activities. |
|
(b) |
|
Recovered over either the remaining life of the original issue or, if
refinanced, over the life of the new issue, which may range up to 50 years. |
|
(c) |
|
Recorded as earned by employees and recovered as paid, generally within one year. |
|
(d) |
|
Recorded and recovered or amortized as approved by the appropriate state PSCs. |
|
(e) |
|
Amortized over a four-year period that ended in 2007. |
|
(f) |
|
Recovered and amortized over the average remaining service period which may
range up to 14 years. See Note 2 under Retirement Benefits.
|
II-54
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
In the event that a portion of a traditional operating companys operations is no longer subject to
the provisions of SFAS No. 71, such company would be required to write off related regulatory
assets and liabilities that are not specifically recoverable through regulated rates. In addition,
the traditional operating company would be required to determine if any impairment to other assets,
including plant, exists and write down the assets, if impaired, to their fair values. All
regulatory assets and liabilities are to be reflected in rates. See Note 3 under Alabama Power
Retail Regulatory Matters, Georgia Power Retail Regulatory Matters, and Storm Damage Cost
Recovery for additional information.
Revenues
Wholesale capacity revenues are generally recognized on a levelized basis over the appropriate
contract periods. Energy and other revenues are recognized as services are provided. Unbilled
revenues related to retail sales are accrued at the end of each fiscal period. Electric rates for
the traditional operating companies include provisions to adjust billings for fluctuations in fuel
costs, fuel hedging, the energy component of purchased power costs, and certain other costs.
Revenues are adjusted for differences between these actual costs and amounts billed in current
regulated rates. Under or over recovered regulatory clause revenues are recorded in the balance
sheets and are recovered or returned to customers through adjustments to the billing factors.
Retail fuel cost recovery mechanisms vary by each retail operating company, but in general, the
process requires periodic filings with the appropriate state PSC. Alabama Power continuously
monitors the under/over recovered balance and files for a revised fuel rate when management deems
appropriate. Georgia Power is required to file a new fuel case no later than March 1, 2008. Gulf
Power is required to notify the Florida PSC if the projected fuel revenue over or under recovery
exceeds 10% of the projected fuel revenue applicable for the period and indicate if an adjustment
to the fuel cost recovery factor is being requested. Mississippi Power is required to file for an
adjustment to the fuel cost recovery factor annually. See Note 3 under Alabama Power Retail
Regulatory Matters and Georgia Power Retail Regulatory Matters for additional information.
Southern Company has a diversified base of customers. No single customer or industry comprises 10%
or more of revenues. For all periods presented, uncollectible accounts averaged less than 1% of
revenues.
Fuel Costs
Fuel costs are expensed as the fuel is used. Fuel expense generally includes the cost of purchased
emission allowances as they are used. Fuel expense also includes the amortization of the cost of
nuclear fuel and a charge, based on nuclear generation, for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear
fuel.
Nuclear Fuel Disposal Costs
Alabama Power and Georgia Power have contracts with the United States, acting through the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE), that provide for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The DOE
failed to begin disposing of spent nuclear fuel in 1998 as required by the contracts, and Alabama
Power and Georgia Power are pursuing legal remedies against the government for breach of contract.
On July 9, 2007, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims awarded Georgia Power a total of $30 million,
based on its ownership interests, and awarded Alabama Power $17.3 million, representing all of
the direct costs of the expansion of spent nuclear fuel storage facilities from 1998 through
2004. On July 24, 2007, the government filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied on
November 1, 2007. The government filed an appeal on January 2, 2008. No amounts have been
recognized in the financial statements as of December 31, 2007. The final outcome of this
matter cannot be determined at this time, but no material impact on net income is expected as
any award received is expected to be returned to customers.
II-55
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Sufficient pool storage capacity for spent fuel is available at Plant Vogtle to maintain full-core
discharge capability for both units into 2014. Construction of an on-site dry storage facility at
Plant Vogtle is expected to begin in sufficient time to maintain pool full-core discharge
capability. At Plants Hatch and Farley, on-site dry storage facilities are operational and can be
expanded to accommodate spent fuel through the expected life of each plant.
Income and Other Taxes
Southern Company uses the liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes and provides
deferred income taxes for all significant income tax temporary differences. Investment tax credits
utilized are deferred and amortized to income over the average life of the related property. Taxes
that are collected from customers on behalf of governmental agencies to be remitted to these
agencies are presented net on the statements of income.
In accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes (FIN
48), Southern Company recognizes tax positions that are more likely than not of being sustained
upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities. See Note 5 under Unrecognized Tax
Benefits for additional information on the effect of adopting FIN 48.
Property, Plant, and Equipment
Property, plant, and equipment is stated at original cost less regulatory disallowances and
impairments. Original cost includes: materials; labor; minor items of property; appropriate
administrative and general costs; payroll-related costs such as taxes, pensions, and other
benefits; and the interest capitalized and/or cost of funds used during construction.
Southern Companys property, plant, and equipment consisted of the following at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Generation |
|
$ |
23,879 |
|
|
$ |
23,355 |
|
Transmission |
|
|
6,761 |
|
|
|
6,352 |
|
Distribution |
|
|
13,134 |
|
|
|
12,484 |
|
General |
|
|
2,619 |
|
|
|
2,510 |
|
Plant acquisition adjustment |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
Utility plant in service |
|
|
46,436 |
|
|
|
44,741 |
|
|
IT equipment and software |
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
Communications equipment |
|
|
452 |
|
|
|
445 |
|
Other |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
Other plant in service |
|
|
740 |
|
|
|
745 |
|
|
Total plant in service |
|
$ |
47,176 |
|
|
$ |
45,486 |
|
|
The cost of replacements of property, exclusive of minor items of property, is capitalized. The
cost of maintenance, repairs, and replacement of minor items of property is charged to maintenance
expense as incurred or performed with the exception of nuclear refueling costs, which are recorded
in accordance with specific state PSC orders. Alabama Power accrues estimated nuclear refueling
costs in advance of the units next refueling outage. Georgia Power defers and amortizes nuclear
refueling costs over the units operating cycle before the next refueling. The refueling cycles
for Alabama Power and Georgia Power range from 18 to 24 months for each unit. In accordance with a
Georgia PSC order, Georgia Power also defers the costs of certain significant inspection costs for
the combustion turbines at Plant McIntosh and amortizes such costs over 10 years, which
approximates the expected maintenance cycle.
II-56
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation of the original cost of utility plant in service is provided primarily by using
composite straight-line rates, which approximated 3.0% in 2007, 3.0% in 2006, and 2.9% in 2005.
Depreciation studies are conducted periodically to update the composite rates. These studies are
filed with the respective state PSC for the traditional operating companies. Accumulated
depreciation for utility plant in service totaled $17.0 billion and $16.2 billion at December 31,
2007 and 2006, respectively. When property subject to composite depreciation is retired or
otherwise disposed of in the normal course of business, its original cost, together with the cost
of removal, less salvage, is charged to accumulated depreciation. For other property dispositions,
the applicable cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the balance sheet accounts and a
gain or loss is recognized. Minor items of property included in the original cost of the plant are
retired when the related property unit is retired.
Under Georgia Powers retail rate plan for the three years ended December 31, 2007 (2004 Retail
Rate Plan), Georgia Power was ordered to recognize Georgia PSCcertified capacity costs in rates
evenly over the three years covered by the 2004 Retail Rate Plan. Georgia Power recorded credits
to amortization of $19 million and $14 million in 2007 and 2006, respectively, and an increase to
amortization of $33 million in 2005. See Note 3 under Retail Regulatory Matters Rate Plans
for additional information.
In May 2004, the Mississippi PSC approved Mississippi Powers request to reclassify 266 megawatts
of Plant Daniel units 3 and 4 capacity to jurisdictional cost of service effective January 1, 2004
and authorized Mississippi Power to include the related costs and revenue credits in jurisdictional
rate base, cost of service, and revenue requirement calculations for purposes of retail rate
recovery. Mississippi Power amortized the related regulatory liability pursuant to the Mississippi
PSCs order as follows: $17 million in 2004, $25 million in 2005, $13 million in 2006, and $6
million in 2007, resulting in increases to earnings in each of those years.
Depreciation of the original cost of other plant in service is provided primarily on a
straight-line basis over estimated useful lives ranging from 3 to 25 years. Accumulated
depreciation for other plant in service totaled $429 million and $405 million at December 31, 2007
and 2006, respectively.
Asset Retirement Obligations and Other Costs of Removal
Asset retirement obligations are computed as the present value of the ultimate costs for an assets
future retirement and are recorded in the period in which the liability is incurred. The costs are
capitalized as part of the related long-lived asset and depreciated over the assets useful life.
The Company has received accounting guidance from the various state PSCs allowing the continued
accrual of other future retirement costs for long-lived assets that the Company does not have a
legal obligation to retire. Accordingly, the accumulated removal costs for these obligations will
continue to be reflected in the balance sheets as a regulatory liability.
The liability recognized to retire long-lived assets primarily relates to the Companys nuclear
facilities, Plants Farley, Hatch, and Vogtle. The fair value of assets legally restricted for
settling retirement obligations related to nuclear facilities as of December 31, 2007 was $1.1
billion. In addition, the Company has retirement obligations related to various landfill sites and
underground storage tanks. In connection with the adoption of FASB Interpretation No. 47,
Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations (FIN 47), Southern Company also recorded
additional asset retirement obligations (and assets) of approximately $153 million, primarily
related to asbestos removal and disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls in certain transformers. The
Company also has identified retirement obligations related to certain transmission and distribution
facilities, co-generation facilities, certain wireless communication towers, and certain structures
authorized by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. However, liabilities for the removal of these
assets have not been recorded because the range of time over which the Company may settle these
obligations is unknown and cannot be reasonably estimated. The Company will continue to recognize
in the statements of income allowed removal costs in accordance with its regulatory treatment. Any
differences between costs recognized under FASB Statement No. 143 Accounting for Asset Retirement
II-57
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Obligations (SFAS No. 143) and FIN 47 and those reflected in rates are recognized as either a
regulatory asset or liability, as ordered by the various state PSCs, and are reflected in the
balance sheets. See Nuclear Decommissioning herein for further information on amounts included
in rates.
Details of the asset retirement obligations included in the balance sheets are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Balance beginning of year |
|
$ |
1,137 |
|
|
$ |
1,117 |
|
Liabilities incurred |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Liabilities settled |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Accretion |
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
Cash flow revisions |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(56 |
) |
|
Balance end of year |
|
$ |
1,203 |
|
|
$ |
1,137 |
|
|
Nuclear Decommissioning
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requires licensees of commercial nuclear power reactors to
establish a plan for providing reasonable assurance of funds for future decommissioning. Alabama
Power and Georgia Power have external trust funds to comply with the NRCs regulations. Use of the
funds is restricted to nuclear decommissioning activities and the funds are managed and invested in
accordance with applicable requirements of various regulatory bodies, including the NRC, the FERC,
and state PSCs, as well as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The trust funds are invested in a
tax-efficient manner in a diversified mix of equity and fixed income securities and are classified
as available-for-sale.
The trust funds are included in the balance sheets at fair value, as obtained from quoted market
prices for the same or similar investments. As the external trust funds are actively managed by
unrelated parties with limited direction from the Company, the Company does not have the ability to
choose to hold securities with unrealized losses until recovery. Through 2005, the Company
considered other-than-temporary impairments to be immaterial. However, since the January 1, 2006
effective date of FASB Staff Position FAS 115-1/124-1, The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments (FSP No. 115-1), the Company considers all
unrealized losses to represent other-than-temporary impairments. The adoption of FSP No. 115-1 had
no impact on the results of operations, cash flows, or financial condition of the Company as all
losses have been and continue to be recorded through a regulatory liability, whether realized,
unrealized, or identified as other-than-temporary.
Details of the securities held in these trusts at December 31, 2007 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other-than-Temporary |
|
|
2007 |
|
Unrealized Gains |
|
Impairments |
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Equity |
|
$ |
256.3 |
|
|
$ |
(27.9 |
) |
|
$ |
787.8 |
|
Debt |
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
|
(5.3 |
) |
|
|
312.0 |
|
Other |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.0 |
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
268.2 |
|
|
$ |
(33.2 |
) |
|
$ |
1,131.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other-than-Temporary |
|
|
2006 |
|
Unrealized Gains |
|
Impairments |
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Equity |
|
$ |
227.9 |
|
|
$ |
(10.3 |
) |
|
$ |
763.1 |
|
Debt |
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
(2.1 |
) |
|
|
285.5 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.9 |
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
231.6 |
|
|
$ |
(12.4 |
) |
|
$ |
1,057.5 |
|
|
II-58
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
The contractual maturities of debt securities at December 31, 2007 are as follows: $35.7 million in
2008; $67.3 million in 2009-2012; $58.1 million in 2013-2017; and $151.2 million thereafter.
Sales of the securities held in the trust funds resulted in cash proceeds of $774.8 million, $743.1
million, and $596.3 million in 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively, all of which were re-invested.
Realized gains and other-than-temporary impairment losses were $78.3 million and $76.3 million,
respectively, in 2007 and $39.8 million and $30.3 million, respectively, in 2006. Net realized
gains were $22.5 million in 2005. Realized gains and other-than-temporary impairment losses are
determined on a specific identification basis. In accordance with regulatory guidance, all
realized and unrealized gains and losses are included in the regulatory liability for asset
retirement obligations in the balance sheets and are not included in net income or other
comprehensive income. Unrealized gains and other-than-temporary impairment losses are considered
non-cash transactions for purposes of the statements of cash flow.
Amounts previously recorded in internal reserves are being transferred into the external trust
funds over periods approved by the respective state PSCs. The NRCs minimum external funding
requirements are based on a generic estimate of the cost to decommission only the radioactive
portions of a nuclear unit based on the size and type of reactor. Alabama Power and Georgia Power
have filed plans with the NRC designed to ensure that, over time, the deposits and earnings of the
external trust funds will provide the minimum funding amounts prescribed by the NRC. At December
31, 2007, the accumulated provisions for decommissioning were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant Farley |
|
Plant Hatch |
|
Plant Vogtle |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
External trust funds, at fair value |
|
$ |
543 |
|
|
$ |
368 |
|
|
$ |
222 |
|
Internal reserves |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
570 |
|
|
$ |
368 |
|
|
$ |
222 |
|
|
Site study cost is the estimate to decommission a specific facility as of the site study year. The
estimated costs of decommissioning based on the most current studies, which were performed in 2003
for Plant Farley and in 2006 for the Georgia Power plants, were as follows for Alabama Powers
Plant Farley and Georgia Powers ownership interests in Plants Hatch and Vogtle:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant Farley |
|
Plant Hatch |
|
Plant Vogtle |
|
Decommissioning periods: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning year |
|
|
2017 |
|
|
|
2034 |
|
|
|
2027 |
|
Completion year |
|
|
2046 |
|
|
|
2061 |
|
|
|
2051 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
|
|
|
Site study costs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Radiated structures |
|
$ |
892 |
|
|
$ |
544 |
|
|
$ |
507 |
|
Non-radiated structures |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
955 |
|
|
$ |
590 |
|
|
$ |
574 |
|
|
The decommissioning cost estimates are based on prompt dismantlement and removal of the plant from
service. The actual decommissioning costs may vary from the above estimates because of changes in
the assumed date of decommissioning, changes in NRC requirements, or changes in the assumptions
used in making these estimates.
For ratemaking purposes, Alabama Powers decommissioning costs are based on the site study and
Georgia Powers decommissioning costs are based on the NRC generic estimate to decommission the
radioactive portion of the facilities as of 2006. The estimates used in current rates are $450
million and $313 million for Plants Hatch and Vogtle, respectively. Amounts expensed were $7
million annually for Plant Vogtle for 2005 through 2007. Significant assumptions used to determine
these costs for ratemaking were an inflation rate of 4.5% and 2.9% for
II-59
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Alabama Power and Georgia Power, respectively, and a trust earnings rate of 7.0% and 4.9% for
Alabama Power and Georgia Power, respectively. As a result of license extensions, amounts
previously contributed to the external trust funds for Plants Hatch and Farley are currently
projected to be adequate to meet the decommissioning obligations. Georgia Power filed an
application with the NRC in June 2007 to extend the licenses for Plant Vogtle Units 1 and 2 for an
additional 20 years. Georgia Power anticipates the NRC may make a decision regarding the license
extension for Plant Vogtle as early as 2009.
Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC) and Interest Capitalized
In accordance with regulatory treatment, the traditional operating companies record AFUDC, which
represents the estimated debt and equity costs of capital funds that are necessary to finance the
construction of new regulated facilities. While cash is not realized currently from such
allowance, it increases the revenue requirement over the service life of the plant through a higher
rate base and higher depreciation expense. The equity component of AFUDC is not included in
calculating taxable income. Interest related to the construction of new facilities not included in
the traditional operating companies regulated rates is capitalized in accordance with standard
interest capitalization requirements. AFUDC and interest capitalized, net of income taxes were
8.4%, 4.2%, and 4.0% of net income for 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
Cash payments for interest totaled $798 million, $875 million, and $661 million in 2007, 2006, and
2005, respectively, net of amounts capitalized of $64 million, $27 million, and $21 million,
respectively.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Intangibles
Southern Company evaluates long-lived assets for impairment when events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. The determination of
whether an impairment has occurred is based on either a specific regulatory disallowance or an
estimate of undiscounted future cash flows attributable to the assets, as compared with the
carrying value of the assets. If an impairment has occurred, the amount of the impairment
recognized is determined by either the amount of regulatory disallowance or by estimating the fair
value of the assets and recording a loss if the carrying value is greater than the fair value. For
assets identified as held for sale, the carrying value is compared to the estimated fair value less
the cost to sell in order to determine if an impairment loss is required. Until the assets are
disposed of, their estimated fair value is re-evaluated when circumstances or events change.
Storm Damage Reserves
Each traditional operating company maintains a reserve to cover the cost of damages from major
storms to its transmission and distribution lines and generally the cost of uninsured damages to
its generation facilities and other property. In accordance with their respective state PSC
orders, the traditional operating companies accrued $25.6 million in 2007 that is recoverable
through rates. Alabama Power, Gulf Power, and Mississippi Power also have discretionary authority
from their state PSCs to accrue certain additional amounts as circumstances warrant. In 2007,
there were no such accruals. In 2006 and 2005, additional accruals totaled $3 million and $6
million, respectively. See Note 3 under Storm Damage Cost Recovery for additional information
regarding these reserves following Hurricanes Ivan, Dennis, and Katrina and the deferral of
additional costs, as well as additional rate riders or other cost recovery mechanisms which have
been or may be approved by the respective state PSCs to recover the deferred costs and accrue
reserves for future storms.
Leveraged Leases
Southern Company has several leveraged lease agreements, with terms ranging up to 45 years, which
relate to international and domestic energy generation, distribution, and transportation assets.
Southern Company receives federal income tax deductions for depreciation and amortization, as well
as interest on long-term debt related to
II-60
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
these investments. The Company reviews all important lease assumptions at least annually, or more
frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate that a change in assumptions has occurred
or may occur. These assumptions include the effective tax rate, the residual value, the credit
quality of the lessees, and the timing of expected tax cash flows.
Southern Companys net investment in domestic leveraged leases consists of the following at
December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Net rentals receivable |
|
$ |
494 |
|
|
$ |
497 |
|
Unearned income |
|
|
(244 |
) |
|
|
(261 |
) |
|
Investment in leveraged leases |
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
236 |
|
Deferred taxes from leveraged leases |
|
|
(163 |
) |
|
|
(133 |
) |
|
Net investment in leveraged leases |
|
$ |
87 |
|
|
$ |
103 |
|
|
A summary of the components of income from domestic leveraged leases was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Pretax leveraged lease income |
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
$ |
23 |
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
Net leveraged lease income |
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
Southern Companys net investment in international leveraged leases consists of the following at
December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Net rentals receivable |
|
$ |
1,298 |
|
|
$ |
1,299 |
|
Unearned income |
|
|
(563 |
) |
|
|
(396 |
) |
|
Investment in leveraged leases |
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
903 |
|
Deferred taxes from leveraged leases |
|
|
(316 |
) |
|
|
(492 |
) |
|
Net investment in leveraged leases |
|
$ |
419 |
|
|
$ |
411 |
|
|
A summary of the components of income from international leveraged leases was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Pretax leveraged lease income |
|
$ |
24 |
|
|
$ |
49 |
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
Net leveraged lease income |
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
See Note 3 under Income Tax Matters for additional information regarding the leveraged lease
transactions.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the financial statements, temporary cash investments are considered cash
equivalents. Temporary cash investments are securities with original maturities of 90 days or
less.
II-61
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Materials and Supplies
Generally, materials and supplies include the average costs of transmission, distribution, and
generating plant materials. Materials are charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed or
capitalized to plant, as appropriate, when installed.
Fuel Inventory
Fuel inventory includes the average costs of oil, coal, natural gas, and emission allowances. Fuel
is charged to inventory when purchased and then expensed as used and recovered by the traditional
operating companies through fuel cost recovery rates approved by each state PSC. Emission
allowances granted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are included in inventory at zero
cost.
Stock Options
Prior to January 1, 2006, Southern Company accounted for options granted in accordance with
Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25; thus, no compensation expense was recognized because
the exercise price of all options granted equaled the fair market value on the date of the grant.
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted the fair value recognition provisions of FASB
Statement No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment (SFAS No. 123(R)), using the modified prospective
method. Under that method, compensation cost for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 was
recognized as the requisite service was rendered and included: (a) compensation cost for the
portion of share-based awards granted prior to and that were outstanding as of January 1, 2006, for
which the requisite service had not been rendered, based on the grant-date fair value of those
awards as calculated in accordance with the original provisions of FASB Statement No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, and (b) compensation cost for all share-based awards
granted subsequent to January 1, 2006, based on the grant-date fair value estimated in accordance
with the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R). Results for prior periods have not been restated.
For Southern Company, the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) resulted in a reduction in earnings before
income taxes and net income of $28 million and $17 million, respectively, for the year ended
December 31, 2007, and $28 million and $17 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31,
2006. Additionally, SFAS No. 123(R) requires the gross excess tax benefit from stock option
exercises to be reclassified as a financing cash flow as opposed to an operating cash flow; the
reduction in operating cash flows and increase in financing cash flows for the years ended December
31, 2007 and 2006 was $21 million and $10 million, respectively.
The adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) also resulted in a reduction in basic and diluted earnings per
share of $0.03 and $0.02, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2007 and $0.02 and $0.03,
respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2006.
For the year ended December 31, 2005, prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R), the pro forma
impact of fair-value accounting for options granted on net income and basic and diluted earnings
per share was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Impact |
|
|
2005 |
|
As Reported |
|
After Tax |
|
Pro Forma |
|
Net income (in millions) |
|
$ |
1,591 |
|
|
$ |
(17 |
) |
|
$ |
1,574 |
|
Earnings per share (dollars): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
2.14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2.12 |
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
2.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2.10 |
|
Because historical forfeitures have been insignificant and are expected to remain insignificant, no
forfeitures were assumed in the calculation of compensation expense; rather they are recognized
when they occur.
II-62
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
The estimated fair values of stock options granted in 2007, 2006, and 2005 were derived using the
Black-Scholes stock option pricing model. Expected volatility was based on historical volatility
of Southern Companys stock over a period equal to the expected term. Southern Company used
historical exercise data to estimate the expected term that represents the period of time that
options granted to employees are expected to be outstanding. The risk-free rate was based on the
U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant that covers the expected term of the stock
options. The following table shows the assumptions used in the pricing model and the weighted
average grant-date fair value of stock options granted:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
Expected volatility |
|
|
14.8 |
% |
|
|
16.9 |
% |
|
|
17.9 |
% |
Expected term (in years) |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
Interest rate |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
|
3.9 |
% |
Dividend yield |
|
|
4.3 |
% |
|
|
4.4 |
% |
|
|
4.4 |
% |
Weighted average grant-date fair value |
|
$ |
4.12 |
|
|
$ |
4.15 |
|
|
$ |
3.90 |
|
Financial Instruments
Southern Company uses derivative financial instruments to limit exposure to fluctuations in
interest rates, the prices of certain fuel purchases, and electricity purchases and sales. All
derivative financial instruments are recognized as either assets or liabilities (categorized in
Other) and are measured at fair value. Substantially all of Southern Companys bulk energy
purchases and sales contracts that meet the definition of a derivative are exempt from fair value
accounting requirements and are accounted for under the accrual method. Other derivative contracts
qualify as cash flow hedges of anticipated transactions or are recoverable through the traditional
operating companies fuel hedging programs. This results in the deferral of related gains and
losses in other comprehensive income or regulatory assets and liabilities, respectively, until the
hedged transactions occur. Any ineffectiveness arising from cash flow hedges is recognized
currently in net income. Other derivative contracts, including derivatives related to synthetic
fuel investments, are marked to market through current period income and are recorded on a net
basis in the statements of income.
Southern Company is exposed to losses related to financial instruments in the event of
counterparties nonperformance. The Company has established controls to determine and monitor the
creditworthiness of counterparties in order to mitigate the Companys exposure to counterparty
credit risk.
The other Southern Company financial instruments for which the carrying amount did not equal fair
value at December 31 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying Amount |
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Long-term debt: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
$ |
15,095 |
|
|
$ |
14,931 |
|
2006 |
|
$ |
13,824 |
|
|
$ |
13,702 |
|
The fair values were based on either closing market prices or closing prices of comparable
instruments.
Comprehensive Income
The objective of comprehensive income is to report a measure of all changes in common stock equity
of an enterprise that result from transactions and other economic events of the period other than
transactions with owners. Comprehensive income consists of net income, changes in the fair value
of qualifying cash flow hedges and marketable securities, and certain changes in pension and other
post retirement benefit plans, less income taxes and reclassifications for amounts included in net
income.
II-63
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Variable Interest Entities
The primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity must consolidate the related assets and
liabilities. Southern Company has established certain wholly-owned trusts to issue preferred
securities. See Note 6 under Long-Term Debt Payable to Affiliated Trusts for additional
information. However, Southern Company and the traditional operating companies are not considered
the primary beneficiaries of the trusts. Therefore, the investments in these trusts are reflected
as Other Investments, and the related loans from the trusts are included in Long-term Debt in the
balance sheets.
In addition, Southern Company holds an 85% limited partnership investment in an energy/technology
venture capital fund that is consolidated in the financial statements. During the third quarter of
2004, Southern Company terminated new investments in this fund; however, additional contributions
to existing investments will still occur. Southern Company has committed to a maximum investment
of $46 million, of which $44 million has been funded. Southern Companys investment in the fund at
December 31, 2007 totaled $26.4 million.
2. RETIREMENT BENEFITS
Southern Company has a defined benefit, trusteed, pension plan covering substantially all
employees. The plan is funded in accordance with requirements of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA). No contributions to the plan are expected for the year
ending December 31, 2008. Southern Company also provides certain defined benefit pension plans for
a selected group of management and highly compensated employees. Benefits under these
non-qualified plans are funded on a cash basis. In addition, Southern Company provides certain
medical care and life insurance benefits for retired employees through other postretirement benefit
plans. The traditional operating companies fund related trusts to the extent required by their
respective regulatory commissions. For the year ending December 31, 2008, postretirement trust
contributions are expected to total approximately $46 million.
The measurement date for plan assets and obligations is September 30 for each year presented.
Pursuant to FASB Statement No. 158, Employers Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other
Postretirement Plans, Southern Company will be required to change the measurement date for its
defined benefit postretirement plans from September 30 to December 31 beginning with the year
ending December 31, 2008.
Pension Plans
The total accumulated benefit obligation for the pension plans was $5.3 billion in 2007 and $5.1
billion in 2006. Changes during the year in the projected benefit obligations and fair value of
plan assets were as follows:
II-64
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Change in benefit obligation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit obligation at beginning of year |
|
$ |
5,491 |
|
|
$ |
5,557 |
|
Service cost |
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
324 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
(241 |
) |
|
|
(230 |
) |
Plan amendments |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Actuarial (gain) loss |
|
|
(111 |
) |
|
|
(297 |
) |
|
Balance at end of year |
|
|
5,660 |
|
|
|
5,491 |
|
|
Change in plan assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year |
|
|
6,693 |
|
|
|
6,147 |
|
Actual return on plan assets |
|
|
1,153 |
|
|
|
759 |
|
Employer contributions |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
(241 |
) |
|
|
(230 |
) |
|
Fair value of plan assets at end of year |
|
|
7,624 |
|
|
|
6,693 |
|
|
Funded status at end of year |
|
|
1,964 |
|
|
|
1,202 |
|
Fourth quarter contributions |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
Prepaid pension asset, net |
|
$ |
1,969 |
|
|
$ |
1,207 |
|
|
At December 31, 2007, the projected benefit obligations for the qualified and non-qualified pension
plans were $5.3 billion and $0.4 billion, respectively. All plan assets are related to the
qualified pension plan.
Pension plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all applicable requirements,
including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code). The
Companys investment policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income
securities, real estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging
tools but may also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes. The Company
primarily minimizes the risk of large losses through diversification but also monitors and manages
other aspects of risk. The actual composition of the Companys pension plan assets as of the end
of the year, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Target |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
Domestic equity |
|
|
36 |
% |
|
|
38 |
% |
|
|
38 |
% |
International equity |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Fixed income |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Real estate |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Private equity |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
Amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets related to the Companys pension plans
consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Prepaid pension costs |
|
$ |
2,369 |
|
|
$ |
1,549 |
|
Other regulatory assets |
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
Current liabilities, other |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
Other regulatory liabilities |
|
|
(1,288 |
) |
|
|
(507 |
) |
Employee benefit obligations |
|
|
(379 |
) |
|
|
(324 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
II-65
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Presented below are the amounts included in accumulated other comprehensive income, regulatory
assets, and regulatory liabilities at December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006 related to the
defined benefit pension plans that have not yet been recognized in net periodic pension cost along
with the estimated amortization of such amounts for the next fiscal year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior Service Cost |
|
Net(Gain)/Loss |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Balance at December 31, 2007: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
(40 |
) |
Regulatory assets |
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
Regulatory liabilities |
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
(1,486 |
) |
|
Total |
|
$ |
278 |
|
|
$ |
(1,404 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2006: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
Regulatory assets |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
Regulatory liabilities |
|
|
225 |
|
|
|
(732 |
) |
|
Total |
|
$ |
263 |
|
|
$ |
(612 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated amortization in net periodic
pension cost in 2008: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
Regulatory assets |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Regulatory liabilities |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
37 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
The components of other comprehensive income, along with the changes in the balances of regulatory
assets and regulatory liabilities, related to the defined benefit pension plans for the year ended
December 31, 2007 are presented in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
Regulatory |
|
Regulatory |
|
|
Income |
|
Assets |
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
|
|
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
158 |
|
|
$ |
(507 |
) |
Net (gain) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(753 |
) |
Change in prior service costs |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification adjustments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of prior service costs |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
Amortization of net gain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Total reclassification adjustments |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
Total change |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(781 |
) |
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
(26 |
) |
|
$ |
188 |
|
|
$ |
(1,288 |
) |
|
Components of net periodic pension cost were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Service cost |
|
$ |
147 |
|
|
$ |
153 |
|
|
$ |
138 |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
324 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
286 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
(481 |
) |
|
|
(456 |
) |
|
|
(456 |
) |
Recognized net (gain) loss |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Net amortization |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
Net periodic pension cost |
|
$ |
35 |
|
|
$ |
39 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
II-66
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Net periodic pension cost (income) is the sum of service cost, interest cost, and other costs
netted against the expected return on plan assets. The expected return on plan assets is
determined by multiplying the expected rate of return on plan assets and the market-related value
of plan assets. In determining the market-related value of plan assets, the Company has elected to
amortize changes in the market value of all plan assets over five years rather than recognize the
changes immediately. As a result, the accounting value of plan assets that is used to calculate
the expected return on plan assets differs from the current fair value of the plan assets.
Future benefit payments reflect expected future service and are estimated based on assumptions used
to measure the projected benefit obligation for the pension plans. At December 31, 2007, estimated
benefit payments were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit Payments |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
2008 |
|
$ |
265 |
|
2009 |
|
|
275 |
|
2010 |
|
|
289 |
|
2011 |
|
|
327 |
|
2012 |
|
|
349 |
|
2013 to 2017 |
|
|
2,007 |
|
|
Other Postretirement Benefits
Changes during the year in the accumulated postretirement benefit obligations (APBO) and in the
fair value of plan assets were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
Change in benefit obligation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit obligation at beginning of year |
|
$ |
1,830 |
|
|
$ |
1,826 |
|
Service cost |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
(79 |
) |
Actuarial (gain) loss |
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
(49 |
) |
Retiree drug subsidy |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
Balance at end of year |
|
|
1,797 |
|
|
|
1,830 |
|
|
Change in plan assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year |
|
|
731 |
|
|
|
684 |
|
Actual return on plan assets |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
Employer contributions |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
(77 |
) |
|
|
(118 |
) |
|
Fair value of plan assets at end of year |
|
|
820 |
|
|
|
731 |
|
|
Funded status at end of year |
|
|
( 977 |
) |
|
|
(1,099 |
) |
Fourth quarter contributions |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
Accrued liability |
|
$ |
(912 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,046 |
) |
|
Other postretirement benefits plan assets are managed and invested in accordance with all
applicable requirements, including ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code. The Companys investment
policy covers a diversified mix of assets, including equity and fixed income securities, real
estate, and private equity. Derivative instruments are used primarily as hedging tools but may
also be used to gain efficient exposure to the various asset classes. The Company primarily
minimizes the risk of large losses through diversification but also monitors and manages other
aspects of risk. The actual composition of the Companys other postretirement benefit plan assets
as of the end of the year, along with the targeted mix of assets, is presented below:
II-67
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Target |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
Domestic equity |
|
|
43 |
% |
|
|
45 |
% |
|
|
44 |
% |
International equity |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Fixed income |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Real estate |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Private equity |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
Amounts recognized in the balance sheets related to the Companys other postretirement benefit
plans consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Other regulatory assets |
|
$ |
360 |
|
|
$ |
539 |
|
Current liabilities, other |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Employee benefit obligations |
|
|
(909 |
) |
|
|
(1,043 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
Presented below are the amounts included in accumulated other comprehensive income and regulatory
assets at December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006 related to the other postretirement benefit
plans that have not yet been recognized in net periodic postretirement benefit cost along with the
estimated amortization of such amounts for the next fiscal year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior Service |
|
Net(Gain)/ |
|
Transition |
|
|
Cost |
|
Loss |
|
Obligation |
|
|
(in millions) |
Balance at December 31, 2007: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Regulatory assets |
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
103 |
|
|
$ |
181 |
|
|
$ |
84 |
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2006: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Regulatory assets |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
112 |
|
|
$ |
342 |
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated amortization as net periodic
postretirement benefit cost in 2008: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Regulatory assets |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
The components of other comprehensive income, along with the changes in the balance of regulatory
assets, related to the other postretirement benefit plans for the year ended December 31, 2007 are
presented in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated Other |
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
Regulatory |
|
|
Income |
|
Assets |
|
|
(in millions) |
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
539 |
|
Net (gain) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(141 |
) |
Change in prior service costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification adjustments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of transition obligation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
Amortization of prior service costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
Amortization of net gain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
Total reclassification adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
Total change |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(179 |
) |
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
360 |
|
|
II-68
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Components of the other postretirement benefit plans net periodic cost were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
(in millions) |
Service cost |
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
Net amortization |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
Net postretirement cost |
|
$ |
120 |
|
|
$ |
122 |
|
|
$ |
118 |
|
|
The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Act) provides
a 28% prescription drug subsidy for Medicare eligible retirees. The effect of the subsidy reduced
Southern Companys expenses for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 by approximately
$35 million, $39 million, and $26 million, respectively.
Future benefit payments, including prescription drug benefits, reflect expected future service and
are estimated based on assumptions used to measure the APBO for the postretirement plans.
Estimated benefit payments are reduced by drug subsidy receipts expected as a result of the
Medicare Act as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit Payments |
|
Subsidy Receipts |
|
Total |
|
|
(in millions) |
2008 |
|
$ |
94 |
|
|
$ |
(7 |
) |
|
$ |
87 |
|
2009 |
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
94 |
|
2010 |
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
103 |
|
2011 |
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
112 |
|
2012 |
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
118 |
|
2013 to 2017 |
|
|
745 |
|
|
|
(91 |
) |
|
|
654 |
|
|
Actuarial Assumptions
The weighted average rates assumed in the actuarial calculations used to determine both the benefit
obligations as of the measurement date and the net periodic costs for the pension and other
postretirement benefit plans for the following year are presented below. Net periodic benefit
costs were calculated in 2004 for the 2005 plan year using a discount rate of 5.75%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
Discount |
|
|
6.30 |
% |
|
|
6.00 |
% |
|
|
5.50 |
% |
Annual salary increase |
|
|
3.75 |
|
|
|
3.50 |
|
|
|
3.00 |
|
Long-term return on plan assets |
|
|
8.50 |
|
|
|
8.50 |
|
|
|
8.50 |
|
|
The Company determined the long-term rate of return based on historical asset class returns and
current market conditions, taking into account the diversification benefits of investing in
multiple asset classes.
An additional assumption used in measuring the APBO was a weighted average medical care cost trend
rate of 9.75% for 2008, decreasing gradually to 5.25% through the year 2015 and remaining at that
level thereafter. An annual increase or decrease in the assumed medical care cost trend rate of 1%
would affect the APBO and the service and interest cost components at December 31, 2007 as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 Percent |
|
1 Percent |
|
|
Increase |
|
Decrease |
|
|
(in millions) |
Benefit obligation |
|
$ |
126 |
|
|
$ |
107 |
|
Service and interest costs |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
II-69
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Employee Savings Plan
Southern Company also sponsors a 401(k) defined contribution plan covering substantially all
employees. The Company provides an 85% matching contribution up to 6% of an employees base
salary. Prior to November 2006, the Company matched employee contributions at a rate of 75% up to
6% of the employees base salary. Total matching contributions made to the plan for 2007, 2006,
and 2005 were $73 million, $62 million, and $58 million, respectively.
3. CONTINGENCIES AND REGULATORY MATTERS
General Litigation Matters
Southern Company is subject to certain claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of
business. In addition, Southern Companys business activities are subject to extensive
governmental regulation related to public health and the environment. Litigation over
environmental issues and claims of various types, including property damage, personal injury,
common law nuisance, and citizen enforcement of environmental requirements such as opacity and air
and water quality standards, has increased generally throughout the United States. In particular,
personal injury claims for damages caused by alleged exposure to hazardous materials have become
more frequent. The ultimate outcome of such pending or potential litigation against Southern
Company and its subsidiaries cannot be predicted at this time; however, for current proceedings not
specifically reported herein, management does not anticipate that the liabilities, if any, arising
from such current proceedings would have a material adverse effect on Southern Companys financial
statements.
Mirant Matters
Mirant Corporation (Mirant) was an energy company with businesses that included independent power
projects and energy trading and risk management companies in the U.S. and selected other countries.
It was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Southern Company until its initial public offering in October
2000. In April 2001, Southern Company completed a spin-off to its shareholders of its remaining
ownership, and Mirant became an independent corporate entity.
Mirant Bankruptcy
In July 2003, Mirant and certain of its affiliates filed voluntary petitions for relief under
Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas.
The Bankruptcy Court entered an order confirming Mirants plan of reorganization in December 2005,
and Mirant announced that this plan became effective in January 2006. As part of the plan, Mirant
transferred substantially all of its assets and its restructured debt to a new corporation that
adopted the name Mirant Corporation (Reorganized Mirant).
Southern Company has certain contingent liabilities associated with guarantees of contractual
commitments made by Mirants subsidiaries discussed in Note 7 under Guarantees and with various
lawsuits related to Mirant discussed below. Also, Southern Company has joint and several liability
with Mirant regarding the joint consolidated federal income tax returns through 2001, as discussed
in Note 5. In December 2004, as a result of concluding an IRS audit for the tax years 2000 and
2001, Southern Company paid approximately $39 million in additional tax and interest related to
Mirant tax items and filed a claim in Mirants bankruptcy case for that amount. Through December
2007, Southern Company received from the IRS approximately $36 million in refunds related to
Mirant. Southern Company believes it has a right to recoup the $39 million tax payment owed by
Mirant from such tax refunds. As a
result, Southern Company intends to retain the tax refunds and reduce its claim against Mirant for
the payment of Mirant taxes by the amount of such refunds. MC Asset Recovery, a special purpose
subsidiary of Reorganized Mirant, has objected to and sought to equitably subordinate the Southern
Company tax claim in its fraudulent
II-70
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
transfer litigation against Southern Company. Southern Company
has reserved the approximately $3 million amount remaining with respect to its Mirant tax claim.
Under the terms of the separation agreements entered into in connection with the spin-off, Mirant
agreed to indemnify Southern Company for costs associated with these guarantees, lawsuits, and
additional IRS assessments. However, as a result of Mirants bankruptcy, Southern Company sought
reimbursement as an unsecured creditor in Mirants Chapter 11 proceeding. As part of a complaint
filed against Southern Company in June 2005 and amended thereafter, Mirant and The Official
Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Mirant Corporation (Unsecured Creditors Committee) objected to
and sought equitable subordination of Southern Companys claims, and Mirant moved to reject the
separation agreements entered into in connection with the spin-off. MC Asset Recovery has been
substituted as plaintiff in the complaint. If Southern Companys claims for indemnification with
respect to these, or any additional future payments, are allowed, then Mirants indemnity
obligations to Southern Company would constitute unsecured claims against Mirant entitled to stock
in Reorganized Mirant. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
MC Asset Recovery Litigation
In June 2005, Mirant, as a debtor in possession, and the Unsecured Creditors Committee filed a
complaint against Southern Company in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas,
which was amended in July 2005, February 2006, May 2006, and March 2007.
In December 2005, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order authorizing the transfer of this
proceeding, along with certain other actions, to MC Asset Recovery. Under that order, Reorganized
Mirant is obligated to fund up to $20 million in professional fees in connection with the lawsuits,
as well as certain additional amounts. Any net recoveries from these lawsuits will be distributed
to, and shared equally by, certain unsecured creditors and the original equity holders. In January
2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas substituted MC Asset Recovery as
plaintiff.
The complaint, as amended in March 2007, alleges that Southern Company caused Mirant to engage in
certain fraudulent transfers and to pay illegal dividends to Southern Company prior to the
spin-off. The alleged fraudulent transfers and illegal dividends include without limitation: (1)
certain dividends from Mirant to Southern Company in the aggregate amount of $668 million, (2) the
repayment of certain intercompany loans and accrued interest in an aggregate amount of $1.035
billion, and (3) the dividend distribution of one share of Series B Preferred Stock and its
subsequent redemption in exchange for Mirants 80% interest in a holding company that owned SE
Finance Capital Corporation and Southern Company Capital Funding, Inc., which transfer plaintiff
asserts is valued at over $200 million. The complaint also seeks to recharacterize certain
advances from Southern Company to Mirant for investments in energy facilities from debt to equity.
The complaint further alleges that Southern Company is liable to Mirants creditors for the full
amount of Mirants liability under an alter ego theory of recovery and that Southern Company
breached its fiduciary duties to Mirant and its creditors, caused Mirant to breach its fiduciary
duties to creditors, and aided and abetted breaches of fiduciary duties by Mirants directors and
officers. The complaint also seeks recoveries under the theories of restitution and unjust
enrichment. In addition, the complaint alleges a claim under the Federal Debt Collection Procedure
Act (FDCPA) to void certain transfers from Mirant to Southern Company. MC Asset Recovery claims to
have standing to assert violations of the FDCPA and to recover property on behalf of the Mirant
debtors estates. The complaint seeks monetary damages in excess of $2 billion plus interest,
punitive damages, attorneys fees, and costs. Finally, the complaint includes an objection to
Southern Companys pending claims against Mirant in the Bankruptcy Court (which relate to
reimbursement under the separation agreements of payments such as income taxes, interest, legal
fees, and other guarantees described in Note 7) and seeks equitable subordination of Southern Companys claims to the claims of all other
creditors. Southern Company served an answer to the complaint in April 2007.
II-71
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
In January 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted Southern
Companys motion to withdraw this action from the Bankruptcy Court and, in February 2006, granted
Southern Companys motion to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of Georgia. In May 2006, Southern Company filed a motion for summary judgment seeking entry of
judgment against the plaintiff as to all counts of the complaint. In December 2006, the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted in part and denied in part the motion.
As a result, certain breach of fiduciary duty claims alleged in earlier versions of the complaint
are barred; all other claims in the complaint may proceed. Southern Company believes there is no
meritorious basis for the claims in the complaint and is vigorously defending itself in this
action. However, the final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Mirant Securities Litigation
In November 2002, Southern Company, certain former and current senior officers of Southern Company,
and 12 underwriters of Mirants initial public offering were added as defendants in a class action
lawsuit that several Mirant shareholders originally filed against Mirant and certain Mirant
officers in May 2002. Several other similar lawsuits filed subsequently were consolidated into
this litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The amended
complaint is based on allegations related to alleged improper energy trading and marketing
activities involving the California energy market, alleged false statements and omissions in
Mirants prospectus for its initial public offering and in subsequent public statements by Mirant,
and accounting-related issues previously disclosed by Mirant. The lawsuit purports to include
persons who acquired Mirant securities between September 26, 2000 and September 5, 2002.
In July 2003, the court dismissed all claims based on Mirants alleged improper energy trading and
marketing activities involving the California energy market. The other claims do not allege any
improper trading and marketing activity, accounting errors, or material misstatements or omissions
on the part of Southern Company but seek to impose liability on Southern Company based on
allegations that Southern Company was a control person as to Mirant prior to the spin-off date.
Southern Company filed an answer to the consolidated amended class action complaint in September
2003. Plaintiffs have also filed a motion for class certification.
During Mirants Chapter 11 proceeding, the securities litigation was stayed, with the exception of
limited discovery. Since Mirants plan of reorganization has become effective, the stay has been
lifted. In March 2006, the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration requesting that the court
vacate that portion of its July 2003 order dismissing the plaintiffs claims based upon Mirants
alleged improper energy trading and marketing activities involving the California energy market.
Southern Company and the other defendants have opposed the plaintiffs motion. On March 6, 2007,
the court granted plaintiffs motion for reconsideration, reinstated the California energy market
claims, and granted in part and denied in part defendants motion to compel certain class
certification discovery. On March 21, 2007, defendants filed renewed motions to dismiss the
California energy claims on grounds originally set forth in their 2003 motions to dismiss, but
which were not addressed by the court. On July 27, 2007, certain defendants, including Southern
Company, filed motions for reconsideration of the courts denial of a motion seeking dismissal of
certain federal securities laws claims based upon, among other things, certain alleged errors
included in financial statements issued by Mirant. The ultimate outcome of this matter cannot be
determined at this time.
The plaintiffs have also stated that they intend to request that the court grant leave for them to
amend the complaint to add allegations based upon claims asserted against Southern Company in the
MC Asset Recovery litigation.
Under certain circumstances, Southern Company will be obligated under its Bylaws to indemnify the
four current and/or former Southern Company officers who served as directors of Mirant at the time
of its initial public offering through the date of the spin-off and who are also named as defendants in this lawsuit. The final
outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
II-72
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Environmental Matters
New Source Review Actions
In November 1999, the EPA brought a civil action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia against certain Southern Company subsidiaries, including Alabama Power and
Georgia Power, alleging that these subsidiaries had violated the New Source Review (NSR) provisions
of the Clean Air Act and related state laws at certain coal-fired generating facilities. Through
subsequent amendments and other legal procedures, the EPA filed a separate action in January 2001
against Alabama Power in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama after Alabama
Power was dismissed from the original action. In these lawsuits, the EPA alleged that NSR
violations occurred at eight coal-fired generating facilities operated by Alabama Power and Georgia
Power. The civil actions request penalties and injunctive relief, including an order requiring the
installation of the best available control technology at the affected units. The action against
Georgia Power has been administratively closed since the spring of 2001, and the case has not been
reopened.
In June 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama entered a consent decree
between Alabama Power and the EPA, resolving the alleged NSR violations at Plant Miller. The
consent decree required Alabama Power to pay $100,000 to resolve the governments claim for a civil
penalty and to donate $4.9 million of sulfur dioxide emission allowances to a nonprofit charitable
organization and formalized specific emissions reductions to be accomplished by Alabama Power,
consistent with other Clean Air Act programs that require emissions reductions. In August 2006,
the district court in Alabama granted Alabama Powers motion for summary judgment and entered final
judgment in favor of Alabama Power on the EPAs claims related to all of the remaining plants:
Plants Barry, Gaston, Gorgas, and Greene County.
The plaintiffs appealed the district courts decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit, and the appeal was stayed by the Appeals Court pending the U.S. Supreme Courts decision
in a similar case against Duke Energy. The Supreme Court issued its decision in the Duke Energy
case in April 2007. On October 5, 2007, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Alabama issued an order in the Alabama Power case indicating a willingness to re-evaluate its
previous decision in light of the Supreme Courts Duke Energy opinion. On December 21, 2007, the
Eleventh Circuit vacated the district courts decision in the Alabama Power case and remanded the
case back to the district court for consideration of the legal issues in light of the Supreme
Courts decision in the Duke Energy case. The final outcome of these matters cannot be determined
at this time.
Southern Company believes that the traditional operating companies complied with applicable laws
and the EPA regulations and interpretations in effect at the time the work in question took place.
The Clean Air Act authorizes maximum civil penalties of $25,000 to $32,500 per day, per violation
at each generating unit, depending on the date of the alleged violation. An adverse outcome in
either of these cases could require substantial capital expenditures or affect the timing of
currently budgeted capital expenditures that cannot be determined at this time and could possibly
require payment of substantial penalties. Such expenditures could affect future results of
operations, cash flows, and financial condition if such costs are not recovered through regulated
rates.
Carbon Dioxide Litigation
In July 2004, attorneys general from eight states, each outside of Southern Companys service
territory, and the corporation counsel for New York City filed a complaint in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York against Southern Company and four other electric power
companies. A nearly identical complaint was filed by three environmental groups in the same court.
The complaints allege that the companies emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas,
contribute to global warming, which the plaintiffs assert is a public nuisance. Under common law
public and private nuisance theories, the plaintiffs seek a judicial order (1) holding each
defendant jointly and severally liable for creating, contributing to, and/or maintaining global
warming and (2) requiring each of the defendants to cap its emissions of carbon dioxide and then
reduce those emissions by a specified percentage each
II-73
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
year for at least a decade. Plaintiffs have not, however, requested that damages be awarded in
connection with their claims. Southern Company believes these claims are without merit and notes
that the complaint cites no statutory or regulatory basis for the claims. In September 2005, the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Southern Companys and the other
defendants motions to dismiss these cases. The plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit in October 2005 and no decision has been issued. The ultimate
outcome of these matters cannot be determined at this time.
Environmental Remediation
Southern Company must comply with other environmental laws and regulations that cover the handling
and disposal of waste and releases of hazardous substances. Under these various laws and
regulations, the subsidiaries may also incur substantial costs to clean up properties. The
traditional operating companies have each received authority from their respective state PSCs to
recover approved environmental compliance costs through regulatory mechanisms. Within limits
approved by the state PSCs, these rates are adjusted annually or as necessary.
Through 2007, Georgia Power recovered environmental costs through its base rates. Beginning in
2008, in connection with the retail rate plan for the years 2008 through 2010 (2007 Retail Rate
Plan), an environmental compliance cost recovery tariff, including an annual accrual of $1.2
million for environmental remediation, was implemented. Environmental remediation expenditures
will be charged against the reserve as they are incurred. The annual accrual amount will be
reviewed and adjusted as necessary in future regulatory proceedings. The balance of Georgia
Powers environmental remediation liability at December 31, 2007 was $13.5 million.
Georgia Power has been designated as a potentially responsible party at sites governed by the
Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act and/or by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), including a large site in Brunswick, Georgia on the
CERCLA National Priorities List (NPL). The parties have completed the removal of wastes from the
Brunswick site as ordered by the EPA. Additional claims for recovery of natural resource damages
at this site or for the assessment and potential cleanup of other sites on the Georgia Hazardous
Sites Inventory and CERCLA NPL are anticipated.
Gulf Powers environmental remediation liability includes estimated costs of environmental
remediation projects of approximately $66.9 million as of December 31, 2007. These estimated costs
relate to new regulations and more stringent site closure criteria by the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP) for impacts to groundwater from herbicide applications at Gulf
Power substations. The schedule for completion of the remediation projects will be subject to FDEP
approval. The projects have been approved by the Florida PSC for recovery through Gulf Powers
environmental cost recovery clause; therefore, there was no impact on net income as a result of
these estimates.
The final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined. However, based on the currently known
conditions at these sites and the nature and extent of activities relating to these sites,
management does not believe that additional liabilities, if any, at these sites would be material
to the financial statements.
FERC Matters
Market-Based Rate Authority
Each of the traditional operating companies and Southern Power has authorization from the FERC to
sell power to non-affiliates, including short-term opportunity sales, at market-based prices.
Specific FERC approval must be obtained with respect to a market-based contract with an affiliate.
In December 2004, the FERC initiated a proceeding to assess Southern Companys generation dominance
within its retail service territory. The ability to charge market-based rates in other markets is
not an issue in the proceeding.
II-74
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Any new market-based rate sales by any subsidiary of Southern Company in Southern Companys retail
service territory entered into during a 15-month refund period that ended in May 2006 could be
subject to refund to a cost-based rate level.
In late June and July 2007, hearings were held in this proceeding and the presiding administrative
law judge issued an initial decision on November 9, 2007 regarding the methodology to be used in
the generation dominance tests. The proceedings are ongoing. The ultimate outcome of this
generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined, but an adverse decision by the FERC in a
final order could require the traditional operating companies and Southern Power to charge
cost-based rates for certain wholesale sales in the Southern Company retail service territory,
which may be lower than negotiated market-based rates and could also result in refunds of up to
$19.7 million, plus interest. Southern Company and its subsidiaries believe that there is no
meritorious basis for this proceeding and are vigorously defending themselves in this matter.
On June 21, 2007, the FERC issued its final rule regarding market-based rate authority. The FERC
generally retained its current market-based rate standards. The impact of this order and its
effect on the generation dominance proceeding cannot now be determined.
Intercompany Interchange Contract
The Companys generation fleet in its retail service territory is operated under the Intercompany
Interchange Contract (IIC), as approved by the FERC. In May 2005, the FERC initiated a new
proceeding to examine (1) the provisions of the IIC among the traditional operating companies,
Southern Power, and SCS, as agent, under the terms of which the power pool of Southern Company is
operated, (2) whether any parties to the IIC have violated the FERCs standards of conduct
applicable to utility companies that are transmission providers, and (3) whether Southern Companys
code of conduct defining Southern Power as a system company rather than a marketing affiliate
is just and reasonable. In connection with the formation of Southern Power, the FERC authorized
Southern Powers inclusion in the IIC in 2000. The FERC also previously approved Southern
Companys code of conduct.
In October 2006, the FERC issued an order accepting a settlement resolving the proceeding subject
to Southern Companys agreement to accept certain modifications to the settlements terms and
Southern Company notified the FERC that it accepted the modifications. The modifications largely
involve functional separation and information restrictions related to marketing activities
conducted on behalf of Southern Power. Southern Company filed with the FERC in November 2006 a
compliance plan in connection with the order. On April 19, 2007, the FERC approved, with certain
modifications, the plan submitted by Southern Company. Implementation of the plan is not expected
to have a material impact on the Companys financial statements. On November 19, 2007, Southern
Company notified the FERC that the plan had been implemented and the FERC division of audits
subsequently began an audit pertaining to compliance implementation and related matters, which is
ongoing.
Generation Interconnection Agreements
In November 2004, generator company subsidiaries of Tenaska, Inc. (Tenaska), as counterparties to
three previously executed interconnection agreements with subsidiaries of Southern Company, filed
complaints at the FERC requesting that the FERC modify the agreements and that those Southern
Company subsidiaries refund a total of $19 million previously paid for interconnection facilities.
No other similar complaints are pending with the FERC.
On January 19, 2007, the FERC issued an order granting Tenaskas requested relief. Although the
FERCs order required the modification of Tenaskas interconnection agreements, under the
provisions of the order, Southern Company determined that no refund was payable to Tenaska.
Southern Company requested rehearing asserting that the FERC retroactively applied a new principle
to existing interconnection agreements. Tenaska requested rehearing of FERCs methodology for
determining the amount of refunds. The requested rehearings were denied, and
II-75
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Southern Company and Tenaska have appealed the orders to the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of
Columbia. The final outcome of this matter cannot now be determined.
Right of Way Litigation
Southern Company and certain of its subsidiaries, including Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and
Southern Telecom, Inc. (a subsidiary of SouthernLINC Wireless), have been named as defendants in
numerous lawsuits brought by landowners since 2001. The plaintiffs lawsuits claim that defendants
may not use, or sublease to third parties, some or all of the fiber optic communications lines on
the rights of way that cross the plaintiffs properties and that such actions exceed the easements
or other property rights held by defendants. The plaintiffs assert claims for, among other things,
trespass and unjust enrichment and seek compensatory and punitive damages and injunctive relief.
Management of Southern Company and its subsidiaries believe that they have complied with applicable
laws and that the plaintiffs claims are without merit.
In November 2003, the Second Circuit Court in Gadsden County, Florida, ruled in favor of the
plaintiffs on their motion for partial summary judgment concerning liability in one such lawsuit
brought by landowners regarding the installation and use of fiber optic cable over Gulf Power
rights of way located on the landowners property. Subsequently, the plaintiffs sought to amend
their complaint and asked the court to enter a final declaratory judgment and to enter an order
enjoining Gulf Power from allowing expanded general telecommunications use of the fiber optic
cables that are the subject of this litigation. In January 2005, the trial court granted in part
the plaintiffs motion to amend their complaint and denied the requested declaratory and injunctive
relief. In November 2005, the trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and against Gulf Power
on their respective motions for partial summary judgment. In that same order, the trial court also
denied Gulf Powers motion to dismiss certain claims. Gulf Power filed an appeal to the Florida
First District Court of Appeals in December 2005. In October 2006, the Florida First District
Court of Appeal issued an order dismissing Gulf Powers December 2005 appeal on the basis that the
trial courts order was a non-final order and therefore not subject to review on appeal at this
time. The case was returned to the trial court for further proceedings. The parties reached
agreement on a proposed settlement plan that was subject to approval by the trial court. On
November 7, 2007, the trial court granted preliminary approval and set forth the requirements for
the trial court to make its final determination on the proposed settlement. Although the final
outcome of this matter cannot now be determined, if approved the settlement is not expected to have
a material effect on Southern Companys financial statements.
To date, Mississippi Power has entered into agreements with plaintiffs in approximately 90% of the
actions pending against Mississippi Power to clarify its easement rights in the State of
Mississippi. These agreements have been approved by the Circuit Courts of Harrison County and
Jasper County, Mississippi (First Judicial Circuit), and dismissals of the related cases are in
progress. These agreements have not resulted in any material effects on Southern Companys
financial statements.
In addition, in late 2001, certain subsidiaries of Southern Company, including Alabama Power,
Georgia Power, Gulf Power, Mississippi Power, and Southern Telecom, Inc. (a subsidiary of
SouthernLINC Wireless), were named as defendants in a lawsuit brought by a telecommunications
company that uses certain of the defendants rights of way. This lawsuit alleges, among other
things, that the defendants are contractually obligated to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the
telecommunications company from any liability that may be assessed against it in pending and future
right of way litigation. The Company believes that the plaintiffs claims are without merit. In
the fall of 2004, the trial court stayed the case until resolution of the underlying landowner
litigation discussed above. In January 2005, the Georgia Court of Appeals dismissed the
telecommunications companys appeal of the trial courts order for lack of jurisdiction. An
adverse outcome in this matter, combined with an adverse outcome against the telecommunications
company in one or more of the right of way lawsuits, could result in substantial judgments;
however, the final outcome of these matters cannot now be determined.
II-76
NOTES (continued)
Southern Company and Subsidiary Companies 2007 Annual Report
Income Tax Matters
Leveraged Leases
Southern Company undergoes audits by the IRS for each of its tax years. The IRS has completed its
audits of Southern Companys consolidated federal income tax returns for all years prior to 2004.
The IRS challenged Southern Companys deductions related to three international lease transactions
(SILO or sale-in-lease-out transactions), in connection with its audits of Southern Companys 2000
through 2003 tax returns. In the third quarter 2006, Southern Company paid the full amount of the
disputed tax and the applicable interest on the SILO issue for tax years 2000 and 2001 and filed a
claim for refund which was denied by the IRS. The disputed tax amount was $79 million and the
related interest approximately $24 million for these tax years. This payment, and the subsequent
IRS disallowance of the refund claim, closed the issue with the IRS and Southern Company has
initiated litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia for a complete
refund of tax and interest paid for the 2000 and 2001 tax years. The IRS also challenged the SILO
deductions for the tax years 2002 and 2003. The estimated amount of disputed tax and interest for
tax years 2002 and 2003 was approximately $83 million and $15 million, respectively. The tax and
interest for these tax years was paid to the IRS in the fourth quarter 2006. Southern Company has
accounted for both payments in 2006 as deposits. For tax years 2000 through 2007, Southern Company
has claimed approximately $330 million in tax benefits related to these SILO transactions
challenged by the IRS. These tax benefits relate to timing differences and do not impact total net
income. Southern Company believes these transactions are valid leases for U.S. tax purposes and
the related deductions are allowable. Southern Company is continuing to pursue resolution of these
matters; however, the ultimate outcome cannot now be determined. In addition, the U.S. Senate is
currently considering legislation that would disallow tax benefits for SILO losses and other
international leveraged lease transactions (such as lease-in-lease-out transactions) occurring
after December 31, 2007. The ultimate impact on Southern Companys net income and cash flow will
be dependent on the outcome of pending litigation and proposed legislation, but could be
significant, and potentially material.
Effective January 1, 2007, Southern Company adopted both FIN 48 and FASB Staff Position No. FAS
13-2, Accounting for a Change or Projected Change in the Timing of Cash Flows Relating to Income
Taxes Generated by a Leveraged Lease Transaction (FSP 13-2). FIN 48 requires companies to
determine whether it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained upon
examination by the appropriate taxing authorities before any part of the benefit can be recorded in
the financial statements. It also provides guidance on the recognition, measurement, and
classification of income tax uncertainties, along with any related interest and penalties. FSP
13-2 amends FASB Statement No. 13, Accounting for Leases requiring recalculation of the rate of
return and the allocation of income whenever the projected timing of the income tax cash flows
generated by a leveraged lease is revised with recognition of the resulting gain or loss in the
year of the revision. FSP 13-2 also requires that all recognized tax positions in a leveraged
lease must be measured in accordance with the criteria in FIN 48 and any changes resulting from FIN
48 must be reflected as a change in an important lease assumption as of the date of adoption. In
adopting these standards, Southern Company concluded that a portion of the SILO tax benefits were
uncertain tax positions, as defined in FIN 48. Accordingly, Southern Company also concluded that
there was a change in the timing of project income tax cash flows and, as required by FSP 13-2,
recalculated the rate of return and allocation of income under the
lease-in-lease-out (LILO) and
SILO transactions.
The cumulative effect of the initial adoption of FIN 48 and FSP 13-2 was recorded as an adjustment
to beginning retained earnings. For the LILO transaction settled with the IRS in February 2005,
the cumulative effect of adopting FSP 13-2 was a $17 million reduction in beginning retained
earnings. With respect to Southern Companys SILO transactions, the adoption of FSP 13-2 reduced
beginning retained earnings by $108 million and the adoption of FIN 48 reduced beginning retained
earnings by an additional $15 million. The adjustments to retained earnings are non-cash charges
and those related to FSP 13-2 will be recognized as income over the remaining terms of the affected
leases. The adoption of FSP 13-2 also resulted in a reduction of net income of approximately $15
million during 2007. Any future changes in the projected or actual income tax cash flows will
result in an additional recalculation of the net investment in the leases and will be recorded
currently in income.
II-77