Commitments and Contingencies

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2019

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments and Contingencies.

a.Environmental - MGE Energy and MGE.

MGE Energy and MGE are subject to frequently changing local, state, and federal regulations concerning air quality, water quality, land use, threatened and endangered species, hazardous materials handling, and solid waste disposal. These regulations affect the manner in which they conduct their operations, the costs of those operations, as well as capital and operating expenditures. Several of these environmental rules are subject to legal challenges, reconsideration and/or other uncertainties. Regulatory initiatives, proposed rules, and court challenges to adopted rules have the potential to have a material effect on capital expenditures and operating costs. Management believes compliance costs will be recovered in future rates based on previous treatment of environmental compliance projects. These initiatives, proposed rules, and court challenges include:

•The EPA's published water effluent limitations guidelines and standards for steam electric power plants, which focus on the reduction of metals and other pollutants in wastewater from new and existing power plants, such as the coal-burning plants at Columbia and the Elm Road Units. The operators of the Columbia and the Elm Road Units have indicated that equipment upgrades may be necessary to comply with the new discharge standards.

•The EPA's cooling water intake rules, which require cooling water intake structures at electric power plants, such as our Blount and Columbia plants, to meet best available technology standards so that mortality from entrainment (drawing aquatic life into a plant's cooling system) and impingement (trapping aquatic life on screens) are reduced. MGE expects that the rule will not have a material effect on its existing plants.

•Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction guidelines and approval criteria established under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for states to use in developing plans to control GHG emissions from existing fossil fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs).

In 2015, the EPA finalized the Clean Power Plan (CPP), which directed states to submit plans to reduce GHG emissions from the electric generation sector. The CPP applied the statutory

requirements for the "best system of emission reduction" (BSER) broadly so as to encompass GHG emission reduction strategies that extend "beyond the fenceline" of existing EGUs and required a shift in the energy generation mix at the grid level.

In July 2019, the EPA published a final rule repealing the CPP and creating the replacement Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from existing coal-fired EGUs. The ACE rule applies to EGUs greater than 25 MW. Based upon these criteria, the ACE rule will likely apply to Columbia and the Elm Road Units. EGUs that burn fossil fuels other than coal, such as Blount, WCCF, and smaller natural gas- and diesel-fueled units are not subject to the ACE rule.

In contrast to the CPP, the ACE rule limits BSER to only "inside the fenceline" heat rate improvement technologies or systems that can be applied at an affected coal-fired EGU. Under ACE, states have the primary role in developing standards of performance that result from the application of BSER. The EPA has not provided a standard of performance that it will deem presumptively acceptable in a state plan, but urges states to provide full justification for each component of their plans so that the EPA can evaluate BSER on a unit-by-unit basis. The ACE rule is subject to a legal challenge pending in the United States District Court of the District of Columbia.

States will have three years to develop and submit compliance plans to the EPA. The EPA will have a year to review and approve the plans. The states are given 24 months from the approval date to implement the rule and can extend the compliance schedule for units that meet progress milestones. EGU's compliance with the ACE rule may not be required until 2024 or later. MGE is currently evaluating how this rule may impact operations. Until the State of Wisconsin develops a plan that is accepted by the EPA, MGE will not be able to determine the final impact of the rule. MGE will continue to evaluate the rule and monitor ongoing and potential legal proceedings associated with the CPP and ACE rules.

•The EPA's rule to regulate ambient levels of ozone through the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

In May 2018, the EPA issued a final rule which designated the northeast portion of Milwaukee County as being in nonattainment with this NAAQS. The Elm Road Units are located in Milwaukee County, outside the designated nonattainment area. In August 2018, several environmental groups, the City of Chicago, and the State of Illinois filed federal lawsuits challenging several of the EPA's attainment designation decisions, including the partial Milwaukee County designation as being too narrow and not sufficiently protective. MGE is monitoring the outcome of this lawsuit and how it may affect our Elm Road Units in Milwaukee County. At this time, MGE expects that the 2015 Ozone NAAQS will not have a material effect on its existing plants based on final designations.

•Rules regulating nitrogen oxide (NO_x) and sulfur dioxide (SO₂) emissions, including the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) and Clean Air Visibility Rule (CAVR).

MGE has met its CSAPR obligations in 2018 and 2017 through a combination of reduced emissions through pollution control (e.g. SCR installation at Columbia), as well as owned, received, and purchased allowances. CSAPR has been subject to ongoing legal challenges. In September 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the legal argument that the EPA cannot provide a partial remedy to the Clean Air Act's "Good Neighbor Provision" which addresses interstate transport of pollutants from upwind states to downwind states. Under the current rule, the EPA was not holding upwind states to the same attainment deadlines as the downwind states that they impacted. The court indicated that this leniency on the upwind states effectively causes downwind states to miss attainment deadlines or over comply to meet deadlines. The court remanded the rule to the EPA without vacating it. No deadline has been set for the EPA to revise the rule. Wisconsin is considered an upwind state under CSAPR and is potentially impacted by rules that the EPA will develop to address this remand.

MGE will not be able to determine impacts to our operations until rules are promulgated. MGE will continue to monitor developments.

Columbia is subject to the best available retrofit technology (BART) regulations, a subsection of the EPA's CAVR, which may require pollution control retrofits. Columbia's existing pollution control upgrades, and the EPA's stance that compliance with the CSAPR equals compliance with BART, should mean that Columbia will not need to do additional work to meet BART requirements. At this time, however, the BART regulatory obligations, compliance strategies, and costs remain uncertain in Wisconsin due to the continued legal challenges surrounding CSAPR and CAVR. MGE will continue to monitor developments to this rule.

•The EPA's Coal Combustion Residuals Rule (CCR), which regulates coal ash from burning coal for the purpose of generating electricity as a solid waste, and defines what ash use activities would be considered generally exempt beneficial reuse of coal ash. The CCR rule also regulates landfills, ash ponds, and other surface impoundments used for coal combustion residuals by regulating their design, location, monitoring, and operation.

Review of the Elm Road Units has indicated that the costs to comply with this rule are not expected to be significant. Columbia's operator has completed a review of their system and has developed a compliance plan. Columbia's operator is also exploring alternative compliance options to meet the rule requirements by the rule's deadline. MGE will continue to monitor the operator's plans for compliance to assess potential impacts on operations.

In July 2018, the EPA published a final rule that included amendments to the CCR (which include the allowance of alternative performance standards for landfills and surface impoundments, revised risk-based groundwater protection standards, and an extension of the deadline by which certain facilities must cease the placement of waste in CCR units). In August 2018, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated parts of the CCR for not being sufficiently protective of the environment. In August 2019, the EPA introduced a proposed rule that if final would revise some monitoring, corrective action, beneficial reuse, and storage requirements. The revised rule as proposed would not have material impact on MGE. MGE will continue to monitor potential rule modifications to assess potential impacts on operations.

b.Legal Matters - MGE Energy and MGE.

MGE is involved in various legal matters that are being defended and handled in the normal course of business. MGE maintains accruals for such costs that are probable of being incurred and subject to reasonable estimation. The accrued amount for these matters is not material to the financial statements. MGE does not expect the resolution of these matters to have a material adverse effect on its consolidated results of operations, financial condition, or cash flows.

c.Purchase Contracts - MGE Energy and MGE.

MGE Energy and MGE have entered into various commodity supply, transportation, and storage contracts to meet their obligations to deliver electricity and natural gas to customers. Management expects to recover these costs in future customer rates. The following table shows future commitments related to purchase contracts as of September 30, 2019:

(In thousands)		2019		2020		2021		2022		2023		Thereafter
Coal(a)	$	7,293		13,120		5,647		2,313		-		-
Natural gas
Transportation and storage(b)		6,258		21,997		21,728		21,728		21,728		55,460
Supply(c)		8,773		10,600		-		-		-		-
Solar farms(d)		509		310		3,024		726		743		32,474
Other		92		928		929		97		99		1,079
	$	22,925	$	46,955	$	31,328	$	24,864	$	22,570	$	89,013

(a)Total coal commitments for the Columbia and Elm Road Units, including transportation. Fuel procurement for MGE’s jointly owned Columbia and Elm Road Units is handled by WPL and WEPCO, respectively, who are the operators of those facilities.

(b)MGE’s natural gas transportation and storage contracts require fixed monthly payments for firm supply pipeline transportation and storage capacity. The pricing components of the fixed monthly payments for the transportation and storage contracts are established by FERC but may be subject to change.

(c)These commitments include market-based pricing.

(d)In 2019, MGE entered into commitments related to operations of the Two Creeks and Badger Hollow Solar Farms. See Footnote 14 for further information on the solar farm construction.

d.Capital Purchase Commitments - MGE Energy and MGE.

Various contractual obligations contain minimum future commitments related to capital expenditures for certain construction projects, including the Two Creeks solar project and the Badger Hollow Solar Farm. As of September 30, 2019, the Two Creeks and Badger Hollow future minimum construction commitment is $20.5 million and $53.2 million, respectively.

e.Other Commitments - MGE Energy.

In September 2019, MGE Energy entered into a subscription agreement to invest in a nonpublic venture capital fund. From time to time, the fund makes capital calls to its investors. MGE Energy has committed to contribute $10 million in capital for such capital calls. The timing of these capital calls is dependent on the needs of the funds and is therefore uncertain at this time.