1.                                      Consolidation and Nature of Operations

The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Pinnacle West and our subsidiaries: APS, SunCor Development Company (“SunCor”), El Dorado Investment Company (“El Dorado”) and formerly APS Energy Services Company, Inc. (“APSES”).  See Note 13 for discussion of the bankruptcy filing of SunCor and the sale of APSES.  Intercompany accounts and transactions between the consolidated companies have been eliminated.  The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for APS include the accounts of APS and the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (“Palo Verde”) sale leaseback variable interest entities (“VIEs”) (see Note 7 for further discussion).  Our accounting records are maintained in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”).  The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.  Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Weather conditions cause significant seasonal fluctuations in our revenues; therefore, results for interim periods do not necessarily represent results expected for the year.

Our condensed consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments except as otherwise disclosed in the notes) that we believe are necessary for the fair presentation of our financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented.  These condensed consolidated financial statements and notes have been prepared consistently with the 2011 Form 10-K with the exception of the reclassification of certain prior year amounts on our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income in accordance with accounting requirements for reporting discontinued operations (see Note 13) and to conform to current year presentation, and on our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows to conform to the current year presentation.

See Note 16 for discussion of amended guidance on the presentation of comprehensive income.

The following tables show the impact of the reclassifications to prior year (previously reported) amounts (dollars in thousands):

2.                                      Long-Term Debt and Liquidity Matters

Pinnacle West and APS maintain committed revolving credit facilities in order to enhance liquidity and provide credit support for their commercial paper programs.

Pinnacle West

At March 31, 2012, Pinnacle West’s $200 million credit facility, which matures in November 2016, was available to refinance indebtedness of the Company and for other general corporate purposes, including credit support for its $200 million commercial paper program.  Pinnacle West has the option to increase the amount of the facility up to a maximum of $300 million upon the satisfaction of certain conditions and with the consent of the lenders. At March 31, 2012, Pinnacle West had no outstanding borrowings under its credit facility, no letters of credit outstanding and no commercial paper borrowings.

APS

On January 13, 2012, APS issued $325 million of 4.50% unsecured senior notes that mature on April 1, 2042.  The net proceeds from the sale were used along with other funds to repay at maturity APS’s $375 million aggregate principal amount of 6.50% senior notes on March 1, 2012.

At March 31, 2012, APS had two credit facilities totaling $1 billion, including a $500 million credit facility that matures in February 2015, and a $500 million facility that matures in November 2016.  APS may increase the amount of each facility up to a maximum of $700 million upon the satisfaction of certain conditions and with the consent of the lenders.  APS will use these facilities to refinance indebtedness and for other general corporate purposes.  Interest rates are based on APS’s senior unsecured debt credit ratings.

The facilities described above are available to support APS’s $250 million commercial paper program, for bank borrowings or for issuances of letters of credit.  At March 31, 2012, APS had commercial paper borrowings of $217 million, and no borrowings or letters of credit outstanding under either of these credit facilities.

On May 1, 2012, APS purchased all $32 million of the Maricopa County, Arizona Pollution Control Corporation Pollution Control Revenue Refunding Bonds, 2009 Series B, due 2029.  We expect to remarket these bonds within the next twelve months.  These bonds are classified as current maturities of long-term debt on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011.

See “Financial Assurances” in Note 10 for discussion of APS’s outstanding letters of credit.

Debt Fair Value

Our long-term debt fair value estimates are based on quoted market prices for the same or similar issues, and are classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. See Note 14 for discussion of the fair value hierarchy. The following table represents the estimated fair value of our long-term debt, including current maturities (dollars in millions):

Debt Provisions

An ACC order requires APS to maintain a common equity ratio of at least 40%. As defined in the ACC order, the common equity ratio is total shareholder equity divided by the sum of total shareholder equity and long-term debt, including current maturities of long-term debt. At March 31, 2012, APS was in compliance with this common equity ratio requirement.  Its total shareholder equity was approximately $3.9 billion, and total capitalization was approximately $7.1 billion. APS would be prohibited from paying dividends if the payment would reduce its total shareholder equity below approximately $2.8 billion, assuming APS’s total capitalization remains the same.  Since APS was in compliance with this common equity ratio requirement, this restriction does not materially affect Pinnacle West’s ability to meet its ongoing cash needs.

3.                                      Regulatory Matters

Retail Rate Case Filing with the Arizona Corporation Commission

On June 1, 2011, APS filed an application with the ACC for a net retail base rate increase of $95.5 million.  APS requested that the increase become effective July 1, 2012.  The request would increase the average retail customer bill approximately 6.6%.  The filing is based on a test year ended December 31, 2010, adjusted as described below.  On January 6, 2012, APS and other parties to APS’s pending general retail rate case entered into an agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) detailing the terms upon which the parties have agreed to settle the rate case.  The Settlement Agreement requires the approval of the ACC.  Evidentiary hearings on the matter were completed on February 3, 2012 and briefs from the parties were filed on February 29, 2012.  See below for details regarding the Settlement Agreement.

The key financial provisions of APS’s original request included:

·                                          An increase in non-fuel base rates of $194.1 million, before the reclassification into base rates of $44.9 million of revenues related to solar generation projects collected through APS’s renewable energy surcharge (which will increase base rates) and $143.5 million of lower fuel and purchased power costs currently addressed through the Power Supply Adjustor (“PSA”) (which will decrease base rates);

·                                          A rate base of $5.7 billion, which approximates the ACC-jurisdictional portion of the book value of utility assets, net of accumulated depreciation and other credits, as of December 31, 2010, subject to certain adjustments, including plant additions under construction at the end of the test year that are currently in service or expected to be placed into service before the proposed rates are requested to become effective;

·                                          The following proposed capital structure and costs of capital:

·                                          A base rate for fuel and purchased power costs (“Base Fuel Rate”) of $0.03242 per kilowatt-hour (“kWh”) based on estimated 2012 prices (a decrease from the current Base Fuel Rate of $0.03757 per kWh).

APS proposed that its PSA be modified to allow full pass-through of all fuel and purchased power costs, instead of the current 90/10 sharing provision.  In addition, APS proposed a decoupling mechanism, which would address recovery of APS’s fixed costs after reflecting implementation of ACC-mandated energy efficiency standards and renewable distributed generation.

Settlement Agreement

The Settlement Agreement provides for a zero net change in base rates, consisting of: (1) a non-fuel base rate increase of $116.3 million; (2) a fuel-related base rate decrease of $153.1 million (to be implemented by a change in the Base Fuel Rate from $0.03757 to $0.03207 per kWh); and (3) the transfer of cost recovery for certain renewable energy projects from the Arizona Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff (“RES”) surcharge to base rates in an estimated amount of $36.8 million.

APS also agreed not to file its next general rate case before May 31, 2015, and not to request that its next general retail rate increase be effective prior to July 1, 2016.  The Settlement Agreement allows APS to request a change to its base rates during the stay-out period in the event of an extraordinary event that, in the ACC’s judgment, requires base rate relief in order to protect the public interest.  Nor is APS precluded from seeking rate relief, or any other party to the Settlement Agreement precluded from petitioning the ACC to examine the reasonableness of APS’s rates, in the event of significant regulatory developments that materially impact the financial results expected under the terms of the Settlement Agreement.

Other key provisions of the Settlement Agreement include the following:

·                                          An authorized return on common equity of 10.0%;

·                                          A capital structure comprised of 46.1% debt and 53.9% common equity;

·                                          A test year ended December 31, 2010, adjusted to include plant that is in service as of March 31, 2012;

·                                          Deferral for future recovery or refund of property taxes above or below a specified 2010 test year level caused by changes to the Arizona property tax rate as follows:

·                                          Deferral of 25% in 2012, 50% in 2013 and 75% for 2014 and subsequent years if Arizona property tax rates increase; and

·                                          Deferral of 100% in all years if Arizona property tax rates decrease;

·                                          A procedure to allow APS to request rate adjustments prior to its next general rate case related to APS’s proposed acquisition (should it be consummated) of additional interests in Units 4 and 5 and the related closure of Units 1-3 of the Four Corners Power Plant (“Four Corners”);

·                                          Implementation of a “Lost Fixed Cost Recovery” rate mechanism to support energy efficiency and distributed renewable generation;

·                                          Modifications to the Environmental Improvement Surcharge (“EIS”) to allow for the recovery of carrying costs for capital expenditures associated with government-mandated environmental controls, subject to an existing cents per kWh cap on cost recovery that could produce approximately $5 million annually;

·                                          Modifications to the PSA, including the elimination of the current 90/10 sharing provision;

·                                          Allowing a negative credit that currently exists in the PSA to continue until February 2013, rather than being reset on the anticipated July 1, 2012 rate effective date;

·                                          Modification of the transmission cost adjustor (“TCA”) to streamline the process for future transmission-related rate changes; and

·                                          Implementation of various changes to rate schedules, including the adoption of an experimental “buy-through” rate that could allow certain large commercial and industrial customers to select alternative sources of generation to be supplied by APS.

If the Settlement Agreement is approved by the ACC, APS expects that its provisions will become effective on or about July 1, 2012.  As is the case with all such agreements, APS cannot predict whether the Settlement Agreement will be approved in the form filed or what changes may be ordered by the ACC and accepted by the parties.

2008 General Retail Rate Case Impacts

On December 30, 2009, the ACC issued an order approving a settlement agreement entered into by APS and twenty-one other parties in APS’s prior general retail rate case, which was originally filed in March 2008.  The settlement agreement included a net retail rate increase of $207.5 million, which represented a base rate increase of $344.7 million less a reclassification of $137.2 million of fuel and purchased power revenues from the then-existing PSA to base rates.  The new rates were effective January 1, 2010.  The settlement agreement also contained on-going requirements, commitments and authorizations, including the following:

·                                          Revenue accounting treatment for line extension payments received for new or upgraded service from January 1, 2010 through year end 2012 (or until new rates are established in APS’s next general rate case, if that is before the end of 2012);

·                                          An authorized return on common equity of 11%;

·                                          A capital structure comprised of 46.2% debt and 53.8% common equity;

·                                          A commitment from APS to reduce average annual operational expenses by at least $30 million from 2010 through 2014 (APS filed a notification with the ACC on April 29, 2011, demonstrating its compliance with this provision in 2010);

·                                          Authorization and requirements of equity infusions into APS of at least $700 million during the period beginning June 1, 2009 through December 31, 2014 ($253 million of which was infused into APS from proceeds of a Pinnacle West equity issuance in the second quarter of 2010); and

·                                          Various modifications to the existing energy efficiency, demand-side management and renewable energy programs that require APS to, among other things, expand its conservation and demand-side management programs and its use of renewable energy, as well as allow for concurrent recovery of renewable energy expenses and provide for more concurrent recovery of demand-side management costs and incentives.

Cost Recovery Mechanisms

APS has received regulatory decisions that allow for more timely recovery of certain costs through the following recovery mechanisms.

Renewable Energy Standard.  In 2006, the ACC approved the RES.  Under the RES, electric utilities that are regulated by the ACC must supply an increasing percentage of their retail electric energy sales from eligible renewable resources, including solar, wind, biomass, biogas and geothermal technologies.  In order to achieve these requirements, the ACC allows APS to include a RES surcharge as part of customer bills to recover the approved amounts for use on renewable energy projects.  Each year APS is required to file a five-year implementation plan with the ACC and seek approval for funding the upcoming year’s RES budget.

On July 1, 2011, APS filed its annual RES implementation plan, covering the 2012-2016  timeframe and requesting 2012 RES funding of $129 million to $152 million.  On December 14, 2011, the ACC voted to approve APS’s 2012 RES Plan and authorized a total 2012 RES budget of $110 million.  Within that budget, the ACC authorized APS to, among other items, (i) own an additional 100 megawatts (“MW”) under the AZ Sun Program, for a total of 200 MW; (ii) recover revenue requirements for the second 100 MW as APS did for the first 100 MW of the AZ Sun Program; (iii) expand APS’s School and Government Program by another 6.25 MW of utility owned distributed generation; and (iv) own another 25 MW of renewable generation to be described later and installed in 2014 and 2015.  In addition, the ACC ordered an initial up front incentive of $0.75 per watt for residential distributed energy and incentive level step downs throughout 2012 based upon the volume and timing of residential incentive applications.  Under the ACC’s order, residential incentives could fall to $0.20 or $0.10 per watt by the end of 2012 depending on demand.

Demand-Side Management Adjustor Charge (“DSMAC”).  The settlement agreement resulting from the 2008 retail rate case requires APS to submit an annual Demand-Side Management Implementation Plan for review by and approval of the ACC.  In 2010, the DSMAC was modified to recover estimated amounts for use on certain demand-side management programs over the current year.  Previously, the DSMAC allowed for such recovery only on a historical or after-the-fact basis.  The surcharge allows for the recovery of energy efficiency program expenses and any earned incentives.

The ACC previously approved recovery of all 2009 program costs plus incentives.  The change from program cost recovery on a historical basis to recovery on a concurrent basis, as authorized in the 2008 retail rate case settlement agreement, resulted in this one-time need to address two years (2009 and 2010) of cost recovery.  As requested by APS, 2009 program cost recovery is to be amortized over a three-year period.

On June 1, 2010, APS filed its 2011 Demand-Side Management Implementation Plan. In order to meet the energy efficiency goal for 2011 established by the settlement agreement of annual energy savings of 1.25%, expressed as a percent of total energy resources to meet retail load, APS proposed a total budget for 2011 of $79 million.  On February 17, 2011, a total budget for 2011 of $80 million was approved and, when added to the amortization of 2009 program costs discussed in the previous paragraph less the $10 million already being recovered in general retail base rates, the DSMAC would recover approximately $75 million over a twelve-month period beginning March 1, 2011.

On June 1, 2011, APS filed its 2012 Demand-Side Management Implementation Plan to meet the energy efficiency requirements of the ACC’s Energy Efficiency Rules, which became effective January 1, 2011. The 2012 requirement under such rules is for energy efficiency savings of 1.75% of APS retail sales for the prior year. This energy savings requirement is slightly higher than the goal established by the 2008 retail rate case settlement agreement (1.5% of total energy resources). The ACC issued an order on April 4, 2012 approving recovery of approximately $72 million over a twelve-month period beginning March 1, 2012.  This amount does not include $10 million already being recovered in general retail base rates.

PSA Mechanism and Balance.  The PSA provides for the adjustment of retail rates to reflect variations in retail fuel and purchased power costs.

The following table shows the changes in the deferred fuel and purchased power regulatory asset (liability) for 2012 and 2011 (dollars in millions):

The PSA rate for the PSA year beginning February 1, 2012 is negative $0.0042 per kWh as compared to negative $0.0057 per kWh for the prior year.  Any uncollected (overcollected) deferrals during the 2012 PSA year will be included in the calculation of the PSA rate for the PSA year beginning February 1, 2013.

Transmission Rates and Transmission Cost Adjustor.  In July 2008, the United States Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) approved an Open Access Transmission Tariff for APS to move from fixed rates to a formula rate-setting methodology in order to more accurately reflect and recover the costs that APS incurs in providing transmission services.  A large portion of the rate represents charges for transmission services to serve APS’s retail customers (“Retail Transmission Charges”).  In order to recover the Retail Transmission Charges, APS must file an application with, and obtain approval from, the ACC to reflect changes in Retail Transmission Charges through the TCA.  If the Settlement Agreement (discussed above) is approved, an adjustment to rates to recover the Retail Transmission Charges will be made annually each June 1 and will go into effect automatically unless suspended by the ACC.

The formula rate is updated each year effective June 1 on the basis of APS’s actual cost of service, as disclosed in APS’s FERC Form 1 report for the previous fiscal year.  Items to be updated include actual capital expenditures made as compared with previous projections, transmission revenue credits and other items.  The resolution of proposed adjustments can result in significant volatility in the revenues to be collected.  APS reviews the proposed formula rate filing amounts with the ACC staff.  Any items or adjustments which are not agreed to by APS and the ACC staff can remain in dispute until settled or litigated at FERC.  Settlement or litigated resolution of disputed issues could require an extended period of time and could have a significant effect on the Retail Transmission Charge because any adjustment, though applied prospectively, may be calculated to account for previously over-collected amounts.

Effective June 1, 2011, APS’s annual wholesale transmission rates for all users of its transmission system increased by approximately $44 million for the twelve-month period beginning June 1, 2011 in accordance with the FERC-approved formula as a result of higher costs and lower revenues reflected in the formula.  Approximately $38 million of this revenue increase relates to Retail Transmission Charges.  The ACC approved the related increase of APS’s TCA rate on June 21, 2011 and it became effective on July 1, 2011.

Regulatory Assets and Liabilities

The detail of regulatory assets is as follows (dollars in millions):

(a)                                  See Cost Recovery Mechanisms discussion above.

(b)                                 There are no regulatory assets for which the ACC has allowed recovery of costs but not allowed a return by exclusion from rate base.  FERC rates are set using a formula rate as described in “Transmission Rates and Transmission Cost Adjustor.”

The detail of regulatory liabilities is as follows (dollars in millions):

(a)                                  In accordance with regulatory accounting guidance, APS accrues for removal costs for its regulated assets, even if there is no legal obligation for removal.

(b)                                 See Cost Recovery Mechanisms discussion above.

4.                                      Retirement Plans and Other Benefits

Pinnacle West sponsors a qualified defined benefit and account balance pension plan, a non-qualified supplemental excess benefit retirement plan, and other postretirement benefit plans for the employees of Pinnacle West and our subsidiaries.  Pinnacle West uses a December 31 measurement date for its pension and other postretirement benefit plans.  The market-related value of our plan assets is their fair value at the measurement date.

Certain pension and other postretirement benefit costs in excess of amounts recovered in electric retail rates are deferred as a regulatory asset for future recovery, pursuant to an ACC regulatory order.  We deferred pension and other postretirement benefit costs of approximately $9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and $3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2011.  The following table provides details of the plans’ net periodic benefit costs and the portion of these costs charged to expense (including administrative costs and excluding amounts capitalized as overhead construction, billed to electric plant participants or charged to the regulatory asset) (dollars in millions):

Contributions

The required minimum contribution to our pension plan is approximately $65 million in 2012, approximately $160 million in 2013 and approximately $175 million in 2014.  The contributions to our other postretirement benefit plans for 2012, 2013 and 2014 are expected to be approximately $20 million each year.

5.                                      Business Segments

Pinnacle West’s reportable business segment is our regulated electricity segment, which consists of traditional regulated retail and wholesale electricity businesses (primarily retail and wholesale sales supplied to traditional cost-based rate regulation (“Native Load”) customers) and related activities and includes electricity generation, transmission and distribution.

Financial data for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 and at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011 is provided as follows (dollars in millions):

(a)                                  All other activities relate to APSES, SunCor, Pinnacle West and El Dorado.  See Note 13 for discussion of discontinued operations.

6.                                      Income Taxes

The $69 million income tax receivable on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets primarily represents the anticipated refunds related to an APS tax accounting method change approved by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) in the third quarter of 2009.  This amount is classified as long-term, as there remains uncertainty regarding the timing of this cash receipt. Further clarification of the timing is expected from the IRS within the next twelve months.

Net income associated with the Palo Verde Sale Leaseback Variable Interest Entities is not subject to tax (see Note 7).  As a result, there is no income tax expense recorded on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income.

It is reasonably possible that within the next twelve months the IRS will finalize the examination of tax returns for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009. At this time, a reasonable estimate of the range of possible change in the uncertain tax position cannot be made.  However, we do not expect the ultimate outcome of this examination to have a material adverse impact on our financial position or results of operations.

On February 17, 2011, Arizona enacted legislation (H.B. 2001) that included a four year phase-in of corporate income tax rate reductions beginning in 2014.  As a result of these tax rate reductions, Pinnacle West has revised the tax rate applicable to reversing temporary items in Arizona.  In accordance with accounting for regulated companies, the benefit of this rate reduction is substantially offset by a regulatory liability.

As of March 31, 2012, the tax year ended December 31, 2008 and all subsequent tax years remain subject to examination by the IRS.  With few exceptions, we are no longer subject to state income tax examinations by tax authorities for years before 2007.

7.                                      Palo Verde Sale Leaseback Variable Interest Entities

In 1986, APS entered into agreements with three separate VIE lessor trusts in order to sell and lease back interests in Palo Verde Unit 2 and related common facilities.  APS will pay approximately $49 million per year for the years 2012 to 2015 related to these leases. The lease agreements include fixed rate renewal periods which may give APS the ability to utilize the asset for a significant portion of the asset’s economic life.  Predominately due to the fixed rate renewal periods, APS has been deemed the primary beneficiary of these VIEs and therefore consolidates the VIEs.

As a result of consolidation we eliminate rent expense and recognize depreciation and interest expense, resulting in an increase in net income for the three months ended March 31, 2012 of $8 million and for the three months ended March 31, 2011 of $5 million, entirely attributable to the noncontrolling interests.  Income attributable to Pinnacle West shareholders remains the same.  Consolidation of these VIEs also results in changes to our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, but does not impact net cash flows.

Our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011 include the following amounts relating to the VIEs (in millions):

Assets of the VIEs are restricted and may only be used to settle the VIEs’ debt obligations and for payment to the noncontrolling interest holders.  Other than the VIEs’ assets reported on our consolidated financial statements, the creditors of the VIEs have no other recourse to the assets of APS or Pinnacle West, except in certain circumstances such as a default by APS under the lease.

APS is exposed to losses relating to these VIEs upon the occurrence of certain events that APS does not consider to be reasonably likely to occur.  Under certain circumstances (for example, the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (“NRC”) issuing specified violation orders with respect to Palo Verde or the occurrence of specified nuclear events), APS would be required to make specified payments to the VIEs’ noncontrolling equity participants, assume the VIEs’ debt, and take title to the leased Unit 2 interests, which, if appropriate, may be required to be written down in value.  If such an event had occurred as of March 31, 2012, APS would have been required to pay the noncontrolling equity participants approximately $141 million and assume $97 million of debt. Since APS consolidates these VIEs, the debt APS would be required to assume is already reflected in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

For regulatory ratemaking purposes the leases continue to be treated as operating leases and, as a result, we have recorded a regulatory asset relating to the arrangements.

8.                                      Derivative Accounting

We are exposed to the impact of market fluctuations in the commodity price and transportation costs of electricity, natural gas, coal, emissions allowances and in interest rates.  We manage risks associated with market volatility by utilizing various physical and financial derivative instruments, including futures, forwards, options and swaps.  As part of our overall risk management program, we may use derivative instruments to hedge purchases and sales of electricity and fuels.  Derivative instruments that meet certain hedge accounting criteria are designated as cash flow hedges and are used to limit our exposure to cash flow variability on forecasted transactions.  The changes in market value of such instruments have a high correlation to price changes in the hedged transactions. We also enter into derivative instruments for economic hedging purposes. While we believe the economic hedges mitigate exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices, some of these instruments may not meet the specific hedge accounting requirements and are not designated as accounting hedges. Contracts that have the same terms (quantities, delivery points and delivery periods) and for which power does not flow are netted, which reduces both revenues and fuel and purchased power costs in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income, but does not impact our financial condition, net income or cash flows.

Our derivative instruments, excluding those qualifying for a scope exception, are recorded on the balance sheet as an asset or liability and are measured at fair value; see Note 14 for a discussion of fair value measurements.  Derivative instruments may qualify for the normal purchases and normal sales scope exception if they require physical delivery and the quantities represent those transacted in the normal course of business.  Derivative instruments qualifying for the normal purchase and sales scope exception are accounted for under the accrual method of accounting and excluded from our derivative instrument discussion and disclosures below.

Hedge effectiveness is the degree to which the derivative instrument contract and the hedged item are correlated and is measured based on the relative changes in fair value of the derivative instrument contract and the hedged item over time.  We assess hedge effectiveness both at inception and on a continuing basis.  These assessments exclude the time value of certain options.  For accounting hedges that are deemed an effective hedge, the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative instrument is reported as a component of other comprehensive income (“OCI”) and reclassified into earnings in the same period during which the hedged transaction affects earnings.  We recognize in current earnings, subject to the PSA, the gains and losses representing hedge ineffectiveness, and the gains and losses on any hedge components which are excluded from our effectiveness assessment.  As of March 31, 2012, we hedged the majority of certain exposures to the price variability of commodities for a maximum of 39 months.

For its regulated operations, APS defers for future rate treatment approximately 90% of unrealized gains and losses on certain derivatives pursuant to the PSA mechanism that would otherwise be recognized in income.  Realized gains and losses on derivatives are deferred in accordance with the PSA to the extent the amounts are above or below the Base Fuel Rate (see Note 3).  Gains and losses from derivatives in the following tables represent the amounts reflected in income before the effect of PSA deferrals.

As of March 31, 2012, we had the following outstanding gross notional volume of derivatives, which represent both purchases and sales (does not reflect net position):

(a)                                  “Bcf” is Billion Cubic Feet.

Gains and Losses from Derivative Instruments

The following table provides information about gains and losses from derivative instruments in designated cash flow accounting hedging relationships during the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 (dollars in thousands):

(a)                                  During the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011, we had no amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to earnings related to discontinued cash flow hedges.

During the next twelve months, we estimate that a net loss of $97 million before income taxes will be reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income as an offset to the effect of market price changes for the related hedged transactions.  In accordance with the PSA, certain of these amounts will be recorded as either a regulatory asset or liability and have no effect on earnings.

The following table provides information about gains and losses from derivative instruments not designated as accounting hedging instruments during the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 (dollars in thousands):

Fair Values of Derivative Instruments in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

The following table provides information about the fair value of our risk management activities reported on a gross basis.  Transactions with counterparties that have contractual net settlement provisions are reported net on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.  These amounts are located in the assets and liabilities from risk management activities lines of our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.  Amounts are as of March 31, 2012 (dollars in thousands):

(a)                                  Collateral relates to non-derivative instruments or derivative instruments that qualify for a scope exception.

(b)                                 Other represents derivative instrument netting, options, and other risk management contracts.

The following table provides information about the fair value of our risk management activities reported on a gross basis at December 31, 2011 (dollars in thousands):

(a)                                  Collateral relates to non-derivative instruments or derivative instruments that qualify for a scope exception.

(b)                                 Other represents derivative instrument netting, options, and other risk management contracts.

Credit Risk and Credit Related Contingent Features

We are exposed to losses in the event of nonperformance or nonpayment by counterparties.  We have risk management contracts with many counterparties, including two counterparties for which our exposure represents approximately 83% of Pinnacle West’s $88 million of risk management assets as of March 31, 2012.  This exposure relates to long-term traditional wholesale contracts with counterparties that have high credit quality.  Our risk management process assesses and monitors the financial exposure of all counterparties.  Despite the fact that the great majority of trading counterparties’ debt is rated as investment grade by the credit rating agencies, there is still a possibility that one or more of these companies could default, resulting in a material impact on consolidated earnings for a given period.  Counterparties in the portfolio consist principally of financial institutions, major energy companies, municipalities and local distribution companies.  We maintain credit policies that we believe minimize overall credit risk to within acceptable limits.  Determination of the credit quality of our counterparties is based upon a number of factors, including credit ratings and our evaluation of their financial condition.  To manage credit risk, we employ collateral requirements and standardized agreements that allow for the netting of positive and negative exposures associated with a single counterparty.  Valuation adjustments are established representing our estimated credit losses on our overall exposure to counterparties.

Certain of our derivative instrument contracts contain credit-risk-related contingent features including, among other things, investment grade credit rating provisions, credit-related cross default provisions, and adequate assurance provisions.  Adequate assurance provisions allow a counterparty with reasonable grounds for uncertainty to demand additional collateral based on subjective events and/or conditions.  For those derivative instruments in a net liability position, with investment grade credit contingencies, the counterparties could demand additional collateral if our debt credit rating were to fall below investment grade (below BBB- for Standard & Poor’s or Fitch or Baa3 for Moody’s).

The following table provides information about our derivative instruments that have credit-risk-related contingent features at March 31, 2012 (dollars in millions):

(a)          This amount is after counterparty netting and includes those contracts which qualify for scope exceptions, which are excluded from the derivative details in the footnote above.

We also have energy related non-derivative instrument contracts with investment grade credit-related contingent features which could also require us to post additional collateral of approximately $184 million if our debt credit ratings were to fall below investment grade.

9.                                      Changes in Equity

The following tables show Pinnacle West’s changes in shareholders’ equity and changes in equity of noncontrolling interests for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 (dollars in thousands):