Note 10 - Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2014

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]

Note 10 - Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies

We have incurred various contractual obligations and financial commitments in the normal course of our operating and financing activities that are reasonably likely to have a material effect on liquidity or the availability of capital resources. Contractual obligations include future cash payments required under existing contractual arrangements, such as debt and lease agreements. These obligations may result from both general financing activities and from commercial arrangements that are directly supported by related revenue-producing activities.

We also are involved in legal or administrative proceedings before various courts and agencies with respect to general claims, taxes, environmental, gas cost prudence reviews and other matters. Although we are unable to determine the ultimate outcomes of these other contingencies, we believe that our financial statements appropriately reflect these amounts, including the recording of liabilities when a loss is probable and reasonably estimable. For more information on these matters, see Note 11 in our Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes in Item 8 of our 2013 Form 10-K.

Contingencies and Guarantees

Contingent financial commitments, such as financial guarantees, represent obligations that become payable only if certain predefined events occur. We have certain subsidiaries that enter into various financial and performance guarantees and indemnities providing assurance to third parties. We believe the likelihood of payment under our guarantees is remote. No liability has been recorded for such guarantees and indemnifications as the fair value is immaterial.

Regulatory Matters

On December 21, 2012 Atlanta Gas Light filed a petition with the Georgia Commission for approval to resolve an imbalance of approximately 4.8 Bcf of natural gas related to Atlanta Gas Light’s use of retained storage assets to operationally balance the system for the benefit of the natural gas market. We believe that any costs associated with resolving the imbalance are recoverable from Marketers. We are currently working with the Marketers to settle this matter, and the resolution of this imbalance will ultimately be decided by the Georgia Commission. We are currently unable to predict the ultimate outcome and recovery.

Environmental Matters

We are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations governing environmental quality and pollution control that require us to remove or remedy the effect on the environment of the disposal or release of specified substances at our current and former operating sites. See Note 3 for additional information.

Litigation

We are involved in litigation arising in the normal course of business. Although in some cases the company is unable to estimate the amount of loss reasonably possible in addition to any amounts already recognized, it is possible that the resolution of these contingencies, either individually or in aggregate, will require us to take charges against, or will result in reductions in, future earnings. Management believes that while the resolution of these contingencies, whether individually or in aggregate, could be material to earnings in a particular period, they will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or cash flows. For additional litigation information, see Note 11 in our Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes in Item 8 of our 2013 Form 10-K.

PBR Proceeding Nicor Gas’ PBR plan was a regulatory plan that provided economic incentives based on natural gas cost performance. The PBR plan went into effect in 2000 and was terminated effective January 1, 2003, following allegations that Nicor Gas acted improperly in connection with the plan. Under this plan, Nicor Gas’ total gas supply costs were compared to a market-sensitive benchmark. Savings and losses relative to the benchmark were determined annually and shared equally with sales customers. Since 2002 the amount of the savings and losses required to be shared has been disputed by the Citizens Utility Board (CUB) and others, with the Illinois Attorney General (IAG) intervening, and subject to extensive contested discovery and other regulatory proceedings before administrative law judges and the Illinois Commission. In 2009, the staff of the Illinois Commission, IAG and CUB requested refunds of $85 million, $255 million and $305 million, respectively.

In February 2012 we committed to a stipulation with the staff of the Illinois Commission for a resolution of the dispute through the crediting to Nicor Gas customers of $64 million. On November 5, 2012 the Administrative Law Judges issued a proposed order for a refund of $72 million to ratepayers. In the fourth quarter of 2012, we increased our accrual for this dispute by $8 million for a total of $72 million as a result of these developments and their effect on the estimated liability.

On June 7, 2013 the Illinois Commission issued an order requiring us to refund $72 million to current Nicor Gas customers over a 12-month period. On July 1, 2013 we began refunding customers the full $72 million through our purchased gas adjustment mechanism based on natural gas throughput. Of this amount, $35 million was refunded during the first quarter of 2014 and $29 million was refunded in 2013.

CUB appealed the Illinois Commission’s order to the appellate court in Illinois. On February 28, 2014 CUB filed its initial brief with the appellate court requesting refunds consistent with its 2009 request. Nicor Gas’ reply is due May 16, 2014.