Fair Value of Financial Assets and Liabilities

Fair Value Measurements

The accounting guidance for fair value measurements and disclosures provides a single definition of fair value and requires certain disclosures about assets and liabilities measured at fair value. A hierarchical framework for disclosing the observability of the inputs utilized in measuring assets and liabilities at fair value is established by this guidance. The three levels in the hierarchy are as follows:

Level 1 — Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting date. The types of assets and liabilities included in Level 1 are highly liquid and actively traded instruments with quoted prices.

Level 2 — Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets, but are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reporting date. The types of assets and liabilities included in Level 2 are typically either comparable to actively traded securities or contracts or priced with models using highly observable inputs.

Level 3 — Significant inputs to pricing have little or no observability as of the reporting date. The types of assets and liabilities included in Level 3 are those valued with models requiring significant management judgment or estimation.

Specific valuation methods include the following:

Cash equivalents — The fair values of cash equivalents are generally based on cost plus accrued interest; money market funds are measured using quoted net asset values.

Interest rate derivatives — The fair values of interest rate derivatives are based on broker quotes that utilize current market interest rate forecasts.

Commodity derivatives — The methods used to measure the fair value of commodity derivative forwards and options utilize forward prices and volatilities, as well as pricing adjustments for specific delivery locations, and are generally assigned a Level 2 classification. When contractual settlements extend to periods beyond those readily observable on active exchanges or quoted by brokers, the significance of the use of less observable forecasts of long-term forward prices and volatilities on a valuation is evaluated and may result in Level 3 classification.

Derivative Instruments Fair Value Measurements

NSP-Wisconsin enters into derivative instruments, including forward contracts, futures, swaps and options, for trading purposes and to manage risk in connection with changes in interest rates and utility commodity prices.

Interest Rate Derivatives — NSP-Wisconsin enters into various instruments that effectively fix the interest payments on certain floating rate debt obligations or effectively fix the yield or price on a specified benchmark interest rate for an anticipated debt issuance for a specific period. These derivative instruments are generally designated as cash flow hedges for accounting purposes.

At June 30, 2017, accumulated other comprehensive loss related to interest rate derivatives included $0.1 million of net losses expected to be reclassified into earnings during the next 12 months as the related hedged interest rate transactions impact earnings, including forecasted amounts for unsettled hedges, as applicable.

Commodity Derivatives — NSP-Wisconsin may enter into derivative instruments to manage variability of future cash flows from changes in commodity prices in its electric and natural gas operations, as well as for trading purposes. This could include the purchase or sale of natural gas to generate electric energy and natural gas for resale.

The following table details the gross notional amounts of commodity options at June 30, 2017 and Dec. 31, 2016:


^(a)	Amounts are not reflective of net positions in the underlying commodities.


^(b)	Notional amounts for options are included on a gross basis, but are weighted for the probability of exercise.

Impact of Derivative Activities on Income and Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss — There were immaterial pre-tax losses related to interest rate derivatives reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive loss into earnings during the three months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016, and $0.1 million of net losses reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive loss into earnings during the six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016.

During the three and six months ended June 30, 2017, changes in the fair value of natural gas commodity derivatives resulted in immaterial and $0.1 million of net losses recognized as regulatory assets and liabilities, respectively. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2016, changes in the fair value of natural gas commodity derivatives resulted in $0.1 million of net gains and $0.1 million of net losses recognized as regulatory assets and liabilities. The classification as a regulatory asset or liability is based on commission approved regulatory recovery mechanisms.

Natural gas commodity derivatives settlement losses of $0.2 million and $0.6 million were recognized for the six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively, and were subject to purchased natural gas cost recovery mechanisms, which result in reclassifications of derivative settlement gains and losses out of income to a regulatory asset or liability, as appropriate. There were no losses or gains and immaterial natural gas commodity derivatives settlement losses recognized during the three months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

NSP-Wisconsin had no derivative instruments designated as fair value hedges during the three and six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016. Therefore, no gains or losses from fair value hedges or related hedged transactions were recognized for these periods.

Consideration of Credit Risk and Concentrations — NSP-Wisconsin continuously monitors the creditworthiness of the counterparties to its interest rate derivatives and commodity derivative contracts prior to settlement, and assesses each counterparty’s ability to perform on the transactions set forth in the contracts. Given this assessment, as well as an assessment of the impact of NSP-Wisconsin’s own credit risk when determining the fair value of derivative liabilities, the impact of credit risk was immaterial to the fair value of unsettled commodity derivatives presented in the consolidated balance sheets.

NSP-Wisconsin employs additional credit risk control mechanisms when appropriate, such as letters of credit, parental guarantees, standardized master netting agreements and termination provisions that allow for offsetting of positive and negative exposures. Credit exposure is monitored and, when necessary, the activity with a specific counterparty is limited until credit enhancement is provided.

Recurring Fair Value Measurements — The following table presents for each of the fair value hierarchy levels, NSP-Wisconsin’s derivative assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis:




	June 30, 2017
	Fair Value						Fair Value Total		Counterparty Netting ^(a)		Total ^(b)
(Thousands of Dollars)	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Fair Value Total		Counterparty Netting ^(a)		Total ^(b)
Current derivative assets
Natural gas commodity	$	—	$	71	$	—	$	71	$	—	$	71



	Dec. 31, 2016
	Fair Value						Fair Value Total		Counterparty Netting ^(a)		Total ^(b)
(Thousands of Dollars)	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Fair Value Total		Counterparty Netting ^(a)		Total ^(b)
Current derivative assets
Natural gas commodity	$	—	$	149	$	—	$	149	$	—	$	149

^(a)

NSP-Wisconsin nets derivative instruments and related collateral in its consolidated balance sheet when supported by a legally enforceable master netting agreement, and all derivative instruments and related collateral amounts were subject to master netting agreements at June 30, 2017 and Dec. 31, 2016. The counterparty netting amounts presented exclude settlement receivables and payables and non-derivative amounts that may be subject to the same master netting agreements.


^(b)	Included in prepayments and other current assets balance of $3.4 million and $3.8 million at June 30, 2017 and Dec. 31, 2016, respectively, in the consolidated balance sheets.

Fair Value of Long-Term Debt

As of June 30, 2017 and Dec. 31, 2016, other financial instruments for which the carrying amount did not equal fair value were as follows:



	June 30, 2017				Dec. 31, 2016
(Thousands of Dollars)	Carrying Amount		Fair Value		Carrying Amount		Fair Value
Long-term debt, including current portion	$	663,402	$	747,072	$	663,069	$	730,284

The fair value of NSP-Wisconsin’s long-term debt is estimated based on recent trades and observable spreads from benchmark interest rates for similar securities. The fair value estimates are based on information available to management as of June 30, 2017 and Dec. 31, 2016, and given the observability of the inputs to these estimates, the fair values presented for long-term debt have been assigned a Level 2.

(Amounts in Thousands) ^(a)(b)

June 30, 2017

Dec. 31, 2016

Million British thermal units of natural gas