e10vq
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2007
or
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM TO
Commission File Number 333-121505
CenterPoint Energy Transition Bond Company II, LLC
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
59-3790472 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) |
incorporation or organization) |
|
|
|
|
|
1111 Louisiana, Suite 4655B |
|
|
Houston, Texas 77002
|
|
(713) 207-5222 |
(Address and zip code of principal
|
|
(Registrants telephone number, including |
executive offices)
|
|
area code) |
The registrant meets the conditions set forth in General Instruction H(1)(a) and (b) of Form
10-Q and is therefore filing this Form 10-Q with the reduced disclosure format.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has 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 registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has
been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large accelerated
filer in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer o Accelerated filer o
Non-accelerated filer þ
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
As of May 1, 2007, all outstanding membership interests in CenterPoint Energy Transition Bond
Company II, LLC were held by CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC.
CenterPoint Energy Transition Bond Company II, LLC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
i
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
From time to time we make statements concerning our expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives,
goals, strategies, future events or performance and underlying assumptions and other statements
that are not historical facts. These statements are forward-looking statements within the meaning
of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Actual results may differ materially from
those expressed or implied by these statements. In some cases, you can identify our forward-looking
statements by the words anticipate, believe, continue, could, estimate, expect,
forecast, goal, intend, may, objective, plan, potential, predict, projection,
should, will, or other similar words.
We have based our forward-looking statements on our managements beliefs and assumptions based
on information available to our management at the time the statements are made. We caution you that
assumptions, beliefs, expectations, intentions and projections about future events may and often do
vary materially from actual results. Therefore, we cannot assure you that actual results will not
differ materially from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements.
The following are some of the factors that could cause actual results to differ from those
expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements:
|
|
|
changes in market demand and demographic patterns; |
|
|
|
|
weather variations and other natural phenomena affecting retail electric customer energy usage; |
|
|
|
|
the operating performance of CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLCs
(CenterPoint Houston) facilities and third-party suppliers of electric energy in
CenterPoint Houstons service territory; |
|
|
|
|
state and federal legislative and regulatory actions or developments, including
deregulation, re-regulation, changes in or application of laws or regulations applicable to
the various aspects of CenterPoint Houstons business; |
|
|
|
|
the accuracy of the servicers forecast of electrical consumption or the payment of transition charges; |
|
|
|
|
non-payment of transition charges by retail electric providers; |
|
|
|
|
the reliability of the systems, procedures and other infrastructure necessary
to operate the retail electric business in CenterPoint Houstons service territory,
including the systems owned and operated by the independent system operator in the Electric
Reliability Council of Texas, Inc.; and |
|
|
|
|
other factors we discuss in Risk Factors in Item 1A of Part I of our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, which is incorporated herein by
reference, and our other Securities and Exchange Commission filings. |
You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Each forward-looking
statement speaks only as of the date of the particular statement.
ii
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
CENTERPOINT ENERGY TRANSITION BOND COMPANY II, LLC
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
AND CHANGES IN MEMBERS EQUITY
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transition charge revenue |
|
$ |
38,117 |
|
|
$ |
39,647 |
|
Investment income |
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
458 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating revenues |
|
|
38,308 |
|
|
|
40,105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
23,636 |
|
|
|
22,996 |
|
Amortization of transition property |
|
|
13,570 |
|
|
|
16,021 |
|
Amortization of transition bond discount and issuance costs |
|
|
563 |
|
|
|
516 |
|
Administrative and general expenses |
|
|
539 |
|
|
|
572 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
38,308 |
|
|
|
40,105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members Equity at Beginning of Period |
|
|
9,256 |
|
|
|
9,256 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributed Capital |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members Equity at End of Period |
|
$ |
9,256 |
|
|
$ |
9,256 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
Notes to the Companys Interim Unaudited Financial Statements
1
CENTERPOINT ENERGY TRANSITION BOND COMPANY II, LLC
BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006 |
|
|
March 31, 2007 |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
90,827 |
|
|
$ |
32,358 |
|
Restricted funds |
|
|
33,243 |
|
|
|
33,400 |
|
Transition charge receivable |
|
|
24,411 |
|
|
|
23,235 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Assets |
|
|
148,481 |
|
|
|
88,993 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible transition property |
|
|
1,746,421 |
|
|
|
1,730,400 |
|
Unamortized debt issuance costs |
|
|
10,439 |
|
|
|
9,936 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
1,905,341 |
|
|
$ |
1,829,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND MEMBERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt |
|
$ |
86,864 |
|
|
$ |
89,992 |
|
Accrued interest |
|
|
39,019 |
|
|
|
15,192 |
|
Customer deposits |
|
|
23,743 |
|
|
|
24,025 |
|
Fees payable to servicer |
|
|
1,143 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Liabilities |
|
|
150,769 |
|
|
|
129,399 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transition bonds, net of unamortized discount |
|
|
1,745,316 |
|
|
|
1,690,674 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities |
|
|
1,896,085 |
|
|
|
1,820,073 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributed capital |
|
|
9,256 |
|
|
|
9,256 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Members Equity |
|
|
9,256 |
|
|
|
9,256 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Members Equity |
|
$ |
1,905,341 |
|
|
$ |
1,829,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
Notes to the Companys Interim Unaudited Financial Statements
2
CENTERPOINT ENERGY TRANSITION BOND COMPANY II, LLC
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
Cash Flows from Operating Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Adjustments for non-cash items: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of transition bond discount and issuance costs |
|
|
563 |
|
|
|
516 |
|
Amortization of transition property |
|
|
13,570 |
|
|
|
16,021 |
|
Changes in other assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transition charge receivable |
|
|
(15,665 |
) |
|
|
1,176 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
(1,460 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Accrued interest |
|
|
23,636 |
|
|
|
(23,827 |
) |
Customer deposits |
|
|
6,754 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
Fees payable to servicer |
|
|
962 |
|
|
|
(953 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |
|
|
28,360 |
|
|
|
(6,785 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Investing Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted funds |
|
|
(6,866 |
) |
|
|
(157 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(6,866 |
) |
|
|
(157 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Financing Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments of long-term debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(51,527 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(51,527 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents |
|
|
21,494 |
|
|
|
(58,469 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents, Beginning of Period |
|
|
1,461 |
|
|
|
90,827 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents, End of Period |
|
$ |
22,955 |
|
|
$ |
32,358 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Payments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
46,823 |
|
See
Notes to the Companys Interim Unaudited Financial Statements
3
CENTERPOINT ENERGY TRANSITION BOND COMPANY II, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(1) Background and Basis of Presentation
General. Included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (Form 10-Q) of CenterPoint Energy
Transition Bond Company II, LLC (the Company) are the Companys interim financial statements and
notes (Interim Financial Statements). The Interim Financial Statements are unaudited, omit certain
financial statement disclosures and should be read with the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2006.
Background. The Company is a special purpose Delaware limited liability company whose sole
member is CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric, LLC (CenterPoint Houston). The Company has no
commercial operations and was formed for the principal purpose of purchasing and owning transition
property, issuing transition bonds and performing activities incidental thereto. CenterPoint
Houston is a regulated utility engaged in the transmission and distribution of electric energy in a
5,000 square mile area located along the Texas Gulf Coast, including the City of Houston.
Basis of Presentation. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts
of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
The Companys Interim Financial Statements reflect all normal recurring adjustments that are,
in the opinion of management, necessary to present fairly the financial position, results of
operations and cash flows for the respective periods. Amounts reported in the Companys Statements
of Income and Changes in
Members Equity are not necessarily indicative of amounts expected for a full-year period due to the
effects of, among other things, seasonal variations in energy consumption.
Amortization. The transition property was recorded at acquired cost and is being amortized
over fourteen years, the expected life of the transition bonds, based on estimated revenue from
transition charges, interest accruals and other expenses. The financing order authorizing the
imposition of the transition charges and the issuance of the transition bonds limits the terms of
the transition bonds to no greater than 15 years. In accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 71, Accounting for the Effects of Certain Types of Regulation,
amortization is adjusted for over/under collection of transition charges. The transition charges
are reviewed and adjusted at least annually, and semi-annually as necessary, by the Public Utility
Commission of Texas to correct any overcollections or undercollections during the preceding 12
months and to provide for the expected recovery of amounts sufficient to timely provide all payment
of debt service and other required amounts and charges in connection with the transition bonds.
4
(2) Transition Charges
The following table shows the aggregate amount of transition charges remitted by CenterPoint
Houston to the trustee under the indenture pursuant to which the transition bonds were issued (the
trustee) during each month from the date of issuance of the transition bonds through March 31, 2007
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
2007 |
January |
|
$ |
402 |
|
|
$ |
13,525 |
|
February |
|
|
8,525 |
|
|
|
12,489 |
|
March |
|
|
13,257 |
|
|
|
14,582 |
|
April |
|
|
11,862 |
|
|
|
|
|
May |
|
|
12,589 |
|
|
|
|
|
June |
|
|
16,704 |
|
|
|
|
|
July |
|
|
16,302 |
|
|
|
|
|
August |
|
|
19,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
September |
|
|
18,528 |
|
|
|
|
|
October |
|
|
18,118 |
|
|
|
|
|
November |
|
|
17,263 |
|
|
|
|
|
December |
|
|
13,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
(3) Cash and Cash Equivalents/Restricted Funds
For purposes of the Balance Sheet and Statement of Cash Flows, the Company considers
investments purchased with a maturity of three months or less to be the equivalent of cash. The
administrative agent for the trustee has established, as provided in the indenture, the following
subaccounts for the Companys cash balances related to its transition bonds:
|
|
|
The General Subaccount is comprised of collections of transition charges
remitted to the trustees administrative agent by the servicer with respect to the
transition bonds. These amounts accumulate in the General Subaccount until they are
transferred from the General Subaccount on each transition bond payment date. The General
Subaccount had a balance of $27.6 million at March 31, 2007. |
|
|
|
|
The Excess Funds Subaccount is maintained for the purpose of holding any
collected transition charges and earnings on amounts in the collection account (other than
earnings on amounts allocated to the Capital Subaccount) not otherwise used on the payment
dates of the transition bonds for payment of principal, interest, fees or expenses, or for
funding the Capital Subaccount. The Excess Funds Subaccount had a balance of $4.8 million
at March 31, 2007. |
|
|
|
|
The Capital Subaccount received a deposit of approximately $9.3 million (0.5%
of the initial principal amount of the transition bonds) on the date of issuance of the
transition bonds. CenterPoint Houston contributed this amount to the Company. If amounts
available in the General and Excess Funds Subaccounts are not sufficient on any payment
date to make scheduled payments on the transition bonds and payments of certain fees and
expenses, the trustees administrative agent will draw on amounts in the Capital
Subaccount. As of March 31, 2007, the Capital Subaccount had a balance of $9.4 million and
is classified as Restricted Funds in the Balance Sheets. |
As of March 31, 2007, cash deposits provided by retail electric providers totaled $24.0
million and are classified as Restricted Funds in the Balance Sheets.
(4) Long-Term Debt
Principal and interest payments on the transition bonds are due semi-annually on February 1
and August 1 of each year and are paid from funds deposited with the trustees administrative agent
by CenterPoint Houston as servicer of the transition property.
The source of repayment for the transition bonds is the transition charges. The servicer
collects this non-bypassable charge from retail electric providers in CenterPoint Houstons service
territory. The servicer deposits
5
transition charge collections into the Companys General Subaccount maintained by the trustees
administrative agent.
Scheduled final payment dates, final maturity dates and interest rates for the transition
bonds at March 31, 2007, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scheduled |
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
|
Tranche |
|
Final Payment Date |
|
Final Maturity Date |
|
Rate |
|
|
(in millions) |
|
|
|
|
A-1 |
|
February 1, 2009 |
|
February 1, 2011 |
|
|
4.84 |
% |
|
$ |
180 |
|
|
|
A-2 |
|
August 1, 2012 |
|
August 1, 2014 |
|
|
4.97 |
% |
|
|
368 |
|
|
|
A-3 |
|
February 1, 2014 |
|
August 1, 2015 |
|
|
5.09 |
% |
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
A-4 |
|
August 1, 2017 |
|
August 1, 2019 |
|
|
5.17 |
% |
|
|
519 |
|
|
|
A-5 |
|
August 1, 2019 |
|
August 1, 2020 |
|
|
5.302 |
% |
|
|
462 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,781 |
|
Less: Current Maturities (scheduled payments) |
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Long-Term Debt, net |
|
$ |
1,691 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table shows scheduled and actual principal payments on the transition bonds from
the issuance date through March 31, 2007 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tranche A-1 |
|
Tranche A-2 |
|
Tranche A-3 |
|
Tranche A-4 |
|
Tranche A-5 |
|
|
Scheduled |
|
Actual |
|
Scheduled |
|
Actual |
|
Scheduled |
|
Actual |
|
Scheduled |
|
Actual |
|
Scheduled |
|
Actual |
August 1, 2006 |
|
$ |
18,565 |
|
|
$ |
18,565 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
February 1, 2007 |
|
|
51,527 |
|
|
|
51,527 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5) Related Party Transactions and Major Customers
Related Party Transactions. As the servicer, CenterPoint Houston manages and administers the
transition property of the Company and collects the transition charges on behalf of the Company.
The Company pays a fixed annual servicing fee to CenterPoint Houston for these services. Pursuant
to an administration agreement entered into between the Company and CenterPoint Houston,
CenterPoint Houston also provides administrative services to the Company. The Company pays
CenterPoint Houston a fixed fee for performing these services, plus all reimbursable expenses. The
Company recorded administrative and servicing fees of $0.3 million during each of the three months
ended March 31, 2006 and 2007, respectively.
Major Customers. Subsidiaries of Reliant Energy, Inc. (formerly named Reliant Resources, Inc.)
(RRI) collect the majority of the transition charges from retail electric customers in CenterPoint
Houstons service territory. At March 31, 2007, subsidiaries of RRI had approximately $19.5 million
of cash on deposit with the trustees administrative agent. As with any retail electric provider
that may default in its payment obligations in respect of transition charges, the servicer is
expected to direct the trustee to seek recourse against such cash deposits or alternate form of
credit support as a remedy for any payment default that may occur.
6
Item 2. MANAGEMENTS NARRATIVE ANALYSIS OF RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
We meet the conditions specified in General Instruction H(1)(a) and (b) to Form 10-Q and
therefore are providing the following analysis of our results of operations using the reduced
disclosure format for wholly owned subsidiaries of reporting companies. Accordingly, we have
omitted from this report the information called for by Item 2 (Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations) and Item 3 (Quantitative and Qualitative
Disclosures About Market Risk) of Part I and the following Part II items of Form 10-Q: Item 2
(Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds), Item 3 (Defaults Upon Senior
Securities) and Item 4 (Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders). This analysis should
be read in combination with the Interim Financial Statements included in Item 1 of this Form 10-Q.
We are a Delaware limited liability company established in December 2004 for limited purposes.
We issued $1.851 billion aggregate principal amount of transition bonds on December 16, 2005 and
used the net proceeds to purchase the transition property from CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric,
LLC (CenterPoint Houston). As we are restricted by our organizational documents from engaging in
activities other than those described under Business in Item 1 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2006, income statement effects are limited primarily to revenue
generated from the transition charges, interest expense on the transition bonds, amortization of
the transition property, debt issuance expenses and the discount on the transition bonds,
transition property servicing and administration fees and incidental investment interest income.
Net income is expected to be zero for each reporting period.
For the three months ended March 31, 2007, revenue from transition charges was $39.6 million
and investment income was $0.5 million. Amortization of transition property was $16.0 million.
Interest expense of $23.0 million related to interest on the transition bonds and amortization
expense of $0.5 million related to amortization of debt issuance expenses and the discount on the
transition bonds. We recorded administrative expenses of $0.6 million for the three months ended
March 31, 2007.
For the three months ended March 31, 2006, revenue from transition charges was $38.1 million
and investment income was $0.2 million. Amortization of transition property was $13.6 million.
Interest expense of $23.6 million related to interest on the transition bonds and amortization
expense of $0.6 million related to amortization of debt issuance expenses and the discount on the
transition bonds. We recorded administrative expenses of $0.5 million for the three months ended
March 31, 2006.
We use collections of transition charges to make scheduled principal and interest payments on
the transition bonds. Transition charges, together with interest earned on collected transition
charges, are expected to offset (1) interest expense on the transition bonds, (2) the principal
amount of the transition bonds scheduled to be paid and (3) fees and expenses, including fees
charged by CenterPoint Houston for servicing the transition property and providing administrative
services to us and expenses related to such administrative services.
The transition charges are reviewed and adjusted at least annually by the Public Utility
Commission of Texas (Texas Utility Commission) to correct prospectively any overcollections or
undercollections during the preceding 12 months and to provide for the expected recovery of amounts
sufficient to timely provide all payment of debt service and other required amounts and charges in
connection with the transition bonds.
CenterPoint Houston is required to true up transition charges annually on December 1 in
compliance with the financing order. CenterPoint Houstons first true-up filing to adjust
transition charges was filed with the Texas Utility Commission on November 1, 2006 and became
effective December 1, 2006. The adjusted transition charges are designed to collect $186.6 million
during the twelve-month period ending November 30, 2007.
Holders of transition bonds may experience payment delays or incur losses if our assets are
not sufficient to pay interest or the scheduled principal of the transition bonds. Funds for
payments depend on the transition property and the right to collect the transition charges over a
period that Texas law limits to 15 years. In addition, collections depend on the amount of
electricity consumed within CenterPoint Houstons service territory and our ability to collect
transition charges from retail electric providers.
In all material respects, each materially significant retail electric provider (i) has been
billed in accordance with
7
the financing order, (ii) has made all payments in compliance with the requirements outlined
in the financing order, and (iii) has satisfied the creditworthiness requirements of the financing
order.
Item 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
In accordance with Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15, we carried out an evaluation, under
the supervision and with the participation of management, including our principal executive officer
and principal financial officer, of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as
of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, our principal executive
officer and principal financial officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were
effective as of March 31, 2007 to provide assurance that information required to be disclosed in
our reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commissions rules and
forms and such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our
principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely
decisions regarding disclosure.
There has been no change in our internal controls over financial reporting that occurred
during the three months ended March 31, 2007 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.
8
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1A. Risk Factors
There have been no material changes from the risk factors disclosed in our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.
Item 6. Exhibits
The following exhibits are filed herewith:
Exhibits not incorporated by reference to a prior filing are designated by a cross (+); all
exhibits not so designated are incorporated by reference to a prior filing of CenterPoint Energy
Transition Bond Company II, LLC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report or Registration |
|
SEC File or |
|
|
Exhibit Number |
|
Description |
|
Statement |
|
Registration Number |
|
Exhibit References |
|
4.1
|
|
Amended and
Restated
Certificate of
Formation of
CenterPoint Energy
Transition Bond
Company II, LLC
|
|
Current Report on
Form 8-K filed with
the SEC on December
16, 2005
|
|
333-121505
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Amended and
Restated Limited
Liability Company
Agreement of
CenterPoint Energy
Transition Bond
Company II, LLC
|
|
Current Report on
Form 8-K filed with
the SEC on December
16, 2005
|
|
333-121505
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Semiannual
Servicers
Certificate, dated
as of January 31,
2007, as to the
transition bond
balances, the
balances of the
collection account
and its
sub-accounts, and
setting forth
transfers and
payments to be made
on the February 1,
2007 payment date
|
|
Form 10-K for the
year ended December
31, 2006
|
|
333-121505
|
|
|
10.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+31.1
|
|
Section 302
Certification of
Gary L. Whitlock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+31.2
|
|
Section 302
Certification of
Marc Kilbride |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+32.1
|
|
Section 906
Certification of
Gary L. Whitlock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+32.2
|
|
Section 906
Certification of
Marc Kilbride |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+99.1
|
|
Items incorporated
by reference from
the CenterPoint
Energy Transition
Bond Company II,
LLC Form 10-K.
Item 1A Risk
Factors. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
CENTERPOINT ENERGY TRANSITION BOND COMPANY II, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ James S. Brian
|
|
|
|
James S. Brian |
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer |
|
|
Date: May
11, 2007
10
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report or Registration |
|
SEC File or |
|
|
Exhibit Number |
|
Description |
|
Statement |
|
Registration Number |
|
Exhibit References |
|
4.1
|
|
Amended and
Restated
Certificate of
Formation of
CenterPoint Energy
Transition Bond
Company II, LLC
|
|
Current Report on
Form 8-K filed with
the SEC on December
16, 2005
|
|
333-121505
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Amended and
Restated Limited
Liability Company
Agreement of
CenterPoint Energy
Transition Bond
Company II, LLC
|
|
Current Report on
Form 8-K filed with
the SEC on December
16, 2005
|
|
333-121505
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Semiannual
Servicers
Certificate, dated
as of January 31,
2007, as to the
transition bond
balances, the
balances of the
collection account
and its
sub-accounts, and
setting forth
transfers and
payments to be made
on the February 1,
2007 payment date
|
|
Form 10-K for the
year ended December
31, 2006
|
|
333-121505
|
|
|
10.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+31.1
|
|
Section 302
Certification of
Gary L. Whitlock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+31.2
|
|
Section 302
Certification of
Marc Kilbride |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+32.1
|
|
Section 906
Certification of
Gary L. Whitlock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+32.2
|
|
Section 906
Certification of
Marc Kilbride |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+99.1
|
|
Items incorporated
by reference from
the CenterPoint
Energy Transition
Bond Company II,
LLC Form 10-K.
Item 1A Risk
Factors. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
exv31w1
Exhibit 31.1
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Gary L. Whitlock, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of CenterPoint Energy Transition Bond
Company II, LLC;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
|
(a) |
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
|
|
(b) |
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and |
|
|
(c) |
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case
of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and |
5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
|
(a) |
|
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and |
|
|
(b) |
|
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting. |
Date: May
11, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Gary L. Whitlock
|
|
|
Gary L. Whitlock |
|
|
President and Manager (Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
exv31w2
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Marc Kilbride, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of CenterPoint Energy Transition Bond
Company II, LLC;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
|
(a) |
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
|
|
(b) |
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and |
|
|
(c) |
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case
of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and |
5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
|
(a) |
|
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and |
|
|
(b) |
|
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting. |
Date: May
11, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Marc Kilbride
|
|
|
Marc Kilbride |
|
|
Vice President and Treasurer (Principal Financial
Officer) |
|
exv32w1
Exhibit 32.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Quarterly Report of CenterPoint Energy Transition Bond Company II, LLC
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 (the Report), as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Gary L. Whitlock, President (Principal
Executive Officer), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:
1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|
|
|
/s/ Gary L. Whitlock |
|
|
|
|
|
President and Manager (Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
May 11, 2007 |
|
|
exv32w2
Exhibit 32.2
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Quarterly Report of CenterPoint Energy Transition Bond Company II, LLC
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 (the Report), as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Marc Kilbride, Vice President and
Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:
1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|
|
|
/s/ Marc Kilbride
Marc Kilbride
|
|
|
Vice President and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer) |
|
|
May 11, 2007 |
|
|
exv99w1
Exhibit
99.1
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Material payment delays or a loss on investments in the transition bonds may occur because the
source of funds for payment is limited.
The only source of funds for payment of transition bonds are our assets, which consist of the
transition property securing the transition bonds, including:
|
|
|
the right to impose, collect and receive related transition charges; |
|
|
|
|
the funds on deposit in the accounts held by the trustee; |
|
|
|
|
our rights under various contracts; and |
|
|
|
|
the credit enhancement. |
The transition bonds are not a charge on the full faith and credit or taxing power of the
State of Texas or any governmental agency or instrumentality, nor are the transition bonds insured
or guaranteed by CenterPoint Houston, including in its capacity as the servicer, or by its ultimate
parent, CenterPoint Energy, Inc., any of its affiliates (other than us), the trustee or by any
other person or entity. Thus, holders of transition bonds (bondholders) must rely for payment of
transition bonds solely upon collections of the transition charges, funds on deposit in the related
accounts held by the trustee and the credit enhancement described under BusinessTransition
Property in Item 1. Our organizational documents restrict our right to acquire other assets
unrelated to the transactions described under BusinessGeneral in Item 1.
Risks Associated with Potential Judicial, Legislative or Regulatory Actions
Future judicial action could reduce the value of the transition bonds.
The transition property is the creation of the 1999 utility restructuring amendments to the
Public Utility Regulatory Act of Texas (Restructuring Act) and the financing order. There is
uncertainty associated with investing in bonds payable from an asset that depends for its existence
on legislation because there is limited judicial or regulatory experience implementing and
interpreting the legislation. Because the transition property is a creation of the Restructuring
Act, any judicial determination affecting the validity of or interpreting the Restructuring Act,
the transition property or our ability to make payments on the transition bonds might have an
adverse effect on the transition bonds.
Other states have passed electric utility deregulation laws similar to the Restructuring Act,
and some of these laws have been challenged by judicial actions. To date, none of these challenges
has succeeded, but future judicial challenges might be made. An unfavorable decision regarding
another states law would not automatically invalidate the Restructuring Act or the financing
order, but it might provoke a challenge to the Restructuring Act, establish a legal precedent for a
successful challenge to the Restructuring Act or heighten awareness of the political and other
risks of the transition bonds, and in that way may limit the liquidity and value of the transition
bonds. Therefore, legal activity in other states may indirectly affect the value of the transition
bonds.
The federal government might preempt the Restructuring Act without full compensation.
In the past, bills have been introduced in Congress that would prohibit the recovery of all or
some types of stranded costs, but none of those bills was enacted. Congress could, however, pass a
law or adopt a rule or regulation negating the existence of or reducing the value of the transition
property.
If federal legislation preempting the Restructuring Act or the financing order is enacted,
there is no assurance that the courts would consider it a taking under the United States
Constitution for which the government would be required to pay just compensation or, if it is
considered a taking, that any amount provided as compensation would be sufficient to pay the full
amount of principal of and interest on the transition bonds or to pay these amounts on a timely
basis.
Future state legislative action could reduce the value of the transition bonds.
Despite its pledge in the Restructuring Act not to take or permit certain actions that would
impair the value of the transition property or the transition charges, the Texas legislature might
attempt to repeal or amend the Restructuring Act in a manner that limits or alters the transition
property so as to reduce its value. It might be possible for the Texas legislature to repeal or
amend the Restructuring Act notwithstanding the States pledge if the legislature acts in order to
serve a significant and legitimate public purpose. Any such action, as well as the costly and
time-consuming litigation that likely would ensue, might adversely affect the price and liquidity,
the dates of payment of interest and principal and the weighted average lives of the transition
bonds. Moreover, the outcome of any litigation cannot be predicted. Accordingly, bondholders might
incur a loss on or delay in recovery of their investment in the transition bonds.
If an action of the Texas legislature adversely affecting the transition property or the
ability to collect transition charges were considered a taking under the United States or Texas
Constitutions, the State of Texas might be obligated to pay compensation for the taking. However,
even in that event, there is no assurance that any amount provided as compensation would be
sufficient for bondholders to recover fully their investment in the transition bonds or to offset
interest lost pending such recovery.
The Texas Utility Commission might take actions that could reduce the value of the transition
bonds.
The Restructuring Act provides that a financing order is irrevocable and that the Texas
Utility Commission may not directly or indirectly, by any subsequent action, rescind or amend a
financing order or reduce or impair the transition charges authorized under a financing order,
except for the true-up adjustments to the transition charges. However, the Texas Utility Commission
retains the power to adopt, revise or rescind rules or regulations affecting CenterPoint Houston.
The Texas Utility Commission also retains the power to interpret the financing order, and in that
capacity might be called upon to rule on the meanings of provisions of the order that might need
further elaboration. Any new or amended regulations or orders from the Texas Utility Commission
might affect the ability of the servicer to collect the transition charges in full and on a timely
basis, the rating of the transition bonds or their price and, accordingly, the amortization of the
transition bonds and their weighted average lives.
The servicer is required to file with the Texas Utility Commission, on our behalf, certain
adjustments of the transition charges. True-up adjustment procedures have been challenged in the
past and may be challenged in the future. Challenges to or delays in the true-up process might
adversely affect the market perception and valuation of the transition bonds. Also, any litigation
might materially delay transition charge collections due to delayed implementation of true-up
adjustments and might result in missing payments or payment delays and lengthened weighted average
life of the transition bonds.
Servicing Risks
Inaccurate consumption forecasting or unanticipated delinquencies or charge-offs might reduce
scheduled payments on the transition bonds.
The transition charges are generally assessed based on forecasted customer usage. The amount
and the rate of transition charge collections depend in part on actual electricity usage and the
amount of collections and write-offs for each customer class. If the servicer inaccurately
forecasts electricity consumption or uses inaccurate customer delinquency or charge-off data when
setting or adjusting the transition charges, there could be a shortfall or material delay in
transition charge collections, which might result in missed or delayed payments of principal and
interest and lengthened weighted average life of the transition bonds.
The servicer has experienced difficulties from time to time in making accurate forecasts of
electricity consumption because of unexpected weather conditions. Inaccurate forecasting of
electricity consumption by the servicer might result from, among other things, unanticipated
weather or economic conditions, resulting in less electricity consumption than forecast; general
economic conditions being worse than expected, causing retail electric customers to migrate from
CenterPoint Houstons service territory or reduce their electricity consumption; the occurrence of
a natural disaster or an act of terrorism or other catastrophic event; changes in the market
structure of the electric industry; customers consuming less electricity because of increased
energy prices or increased conservation efforts; or customers switching to alternative sources of
energy, including self-generation of electric power.
The servicers use of inaccurate delinquency or charge-off rates might result also from, among
other things, unexpected deterioration of the economy or the declaration of a moratorium on
terminating electric service to customers in the event of extreme weather, either of which would
cause greater delinquencies or charge-offs than expected or force CenterPoint Houston or retail
electric providers to grant additional payment relief to more customers, or any other change in law
that makes it more difficult for CenterPoint Houston or retail electric providers to terminate
service to non-paying customers or that requires CenterPoint Houston or retail electric providers
to apply more lenient credit standards in accepting retail electric customers.
We depend on CenterPoint Houston or its successor or assignee, acting as servicer of the transition
property.
CenterPoint Houston, as servicer, is responsible for, among other things, calculating, billing
and collecting the transition charges from retail electric providers, submitting requests to the
Texas Utility Commission to adjust these charges, monitoring the collateral for the transition
bonds and taking certain actions in the event of non-payment by a retail electric provider. The
trustees receipt of collections in respect of the transition charges, which are used to make
payments on the transition bonds, depends in part on the skill and diligence of the servicer in
performing these functions. The systems the State of Texas and the servicer have in place for
transition charge billings and collections might, in particular circumstances, cause the servicer
to experience difficulty in performing these functions in a timely and completely accurate manner.
If the servicer fails to make collections for any reason, then the servicers payments to the
trustee in respect of the transition charges might be delayed or reduced. In that event, our
payments on the transition bonds might be delayed or reduced.
If we replace CenterPoint Houston as the servicer, we may experience difficulties finding and using
a replacement servicer.
If CenterPoint Houston ceases to service the transition property, it might be difficult to
find a successor servicer. Also, any successor servicer might have less experience and ability than
CenterPoint Houston and might experience difficulties in collecting transition charges and
determining appropriate adjustments to the transition charges and billing and/or payment
arrangements may change, resulting in collection disruption. A successor servicer might charge fees
that, while permitted under the financing order, are substantially higher than the fees paid to
CenterPoint Houston as servicer. In the event of the commencement of a case by or against the
servicer under the United States Bankruptcy Code or similar laws, we and the trustee might be
prevented from effecting a transfer of servicing due to operation of the bankruptcy code. Any of
these factors and others might delay the timing of payments and may reduce the value of the
transition bonds.
It might be difficult to collect transition charges from retail electric providers.
As required by the Restructuring Act, retail electric customers pay the transition charges to
retail electric providers who supply them with electric power. The retail electric providers are
obligated to remit payments of the transition charges, less a specified percentage allowance for
charge-offs of delinquent customer accounts, within 35 days of billing from the servicer, even if
they do not collect the transition charges from retail electric customers. Because the retail
electric providers bill most retail electric customers for the transition charges, we have to rely
on a relatively small number of entities for the collection of the bulk of the transition charges.
As of December 31, 2006, CenterPoint Houston did business with approximately 68 retail electric
providers. Reliant Energy, Inc., through its subsidiaries, is CenterPoint Houstons largest
customer, accounting for approximately 53% of CenterPoint Houstons outstanding receivables from
retail electric providers as of December 31, 2006.
Failure by the retail electric providers to remit transition charges to the servicer might
cause delays in payments on the transition bonds and adversely affect the value of the transition
bonds. The servicer does not pay any shortfalls resulting from the failure of any retail electric
provider to forward transition charge collections.
Adjustments to the transition charges and any credit support provided by a retail electric
provider, while available to compensate for a failure by a retail electric provider to pay the
transition charges to the servicer, might not be sufficient to protect the value of the transition
bonds.
The Restructuring Act provides for one or more retail electric providers in each area to be
designated the provider of last resort for that area or a specified customer class. The provider
of last resort is required to offer basic electric service to retail electric customers in its
designated area, regardless of the creditworthiness of the customers. The provider of last resort
might face greater difficulty in bill collection than other retail electric providers and therefore
the servicer may face greater difficulty in collecting transition charges from the provider of last
resort.
Retail electric providers may issue a single bill to retail customers that includes all
charges related to the purchase of electricity, without separately itemizing the transition charge
component of the bill. A retail electric providers use of a consolidated bill might increase the
risk that customers who have claims against the retail electric provider will attempt to offset
those claims against transition charges or increase the risk that, in the event of a bankruptcy of
a retail electric provider, a bankruptcy court would find that the retail electric provider has an
interest in the transition property and would make it more difficult to terminate the services of a
bankrupt retail electric provider or collect transition charges from its customers.
Competitive metering services might result in unexpected problems in receiving accurate metering
data.
Under the Restructuring Act, commercial and industrial retail customers that are required by
the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, or ERCOT, to have an interval data recorder meter may
choose to own the settlement and billing meters that are used to measure electric energy delivered
to their location or to have those meters owned by a retail electric provider, the transmission and
distribution utility or another person authorized by the customer. As of December 31, 2006,
CenterPoint Houston continued to provide metering services related to the installation and removal
of meters, meter testing and calibration, data collection and data management. Should the Texas
Utility Commission allow third parties to perform those metering services in CenterPoint Houstons
service territory, there might be problems converting to the third partys metering system, taking
accurate meter readings and collecting and processing accurate metering data. Inaccurate metering
data might lead to inaccuracies in the calculation and imposition of transition charges and might
give rise to disputes between the servicer and retail electric providers regarding payments and
payment shortfalls resulting in missing or delayed payments of principal and interest and
lengthened weighted average life of the transition bonds.
Changes to billing and collection practices might reduce the value of the transition bonds.
The financing order specifies the methodology for determining the amount of the transition
charges we may impose. The servicer may not change this methodology without approval from the Texas
Utility Commission. However, the servicer may set its own billing and collection arrangements with
retail electric providers and retail electric customers, if any, from whom it collects transition
charges directly, provided that these arrangements comply with the Texas Utility Commissions
customer safeguards. For example, to recover part of an outstanding bill, the servicer may agree to
extend a retail electric providers payment schedule or to write off the remaining portion of the
bill, including the transition charges. Also, the servicer may change billing and collection
practices, which might adversely impact the timing and amount of retail electric customer payments
and might reduce transition charge collections, thereby limiting our ability to make scheduled
payments on the transition bonds. Separately, the Texas Utility Commission might require changes to
these practices. Any changes in billing and collection practices regulations might make it more
difficult for the servicer to collect the transition charges and adversely affect the value of the
transition bonds.
Limits on rights to terminate service might make it more difficult to collect the transition
charges.
Texas statutory requirements and the rules and regulations of the Texas Utility Commission,
which may change from time to time, regulate and control the right of the retail electric provider
to initiate disconnection of service. For example, retail electric providers generally may not
terminate service to a customer (1) on a holiday or weekend day or the day immediately preceding a
holiday or weekend, (2) during certain extreme weather conditions, (3) if such disconnection would
cause a person to become seriously ill or more seriously ill, (4) if such customer is an energy
assistance client under certain circumstances or (5) if the customer is a master-metered apartment
complex unless certain notices are given. To the extent these retail electric customers do not pay
for their electric service, retail electric providers will not be able to collect transition
charges from these retail electric customers. Although retail electric providers have to pay the
servicer the transition charges on behalf of those customers (subject to any charge-off allowance
and reconciliation), required service to non-paying customers could affect the ability of retail
electric providers to make such payment.
Future adjustments to transition charges by customer class might result in insufficient
collections.
The customers who pay transition charges are divided into customer classes. Transition charges
are allocated among customer classes and assessed in accordance with the formula required under the
Restructuring Act and specified in the financing order. A shortfall in collections of transition
charges in one customer class may be corrected by making adjustments to the transition charges
payable by that customer class and any other customer class. If customers in a class fail to pay
transition charges or cease to be customers, the servicer might have to substantially increase the
transition charges for the remaining customers in that customer class and for other customer
classes. This effect might be more extreme in the case of the large industrial and the
interruptible customer classes, which consist of a small number of large customers. These increases
could lead to further failures by the remaining customers to pay transition charges, thereby
increasing the risk of a shortfall in funds to pay debt service on the transition bonds.
Risks Associated with the Unusual Nature of the Transition Property
We will not receive transition charges in respect of electric service provided more than 15 years
from the date of issuance of the transition bonds.
CenterPoint Houston will not be entitled to charge transition charges for electricity
delivered after the fifteenth anniversary of the issuance of the transition bonds. If transition
charges collected for electricity delivered through the fifteenth anniversary of the transition
bonds, or from any credit enhancement funds, are not sufficient to repay the transition bonds in
full, no other funds will be available to pay the unpaid balance due on the transition bonds.
Foreclosure of the trustees lien on the transition property might not be practical, and
acceleration of the transition bonds before maturity might have little practical effect.
Under the Restructuring Act and the indenture, the trustee or the bondholders have the right
to foreclose or otherwise enforce the lien on the transition property securing the transition
bonds. However, in the event of foreclosure, there is likely to be a limited market, if any, for
the transition property. Therefore, foreclosure might not be a realistic or practical remedy.
Moreover, although principal of the transition bonds will be due and payable upon acceleration of
the transition bonds before maturity, the transition charges likely would not be accelerated and
the nature of our business will result in principal of the transition bonds being paid as funds
become available. If there is an acceleration of the transition bonds, all tranches of the
transition bonds will be paid pro rata; therefore, some tranches might be paid earlier than
expected and some tranches might be paid later than expected.
Risks Associated with Potential Bankruptcy Proceedings of CenterPoint Houston or a Successor
Servicer
The servicer will commingle the transition charges with other revenues it collects, which might
obstruct access to the transition charges in case of the servicers bankruptcy and reduce the value
of the transition bonds.
The servicer is required to remit collections to the trustee within two business days of
receipt. The servicer does not segregate the transition charges from the other funds it collects
from retail electric customers or retail electric providers or its general funds. The transition
charges are segregated only when the servicer pays them to the trustee.
Despite this requirement, the servicer might fail to pay the full amount of the transition
charges to the trustee or might fail to do so on a timely basis. This failure, whether voluntary or
involuntary, might materially reduce the amount of transition charge collections available to make
payments on the transition bonds.
The Restructuring Act provides that our rights to the transition property are not affected by
the commingling of these funds with any other funds of the servicer. In a bankruptcy of the
servicer, however, a bankruptcy court might rule that federal bankruptcy law does not recognize our
right to collections of the transition charges that are commingled with other funds of the servicer
as of the date of bankruptcy. If so, the collections of the transition charges held by the servicer
as of the date of bankruptcy would not be available to pay amounts owing on the transition bonds.
In this case, we would have only a general unsecured claim against the servicer for those amounts.
This decision could cause material delays in payments of principal or interest, or losses, on the
transition bonds and could materially reduce the value of the transition bonds, particularly if it
occurred in the fifteenth year of the transition bonds after the completion of which no transition
charges can be charged.
The bankruptcy of CenterPoint Houston, as seller of the transition property, might result in losses
or delays in payments on the transition bonds.
The Restructuring Act and the financing order provide that as a matter of Texas state law:
|
|
|
the rights and interests of a selling utility under a financing order, including the
right to impose, collect and receive transition charges, are contract rights of the
seller; |
|
|
|
|
the seller may make a present transfer of its rights under a financing order,
including the right to impose, collect and receive future transition charges that
retail customers do not yet owe; |
|
|
|
|
upon the transfer to us, the rights became transition property, and transition
property constitutes a present property right, even though the imposition and
collection of transition charges depend on further acts that have not yet occurred; and |
|
|
|
|
a transfer of the transition property from the seller, or its affiliate, to us that
expressly states the transfer is a sale or other absolute transfer is a true sale of
the transition property, not a pledge of the transition property to secure a financing
by the seller. |
These provisions are important to maintaining payments on the transition bonds in accordance with
their terms during any bankruptcy of CenterPoint Houston.
A bankruptcy court generally follows state property law on issues such as those addressed by
the state law provisions described above. However, a bankruptcy court does not follow state law if
it determines that the state law is contrary to a paramount federal bankruptcy policy or interest.
If a bankruptcy court in a CenterPoint Houston bankruptcy refused to enforce one or more of the
state property law provisions described above, the effect of this decision on beneficial owners of
the transition bonds might be similar to the treatment they would receive in a CenterPoint Houston
bankruptcy if the transition bonds had been issued directly by CenterPoint Houston. A decision by
the bankruptcy court that, despite our separateness from CenterPoint Houston, our assets and
liabilities and those of CenterPoint Houston should be consolidated would have a similar effect on
bondholders.
We have taken steps together with CenterPoint Houston, as seller of the transition property,
to reduce the risk that in the event the seller or an affiliate of the seller were to become the
debtor in a bankruptcy case, a court would order that our assets and liabilities be substantively
consolidated with those of CenterPoint Houston or an affiliate. Nonetheless, these steps might not
be completely effective, and thus if CenterPoint Houston or one of its affiliates
were to become a debtor in a bankruptcy case, a court might order that our assets and
liabilities be consolidated with those of CenterPoint Houston or such affiliate. This might cause
material delays in payment of, or losses on, the transition bonds and might materially reduce the
value of the transition bonds. For example:
|
|
|
without permission from the bankruptcy court, the trustee might be prevented from
taking actions against CenterPoint Houston or recovering or using funds on behalf of
bondholders or replacing CenterPoint Houston as the servicer; |
|
|
|
|
the bankruptcy court might order the trustee to exchange the transition property for
other property, of lower value; |
|
|
|
|
tax or other government liens on CenterPoint Houstons property might have priority
over the trustees lien and might be paid from collected transition charges before
payments on the transition bonds; |
|
|
|
|
the trustees lien might not be properly perfected in the collected transition
property collections prior to or as of the date of CenterPoint Houstons bankruptcy,
with the result that the transition bonds would represent only general unsecured claims
against CenterPoint Houston; |
|
|
|
|
the bankruptcy court might rule that neither our property interest nor the trustees
lien extends to transition charges in respect of electricity consumed after the
commencement of CenterPoint Houstons bankruptcy case, with the result that the
transition bonds would represent only general unsecured claims against CenterPoint
Houston; |
|
|
|
|
we and CenterPoint Houston might be relieved of any obligation to make any payments
on the transition bonds during the pendency of the bankruptcy case and might be
relieved of any obligation to pay interest accruing after the commencement of the
bankruptcy case; |
|
|
|
|
CenterPoint Houston might be able to alter the terms of the transition bonds as part
of its plan of reorganization; |
|
|
|
|
the bankruptcy court might rule that the transition charges should be used to pay,
or that we should be charged for, a portion of the cost of providing electric service;
or |
|
|
|
|
the bankruptcy court might rule that the remedy provisions of the transition
property sale agreement are unenforceable, leaving us with an unsecured claim for
actual damages against CenterPoint Houston that may be difficult to prove or, if
proven, to collect in full. |
Furthermore, if CenterPoint Houston enters bankruptcy proceedings, it might be permitted to
stop acting as servicer and it may be difficult to find a third party to act as servicer. The
failure of the servicer to perform its duties or the inability to find a successor servicer might
cause payment delays or losses on the transition bonds. Also, the mere fact of a servicer or seller
bankruptcy proceeding might have an adverse effect on the resale market for the transition bonds
and on the value of the transition bonds.
The sale of the transition property might be construed as a financing and not a sale in a case of
CenterPoint Houstons bankruptcy which might delay or limit payments on the transition bonds.
The Restructuring Act provides that the characterization of a transfer of transition property
as a sale or other absolute transfer will not be affected or impaired by treatment of the transfer
as a financing for federal or state tax purposes or financial reporting purposes. We and
CenterPoint Houston treated the transaction as a sale under applicable law, although for financial
reporting and state income and franchise tax purposes the transaction was intended to be treated as
a financing. In the event of a bankruptcy of CenterPoint Houston, a party in interest in the
bankruptcy might assert that the sale of the transition property to us was a financing transaction
and not a sale or other absolute transfer and that the treatment of the transaction for financial
reporting and tax purposes as a financing and not a sale lends weight to that position. If a court
were to characterize the transaction as a financing, we expect that we would, on behalf of
ourselves and the trustee, be treated as a secured creditor of CenterPoint Houston in the
bankruptcy proceedings, although a court might determine that we only have an unsecured claim
against CenterPoint Houston. See The servicer will commingle the transition charges with other
revenues it collects, which might obstruct access to the transition charges in case of the
servicers bankruptcy and reduce the value of the transition bonds above. Even if we had a
security interest in the transition property, we would not likely have access to the related
transition charge collections during the bankruptcy and would be subject to the risks of a secured
creditor in a bankruptcy case, including the possible bankruptcy risks described in the immediately
preceding risk factor. As a result, repayment of the transition bonds might be significantly
delayed and a plan of
reorganization in the bankruptcy might permanently modify the amount and timing of payments to
us of the related transition charge collections and therefore the amount and timing of funds
available to us to pay bondholders.
If the servicer enters bankruptcy proceedings, the collections of the transition charges held by
the servicer as of the date of bankruptcy might constitute preferences, which means these funds
might be unavailable to pay amounts owing on the transition bonds.
In the event of a bankruptcy of the servicer, a party in interest might take the position that
the remittance of funds prior to bankruptcy of the servicer, pursuant to the servicing agreement or
intercreditor agreement, constitutes a preference under bankruptcy law if the remittance of those
funds was deemed to be paid on account of a pre-existing debt. If a court were to hold that the
remittance of funds constitutes a preference, any such remittance within 90 days of the filing of
the bankruptcy petition could be avoidable, and the funds could be required to be returned to the
bankruptcy estate of the servicer. To the extent that transition charges have been commingled with
the general funds of the servicer, the risk that a court would hold that a remittance of funds was
a preference would increase. Also, we or the servicer may be considered an insider with any
retail electric provider that is affiliated with us or the servicer. If the servicer or we are
considered to be an insider of the retail electric provider, any such remittance made within one
year of the filing of the bankruptcy petition could be avoidable as well if the court were to hold
that such remittance constitutes a preference. In either case, we or the trustee would merely be an
unsecured creditor of the servicer.
Claims against CenterPoint Houston might be limited in the event of its bankruptcy.
If CenterPoint Houston were to become a debtor in a bankruptcy case, claims, including
indemnity claims, by us against it, as seller, under the transition property sale agreement and the
other documents executed in connection with the transition property sale agreement would be
unsecured claims and would be disposed of in the bankruptcy case. In addition, the bankruptcy court
might estimate any contingent claims that we have against the seller and, if it determines that the
contingency giving rise to these claims is unlikely to occur, estimate the claims at a lower
amount. A party in interest in the bankruptcy of the seller might challenge the enforceability of
the indemnity provisions in the transition property sale agreement. If a court were to hold that
the indemnity provisions were unenforceable, we would be left with a claim for actual damages
against the seller based on breach of contract principles, which would be subject to estimation
and/or calculation by the court. We cannot give any assurance as to the result if any of the
above-described actions or claims were made. Furthermore, we cannot give any assurance as to what
percentage of their claims, if any, unsecured creditors would receive in any bankruptcy proceeding
involving the seller.
The bankruptcy of CenterPoint Houston might limit the remedies available to the trustee.
Upon an event of default under the indenture, the Restructuring Act permits the trustee to
enforce the security interest in the transition property in accordance with the terms of the
indenture. In this capacity, the trustee is permitted to request the Texas Utility Commission or a
Travis County, Texas district court to order the sequestration and payment to bondholders of all
revenues arising with respect to the transition property. There can be no assurance, however, that
the Texas Utility Commission or the Travis County, Texas district court would issue this order
after a CenterPoint Houston bankruptcy in light of the automatic stay provisions of Section 362 of
the United States Bankruptcy Code. In that event, the trustee would be required to seek an order
from the bankruptcy court lifting the automatic stay to permit this action by the Texas court, and
an order requiring an accounting and segregation of the revenues arising from the transition
property. There can be no assurance that a court would grant either order.
Risks Associated with Potential Bankruptcy Proceedings of Retail Electric Providers
Retail electric providers may commingle the transition charges with other revenues they collect.
This may cause losses on or reduce the value of the transition bonds in the event a retail electric
provider enters bankruptcy proceedings.
A retail electric provider is not required to segregate from its general funds the transition
charges it collects but is required to remit to the servicer amounts billed to it for transition
charges, less an amount relating to expected
customer charge-offs, within 35 days of the billing by the servicer. A retail electric
provider nevertheless might fail to remit the full amount of the transition charges owed to the
servicer or might fail to do so on a timely basis. This failure, whether voluntary or involuntary,
might materially reduce the amount of transition charge collections available on the next payment
date to make timely payments on the transition bonds.
The Restructuring Act provides that our rights to the transition property are not affected by
the commingling of these funds with other funds. In a bankruptcy of a retail electric provider,
however, a bankruptcy court might rule that federal bankruptcy law takes precedence over the
Restructuring Act and does not recognize our right to receive the collected transition charges that
are commingled with other funds of a retail electric provider as of the date of bankruptcy. If so,
the collections of the transition charges held by a retail electric provider as of the date of
bankruptcy would not be available to pay amounts owing on the transition bonds. In this case, we
would have only a general unsecured claim against the retail electric provider for those amounts.
This decision might cause material delays in payments of principal or interest or losses on the
transition bonds and could materially reduce the value of the transition bonds, particularly if it
occurred in the fifteenth year of the transition bonds after the completion of which no transition
charges can be charged.
If a retail electric provider enters bankruptcy proceedings, any cash deposit of the retail
electric provider held by the trustee might not be available to cover amounts owed by the retail
electric provider.
If a retail electric provider does not have the credit rating required by the financing order,
it may nevertheless qualify to act as a retail electric provider if, among other alternatives, it
provides a cash deposit equal to two months maximum expected transition charge collections. That
cash deposit will be held by the trustee under the indenture. However, it is unclear whether the
Restructuring Act creates a lien on the cash deposit in favor of the trustee. If the retail
electric provider becomes bankrupt, the trustee would be stayed from applying that cash deposit to
cover amounts owed by the retail electric provider, and the trustee might be required to return
that cash deposit to the retail electric providers bankruptcy estate if the bankruptcy court
determines there is no valid right of set-off or recoupment. In that case, the issuer might only
have an unsecured claim for any amounts owed by the retail electric provider in the retail electric
providers bankruptcy proceedings. Several retail electric providers with which CenterPoint Houston
has done business have filed for bankruptcy. CenterPoint Houston, as servicer of the transition
bonds, was able to recover the full amount or a substantial majority of the transition charges from
cash deposits or a combination of cash deposits and payments from these retail electric providers,
but there is no assurance that CenterPoint Houston will be able to recover such amounts from any
bankrupt retail electric providers in the future.
If a retail electric provider enters bankruptcy proceedings, transition charge payments made by
that retail electric provider to the servicer might constitute preferences, and the servicer may be
required to return such funds to the bankruptcy estate of the retail electric provider.
In the event of a bankruptcy of a retail electric provider, a party in interest might take the
position that the remittance of funds by the retail electric provider to the servicer, pursuant to
the financing order, prior to bankruptcy constitutes a preference under bankruptcy law if the
remittance of those funds was deemed to be paid on account of a pre-existing debt. If a court were
to hold that the remittance of funds constitutes preferences, any remittance of such funds made
within 90 days of the filing of the bankruptcy petition might be avoidable, and the funds might be
required to be returned to the bankruptcy estate of the retail electric provider by us or the
servicer. To the extent that transition charges have been commingled with the general funds of the
retail electric provider, the risk that a court would hold that a remittance of funds was a
preference would increase. Also, we or the servicer might be considered an insider with any
retail electric provider that is affiliated with us or the servicer. If the servicer or we are
considered to be an insider of the retail electric provider, any such remittance made within one
year of the filing of the bankruptcy petition could be avoidable as well if the court were to hold
that such remittance constitutes a preference. In either case, we or the servicer would merely be
an unsecured creditor of the retail electric provider.
Furthermore, the mere fact of a retail electric provider bankruptcy proceeding could have an
adverse effect on the resale market for the transition bonds and on the value of the transition
bonds.
Other Risks Associated with an Investment in the Transition Bonds
We may incur expenses in excess of caps on such expenses provided in the financing order.
Under the financing order, transition charges may not be imposed for certain of our ongoing
expenses to the extent they exceed caps provided in the financing order for such amounts. In
addition, our other assets, substantially all of which are pledged to the trustee under the
indenture, may not be used by the trustee to pay such excess amounts. Examples of these caps
include payment of specified fees and expenses of the trustee and the servicer and other specified
operating expenses. We cannot be sure that we will not incur expenses for these purposes in excess
of the cap levels and, if this were to occur, we would not have funds to make payments for these
excess amounts. Creditors of ours which are owed these amounts and not paid may obtain judgment
liens against our assets or seek to place us in bankruptcy.
CenterPoint Houstons indemnification obligations under the transition property sale and servicing
agreements are limited and might not be sufficient to protect the value of the transition bonds.
CenterPoint Houston is obligated under the transition property sale agreement to indemnify us
and the trustee, for itself and on behalf of the bondholders, only in specified circumstances and
will not be obligated to repurchase the transition property in the event of a breach of any of its
representations, warranties or covenants regarding the transition property. Similarly, CenterPoint
Houston is obligated under the transition property servicing agreement to indemnify us, the
trustee, for itself and on behalf of the bondholders, and the Texas Utility Commission only in
specified circumstances.
Neither the trustee nor the bondholders have the right to accelerate payments on the
transition bonds as a result of a breach under the transition property sale agreement or the
transition property servicing agreement, absent an event of default under the indenture.
Furthermore, CenterPoint Houston might not have sufficient funds available to satisfy its
indemnification obligations under these agreements, and the amount of any indemnification paid by
CenterPoint Houston might not be sufficient for bondholders to recover all of their investment in
the transition bonds. In addition, if CenterPoint Houston becomes obligated to indemnify
bondholders, the ratings on the transition bonds will likely be downgraded as a result of the
circumstances causing the breach and the fact that bondholders will be unsecured creditors of
CenterPoint Houston with respect to any of these indemnification amounts.
CenterPoint Houstons ratings might affect the market value of the transition bonds.
A downgrading of the credit ratings on the debt of CenterPoint Houston might have an adverse
effect on the market value of the transition bonds.
Technological change might make alternative energy sources more attractive in the future.
Technological developments might result in the introduction of economically attractive
alternatives to purchasing electricity through CenterPoint Houstons distribution facilities for
increasing numbers of retail customers. Manufacturers of self-generation facilities may develop
smaller-scale, more fuel-efficient generating units that can be cost-effective options for a
greater number of retail customers. Electric customers within CenterPoint Houstons service
territory whose load is served by an on-site power production facility with a rated capacity of 10
megawatts or less are not required to pay transition charges under the Restructuring Act except for
transition charges associated with services actually provided by the transmission and distribution
utility. Technological developments might allow greater numbers of retail customers to avoid
transition charges under such provisions, which may reduce the total number of retail customers
from which transition charges will be collected.
Bondholders might receive principal payments on the transition bonds later than expected.
The amount and the rate of collection of the transition charges, together with the related
transition charge adjustments, will generally determine whether there is a delay in the scheduled
repayments of transition bond principal. If the servicer collects the transition charges at a
slower rate than expected from any retail electric provider, it might have to request adjustments
of the transition charges. If those adjustments are not timely and
accurate, bondholders might experience a delay in payments of principal and interest and a
decrease in the value of the transition bonds.