NISOURCE INC. - Quarter Report: 2012 March (Form 10-Q)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

þ QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2012

or

¨ 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 001-16189

NiSource Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(877) 647-5990

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

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 ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files.)

Yesþ    No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company.

Large accelerated filer þ                        Accelerated filer ¨

Non-accelerated filer ¨                          Smaller reporting company ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Yes ¨  No þ

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date: Common Stock, $0.01 Par Value: 284,092,190 shares outstanding at April 26, 2012.

Table of Contents

NISOURCE INC.

FORM 10-Q QUARTERLY REPORT

FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2012

Table of Contents

2

Table of Contents

DEFINED TERMS

The following is a list of frequently used abbreviations or acronyms that are found in this report:

3

Table of Contents

DEFINED TERMS (continued)

4

Table of Contents

DEFINED TERMS (continued)

5

Table of Contents

PART I

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

NiSource Inc.

Condensed Statements of Consolidated Income (unaudited)

The accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) are an integral part of these statements.

6

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Condensed Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (unaudited)

The accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) are an integral part of these statements.

7

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets (unaudited)

The accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) are an integral part of these statements.

8

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet (unaudited) (continued)

The accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) are an integral part of these statements.

9

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Condensed Statements of Consolidated Cash Flows (unaudited)

The accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) are an integral part of these statements.

10

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited)

1.            Basis of Accounting Presentation

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for NiSource (the “Company”) reflect all normal recurring adjustments that are necessary, in the opinion of management, to present fairly the results of operations in accordance with GAAP in the United States of America.

The accompanying financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in NiSource’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011. Income for interim periods may not be indicative of results for the calendar year due to weather variations and other factors.

The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared pursuant to the rules and regulations of the SEC. Certain information and note disclosures normally included in annual financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP have been condensed or omitted pursuant to those rules and regulations, although NiSource believes that the disclosures made are adequate to make the information not misleading.

Immaterial Restatement

As indicated in NiSource’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, NiSource made correcting adjustments to its historical financial statements including for the first quarter of 2011 relating to deferred revenue, environmental asset recovery and OPEB over-reimbursement. NiSource does not believe that these corrections, individually or in the aggregate, are material to its financial statements (unaudited) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011. For additional information on these corrections, see Note 1, Nature of Operations and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, and Note 26, Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited), of the Consolidated Financial Statements of NiSource’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011.

The following table sets forth the effects of the correcting adjustments to Net Income for the three months ended March 31, 2011:

11

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited)

The following table sets forth the effects of the correcting adjustments on affected line items within the Condensed Statement of Consolidated Income (unaudited) for the three months ended March 31, 2011:

Condensed Statements of Consolidated Income (unaudited)

These corrections affected certain line items within net cash flows from operating activities on the Condensed Statement of Consolidated Cash Flows (unaudited) for the three months ended March 31, 2011, with no net effect on total net cash flows from operating activities.

2.            Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

Comprehensive Income. In June 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2011-05, which revises the manner in which entities present comprehensive income in their financial statements. The new guidance removes the presentation options in ASC 220 and requires entities to report components of comprehensive income in either (1) a continuous statement of comprehensive income or (2) two separate but consecutive statements. The update does not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income. In December 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2011-12, which indefinitely defers the requirement to present reclassification adjustments out of accumulated other comprehensive income by component in both the Condensed Statements of Consolidated Income (unaudited) and the Condensed Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (unaudited), as required by Accounting Standards Update 2011-05. For public entities, these updates are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. NiSource adopted the guidance on January 1, 2012 by presenting the Condensed Statements of Consolidated Income (unaudited) and the Condensed Statements of Consolidated Comprehensive Income (unaudited) as two separate statements.

12

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

Balance Sheet Disclosure. In December 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2011-11, which requires additional disclosures regarding the nature of an entity’s rights to offset positions associated with its financial and derivative instruments. These new disclosures will provide additional information about the entity’s gross and net financial exposure. The amendment is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after January 1, 2013 with retrospective application required. NiSource is currently reviewing the provisions of this new standard to determine the impact on its Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) and Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited).

Goodwill Impairment. In September 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2011-08, which gives entities testing goodwill for impairment the option of performing a qualitative assessment before calculating the fair value of a reporting unit for the goodwill impairment test. The amendment is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. As NiSource performs its annual Goodwill impairment test during the second quarter of its fiscal year, NiSource is currently reviewing the provisions of this new standard to determine if it will elect the option for the second quarter of 2012.

3.            Earnings Per Share

Basic EPS is computed by dividing income available to common stockholders by the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding for the period. The weighted average shares outstanding for diluted EPS includes the incremental effects of the various long-term incentive compensation plans and the Forward Agreements (refer to Note 4 “Forward Equity Agreement” for additional information). The calculation of diluted earnings per share for March 31, 2012 and 2011 excludes out-of-the-money stock options of 2.1 million and 3.5 million, respectively, which had an anti-dilutive effect. The numerator in calculating both basic and diluted EPS for each period is reported net income. The computation of diluted average common shares follows:

4.            Forward Equity Agreement

On September 14, 2010, NiSource and Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, as forward seller, closed an underwritten registered public offering of 24,265,000 shares of NiSource’s common stock. All of the shares sold were borrowed and delivered to the underwriters by the forward seller. NiSource did not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of the borrowed shares, but NiSource will receive proceeds upon settlement of the Forward Agreements referred to below.

In connection with the public offering, NiSource entered into forward sale agreements (“Forward Agreements”) with an affiliate of the forward seller covering an aggregate of 24,265,000 shares of NiSource’s common stock. Settlement of the Forward Agreements is expected to occur no later than September 10, 2012. Subject to certain exceptions, NiSource may elect cash or net share settlement for all or a portion of its obligations under the Forward Agreements. Upon any physical settlement of the Forward Agreements, NiSource will deliver shares of its common stock in exchange for cash proceeds at the forward sale price, which initially is $15.9638 and is subject to adjustment as provided in the Forward Agreements. If the equity forward had been settled by delivery of shares at March 31, 2012, NiSource would have received approximately $351.2 million based on a forward price of $14.4744 for the 24,265,000 shares. NiSource currently anticipates settling the equity forward by delivering shares.

13

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

In accordance with ASC 815-40, NiSource has classified the Forward Agreement as an equity transaction. As a result of this classification, no amounts have been recorded in the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and the year ended December 31, 2011 in connection with the Forward Agreements. The only impact to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) is the inclusion of incremental shares within the calculation of fully diluted EPS under the treasury stock method. Refer to Note 3, “Earnings Per Share,” for additional information.

5.            Gas in Storage

Both the LIFO inventory methodology and the weighted average cost methodology are used to value natural gas in storage. Gas Distribution Operations price natural gas storage injections at the average of the costs of natural gas supply purchased during the year. For interim periods, the difference between current projected replacement cost and the LIFO cost for quantities of gas temporarily withdrawn from storage is recorded as a temporary LIFO liquidation credit or debit within the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets (unaudited). Due to seasonality requirements, NiSource expects interim variances in LIFO layers to be replenished by year-end. NiSource has a temporary LIFO liquidation debit of $21.7 million recorded for the three months ended March 31, 2012 for certain gas distribution companies recorded within “Prepayments and other,” on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets (unaudited).

6.            Discontinued Operations and Assets and Liabilities Held for Sale

There were no significant assets or liabilities of discontinued operations and held for sale on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011.

Results from discontinued operations, which primarily arise from changes in estimate for certain liabilities for NiSource’s former exploration and production subsidiary, CER, are provided in the following table:

7.            Asset Retirement Obligations

Certain costs of removal that have been, and continue to be, included in depreciation rates and collected in the service rates of the rate-regulated subsidiaries are classified as “Regulatory liabilities and other removal costs” on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets (unaudited).

Changes in NiSource’s liability for asset retirement obligations for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 are presented in the table below:

14

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

8.            Regulatory Matters

Gas Distribution Operations Regulatory Matters

Significant Rate Developments.  On June 27, 2011, Northern Indiana filed a settlement agreement with the IURC in which regulatory stakeholders agreed that Northern Indiana should adopt the WACOG accounting methodology instead of LIFO, Northern Indiana’s historical method. On August 31, 2011, the IURC approved the settlement and Northern Indiana transitioned to WACOG accounting methodology beginning January 1, 2012.

On March 15, 2012, the IURC approved a settlement agreement with Northern Indiana and all participating parties to extend its product and services contained in its current gas ARP indefinitely.

On January 14, 2011, Columbia of Pennsylvania filed a base rate case with the Pennsylvania PUC, seeking a revenue increase of approximately $37.8 million annually. The parties jointly filed a petition for approval of a partial settlement on July 1, 2011. The partial settlement resolved all issues except residential rate design and a challenge to the structure of one of Columbia of Pennsylvania’s customer programs. The settlement provides for an annual revenue increase of $17 million. The Pennsylvania PUC issued an order on October 14, 2011 approving the annual revenue increase of $17 million. New rates went into effect on October 18, 2011. The Pennsylvania PUC’s ruling increased the minimum residential customer charge from $12.25 to $18.73, which includes an allowance for 20 Ccf of distribution charges. However, the customer pays for gas commodity on all usage.

On November 12, 2010, Columbia of Pennsylvania filed a petition for an order authorizing the company to revise its accounting methodology for the gas it holds in storage. Columbia of Pennsylvania had historically used Last-In First-Out (LIFO) accounting but sought permission to move to a Weighted Average Cost of Gas (WACOG) accounting methodology as a means of simplifying regulatory accounting and to realize the value of low-cost gas injected into storage decades ago. On February 4, 2011, Columbia of Pennsylvania filed a settlement agreement with the Pennsylvania PUC in which regulatory stakeholders agreed that Columbia of Pennsylvania should adopt the WACOG accounting methodology and provide the benefit of the low-cost gas supplies to its customers. On March 31, 2011, the Pennsylvania PUC approved the settlement and Columbia of Pennsylvania began to provide the projected benefit as a credit to its customers as a reduction to the Gas Cost Recovery rate. The credit to customers of $43.8 million was totally refunded by September 2011.

On September 29, 2010, Columbia of Pennsylvania filed tariff modifications with the Pennsylvania PUC, seeking permission to apply a BTU content billing adjustment to customers’ metered volumetric consumption. The filing sought to account for high BTU content gas that is produced from Marcellus Shale, which burns hotter than gas from other sources, resulting in lower volumes than assumed in the design of the Columbia of Pennsylvania’s rates. The proposed billing adjustment was designed to produce revenues reflective of the BTU content underlying the demand forecast in the design of Columbia of Pennsylvania’s most recently approved base rates by synchronizing the BTU content used for billing with the BTU content used for rate design. If the billing adjustment had been in place for the twelve months ended June 30, 2010, it would have produced additional revenues of approximately $3.7 million due to the difference between the BTU value used in the design of the recently approved rates and the actual BTU value at the time of billing. By an Order entered on January 26, 2011, the Pennsylvania PUC consolidated this matter with Columbia of Pennsylvania’s base rate case filed on January 14, 2011. As described above, on October 14, 2011, the Pennsylvania PUC approved a partial settlement of the base rate case. The partial settlement resolved the issue of BTU content whereby the parties agreed that Columbia of Pennsylvania would convert from usage-based billing to heat content billing by no later than the June 2012 billing cycle. Columbia of Pennsylvania began heat content billing, with a therm billing unit, on January 31, 2012.

On May 19, 2008 Columbia of Ohio filed an application with the PUCO to defer environmental remediation expenses. On September 24, 2008, the PUCO approved the application. Each year COH must report on the amounts deferred during the previous year. On December 6, 2011, COH filed its annual deferral report for the twelve months ended November 30, 2011. PUCO Staff filed its Comments on January 5, 2012, and objected to deferral of costs for a Toledo remediation project. As suggested by PUCO Staff, Columbia of Ohio capitalized $2.4 million in costs associated with the Toledo project which will be proposed for recovery as a component of future rate base.

15

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

Columbia of Massachusetts filed an application to implement its Targeted Infrastructure Reinvestment Factor (“TIRF”) on April 30, 2010. On October 29, 2010, the Massachusetts DPU approved Columbia of Massachusetts’ proposed adjustment factor, to take effect November 1, 2010, subject to further investigation and reconciliation. On April 29, 2011, Columbia of Massachusetts filed its second annual application of its TIRF tracker for DPU approval for new rates to go into effect November 1, 2011. On October 31, 2011, the Massachusetts DPU approved Columbia of Massachusetts proposed adjustment factor subject to further investigation and reconciliation. On September 16, 2010, Columbia of Massachusetts filed a petition for approval to implement its first semi-annual revenue decoupling adjustment factor (“RDAF”) for the Peak Period. That adjustment, which took effect on November 1, 2010, subject to further review and reconciliation, was approved by the DPU on March 23, 2011. Columbia of Massachusetts filed its application for approval of its Off-peak Period RDAF on March 15, 2011. The rate took effect on May 1, 2011, subject to further review and reconciliation by the DPU. On September 15, 2011, Columbia of Massachusetts filed a petition for approval of its second Peak Period RDAF, with a proposed effective date of November 1, 2011. On October 31, 2011, the Massachusetts DPU approved Columbia of Massachusetts’ proposed adjustment factor subject to further investigation and reconciliation. On March 19, 2012, Columbia of Massachusetts filed its Off-Peak RDAF to take effect May 1, 2012. The filing is under review by the Massachusetts DPU.

On April 13, 2012, Columbia of Massachusetts submitted a filing with the Massachusetts DPU requesting an annual revenue requirement increase of $29.2 million. Columbia of Massachusetts filed using a historic test year ending December 31, 2011. Additionally, Columbia of Massachusetts proposed rate-year, rate base treatment, as well as modification to the TIRF. The rate-year, rate base treatment has been proposed to reduce the impact of regulatory lag. An order is expected later this year, with new rates going into effect on November 1, 2012.

On January 30, 2009, Columbia of Ohio filed an application with the PUCO to implement a gas supply auction. The auction replaced Columbia of Ohio’s current GCR mechanism for providing commodity gas supplies to its sales customers. By Order dated December 2, 2009, the PUCO approved a stipulation that resolved all issues in the case. Pursuant to the stipulation, Columbia of Ohio conducted two consecutive one-year long standard service offer auction periods starting April 1, 2010 and April 1, 2011. On February 23, 2010, Columbia of Ohio held the first standard service offer auction which resulted in a final retail price adjustment of $1.93 per Mcf. On February 24, 2010 the PUCO issued an entry that approved the results of the auction and directed Columbia of Ohio to proceed with the implementation of the standard service offer process. On February 8, 2011, Columbia of Ohio held its second standard service offer auction which resulted in a retail price adjustment of $1.88 per Mcf. On February 9, 2011, the PUCO issued an entry that approved the results of the auction with the new retail price adjustment to become effective April 1, 2011. Several parties challenged the transition from a standard service offer auction to a standard choice offer auction and on September 7, 2011, the PUCO issued an Order authorizing Columbia of Ohio to implement a standard choice offer auction in February 2012. On October 7, 2011, the OCC filed an application for rehearing of the PUCO’s Order. By Entry on Rehearing dated November 1, 2011, the PUCO denied the OCC’s Application for Rehearing. On February 14, 2012, Columbia of Ohio held its first standard choice offer auction which resulted in a retail price adjustment of $1.53 per Mcf. On February 14, 2012, the PUCO issued an entry that approved the results of the auction with the new retail price adjustment to become effective April 1, 2012. With the implementation of the standard choice offer, Columbia of Ohio will report lower gross revenues and lower cost of sales. There is no impact on net revenues.

On October 3, 2011, Columbia of Ohio filed an application with PUCO, requesting authority to defer incurred charges to a regulatory asset for debt-based post-in-service carrying charges, depreciation and property taxes associated with Columbia of Ohio’s capital program. Interested parties filed comments on Columbia of Ohio’s application by February 17, 2012. Columbia of Ohio filed Reply Comments on February 27, 2012.

On November 30, 2011 Columbia of Ohio filed a Notice of Intent to file an application to adjust rates associated with Rider IRP and Rider DSM. On February 28, 2012, Columbia of Ohio filed its application to adjust rates associated with IRP and DSM Riders. The DSM Rider tracks and recovers costs associated with Columbia of Ohio’s energy efficiency and conservation programs. The application sought to increase the annual revenue from the riders by approximately $27.9 million. On April 10, 2012, Columbia of Ohio reached a settlement with parties allowing for an increase in annual revenue from the Riders of approximately $27 million. It is anticipated that the PUCO will approve the settlement to become effective May 1, 2012.

16

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

On December 9, 2011 Columbia of Ohio filed a Notice of Intent to file an application to extend its Infrastructure Replacement Program. On January 6, 2012, the OCC filed a Memorandum Contra, arguing that Columbia of Ohio’s base rates should be reviewed as part of the IRP extension process. Columbia of Ohio filed a Reply Memorandum on January 11, 2012. Columbia of Ohio filed an amended Notice of Intent and an amended Motion for Waiver on March 5, 2012.

On April 19, 2012, Columbia of Ohio filed an application that requests authority to increase its uncollectible expense rider rate in order to generate an additional $14.6 million in annual revenue in order to offset anticipated increases in uncollectible expenses.

Cost Recovery and Trackers.  A significant portion of the distribution companies’ revenue is related to the recovery of gas costs, the review and recovery of which occurs via standard regulatory proceedings. All states require periodic review of actual gas procurement activity to determine prudence and to permit the recovery of prudently incurred costs related to the supply of gas for customers. NiSource distribution companies have historically been found prudent in the procurement of gas supplies to serve customers.

Certain operating costs of the NiSource distribution companies are significant, recurring in nature, and generally outside the control of the distribution companies. Some states allow the recovery of such costs via cost tracking mechanisms. Such tracking mechanisms allow for abbreviated regulatory proceedings in order for the distribution companies to implement charges and recover appropriate costs. Tracking mechanisms allow for more timely recovery of such costs as compared with more traditional cost recovery mechanisms. Examples of such mechanisms include GCR adjustment mechanisms, tax riders, and bad debt recovery mechanisms.

Comparability of Gas Distribution Operations line item operating results is impacted by regulatory trackers that allow for the recovery in rates of certain costs such as bad debt expenses. Increases in the expenses that are the subject of trackers, result in a corresponding increase in net revenues and therefore have essentially no impact on total operating income results.

Certain of the NiSource distribution companies have completed rate proceedings involving infrastructure replacement or are embarking upon regulatory initiatives to replace significant portions of their operating systems that are nearing the end of their useful lives. Each LDC’s approach to cost recovery may be unique, given the different laws, regulations and precedent that exist in each jurisdiction.

Gas Transmission and Storage Operations Regulatory Matters

Columbia Gulf Rate Case.   On October 28, 2010, Columbia Gulf filed a rate case with the FERC, proposing a rate increase and tariff changes. Among other things, the filing proposed a revenue increase of approximately $50 million to cover increases in the cost of services, which includes adjustments for operation and maintenance expenses, capital investments, adjustments to depreciation rates and expense, rate of return, and increased federal, state and local taxes. On November 30, 2010, the FERC issued an Order allowing new rates to become effective by May 2011, subject to refund. Columbia Gulf placed new rates into effect, subject to refund, on May 1, 2011. Columbia Gulf and the active parties to the case negotiated a settlement, which was filed with the FERC on September 9, 2011. On September 30, 2011, the Chief Judge severed the issues relating to a contesting party for separate hearing and decision. On October 4, 2011, the Presiding Administrative Law Judge certified the settlement agreement as uncontested to the FERC with severance of the contesting party from the settlement. On November 1, 2011, Columbia Gulf began billing interim rates to customers. On December 1, 2011, the FERC issued an order approving the settlement without change. The key elements of the settlement, which was a “black box agreement”, include: (1) increased base rate to $0.1520 per Dth and (2) establishing a postage stamp rate design. No protests to the order were filed and therefore, pursuant to the Settlement, the order became final on January 1, 2012 which made the settlement effective on February 1, 2012. On February 2, 2012, the Presiding Administrative Law Judge issued an initial decision granting a joint motion terminating the remaining litigation with the contesting party and allowing it to become a settling party. The FERC issued an order on March 15, 2012, affirming the initial decision, which terminated the remaining litigation with the contesting party. Refunds of approximately $16 million, accrued as of December 31, 2011, were disbursed to settling parties in March 2012.

17

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

Electric Operations Regulatory Matters

Significant Rate Developments.   On July 18, 2011, Northern Indiana filed with the IURC a settlement in its 2010 Electric Rate Case with the OUCC, Northern Indiana Industrial Group, NLMK Indiana and Indiana Municipal Utilities Group. The settlement agreement limited the proposed base rate impact to the residential customer class to a 4.5% increase. The parties have also agreed to a rate of return of 6.98% based upon a 10.2% return on equity. The settlement also resolves all pending issues related to compliance with the August 25, 2010 Order in the 2008 Electric Rate Case. On December 21, 2011, the IURC issued an Order approving the Settlement Agreement as filed, and new electric base rates became effective on December 27, 2011. On January 20, 2012, the City of Hammond filed an appeal of the IURC’s December 21, 2011 Order. That appeal is pending.

During 2002, Northern Indiana settled certain regulatory matters related to an electric rate review. On September 23, 2002, the IURC issued an Order adopting most aspects of the settlement. The Order approving the settlement provided that certain electric customers of Northern Indiana would receive bill credits of approximately $55.1 million each year. The credits continued at approximately the same annual level and per the same methodology, until the IURC approval and implementation of new customer rates, which occurred on December 27, 2011. A final reconciliation of the credits will occur in a future fuel cost filing according to the terms of the approved settlement in the 2010 Electric Rate Case. Credits amounting to $(0.9) million and $13.0 million were recognized for electric customers for the first quarter of 2012 and 2011, respectively.

On December 9, 2009, the IURC issued an Order in its generic DSM investigation proceeding establishing an overall annual energy savings goal of 2% to be achieved by Indiana jurisdictional electric utilities in 10 years, with interim savings goals established in years one through nine. On May 25, 2011, the IURC issued an Order approving a tracker mechanism to recover the costs associated with these energy efficiency programs. On July 27, 2011, the IURC issued an Order approving the energy efficiency programs. On February 1, 2012, Northern Indiana submitted a petition to the IURC to recover lost margins, and an evidentiary hearing is scheduled for July 31, 2012.

Cost Recovery and Trackers.   A significant portion of Northern Indiana’s revenue is related to the recovery of fuel costs to generate power and the fuel costs related to purchased power. These costs are recovered through a FAC, a standard, quarterly, “summary” regulatory proceeding in Indiana.

As part of a multi-state effort to strengthen the electric transmission system serving the Midwest, Northern Indiana anticipates making an investment in a new, 100-mile, 345-kilovolt transmission project in northern Indiana. The project, a major new transmission system improvement reviewed and authorized by the MISO, is scheduled to be in service during the latter part of the decade. On March 16, 2012, Northern Indiana filed with the FERC for incentives for this transmission project, including all construction work in progress in rate base. Northern Indiana has also been identified by the MISO as one of two Transmission Owners to invest in another project. On February 8, 2012, Pioneer Transmission, LLC filed a complaint with the FERC, seeking to obtain 100 percent of the investment rights in this second project. The last Response was filed by Northern Indiana on March 27, 2012.

In the Order issued on August 25, 2010, the IURC approved an RTO tracker for recovery of MISO non-fuel costs and revenues and off-system sales sharing and ordered that purchased power costs and fuel-related MISO charge types be recovered in the FAC. The IURC also approved a purchase capacity tracker referred to as the RA Tracker. Similar treatment was requested in the 2010 Electric Rate Case filing and approved in the December 21, 2011 Order approving the Settlement Agreement. The implementation of such trackers coincides with the implementation of new customer rates. Northern Indiana made its first filings for recovery of costs under the RTO and RA mechanisms on February 2, 2012. The RTO filing also seeks authorization from the IURC to retain certain revenues under MISO Schedule 26-A to support investments in Northern Indiana’s Multi-Value Projects under MISO’s 2011 transmission expansion plan. On April 10, 2012, the IURC approved a procedural schedule to consider the retention of MISO Schedule 26-A revenues. The hearing date is set for May 14, 2012.

As part of the August 25, 2010 Order, a new “purchase power benchmark” became effective. This purchase power benchmark superseded the one made effective by a settlement in October 2007. The benchmark is based upon the costs of power generated by a hypothetical natural gas fired unit using gas purchased and delivered to Northern Indiana. During the quarters ended March 31, 2012 and 2011, no purchased power costs exceeded the benchmark.

18

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

On March 22, 2011, Northern Indiana filed a petition with the IURC for a certificate of public convenience and necessity and associated relief for the construction of additional environmental projects required to comply with the NOV consent decree lodged in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana on January 13, 2011. Refer to Note 19-C, “Environmental Matters,” for additional information. This petition has since been trifurcated into three separate phases. On December 28, 2011, the IURC issued an order for the Phase I projects estimated to cost $500 million and granting the requested ratemaking and accounting relief associated with these Phase I projects. On February 15, 2012, the IURC issued an order for the Phase II projects. The proposed construction of a FGD unit on Michigan City Generating Station Unit 12 is the subject of Phase III of this proceeding. On February 14, 2012, the IURC issued a procedural schedule for the Phase III projects, which includes an evidentiary hearing scheduled on May 10, 2012.

On February 7, 2012, Northern Indiana filed ECR-19 and EER-9, the filing implementing the ECT, which included $109.6 million of net capital expenditures and operation and maintenance and depreciation expenses of $32.6 million for the period ended December 31, 2011.

9.            Risk Management Activities

NiSource is exposed to certain risks relating to its ongoing business operations. The primary risks managed by using derivative instruments are commodity price risk and interest rate risk. Derivative natural gas contracts are entered into to manage the price risk associated with natural gas price volatility and to secure forward natural gas prices. Interest rate swaps are entered into to manage interest rate risk associated with NiSource’s fixed-rate borrowings. NiSource designates some of its commodity forward contracts as cash flow hedges of forecasted purchases of commodities and designates its interest rate swaps as fair value hedges of fixed-rate borrowings. Additionally, certain NiSource subsidiaries enter into forward physical contracts with various third parties to procure or sell natural gas or power. Certain forward physical contracts are derivatives which qualify for the normal purchase and normal sales exception which do not require mark-to-market accounting.

Accounting Policy for Derivative Instruments.   The ASC topic on accounting for derivatives and hedging requires an entity to recognize all derivatives as either assets or liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value, unless such contracts are exempted such as a normal purchase and normal sale contract under the provisions of the ASC topic. The accounting for changes in the fair value of a derivative depends on the intended use of the derivative and resulting designation.

NiSource uses a variety of derivative instruments (exchange traded futures and options, physical forwards and options, basis contracts, financial commodity swaps, and interest rate swaps) to effectively manage its commodity price risk and interest rate risk exposure. If certain conditions are met, a derivative may be specifically designated as (a) a hedge of the exposure to changes in the fair value of a recognized asset or liability or an unrecognized firm commitment, or (b) a hedge of the exposure to variable cash flows of a forecasted transaction. In order for a derivative contract to be designated as a hedge, the relationship between the hedging instrument and the hedged item or transaction must be highly effective. The effectiveness test is performed at the inception of the hedge and each reporting period thereafter, throughout the period that the hedge is designated. Any amounts determined to be ineffective are recognized currently in earnings. For derivative contracts that qualify for the normal purchase and normal sales exception, a contract’s fair value is not recognized in the Consolidated Financial Statements until the contract is settled.

Unrealized and realized gains and losses are recognized each period as components of AOCI, regulatory assets and liabilities or earnings depending on the designation of the derivative instrument. For subsidiaries that utilize derivatives for cash flow hedges, the effective portions of the gains and losses are recorded to AOCI and are recognized in earnings concurrent with the disposition of the hedged risks. If a forecasted transaction corresponding to a cash flow hedge is no longer probable to occur, the accumulated gains or losses on the derivative are recognized currently in earnings. For fair value hedges, the gains and losses are recorded in earnings each period together with the change in the fair value of the hedged item. As a result of the rate-making process, the rate-regulated subsidiaries generally record gains and losses as regulatory liabilities or assets and recognize such gains or losses in earnings when both the contracts settle and the physical commodity flows. These gains and losses recognized in earnings are then subsequently recovered or passed back to customers in revenues through rates. When gains and losses are recognized in earnings, they are recognized in revenues or cost of sales for derivatives that correspond to commodity risk activities and are recognized in interest expense for derivatives that correspond to interest-rate risk activities.

19

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

NiSource has elected not to net fair value amounts for its derivative instruments or the fair value amounts recognized for its right to receive cash collateral or obligation to pay cash collateral arising from those derivative instruments recognized at fair value, which are executed with the same counterparty under a master netting arrangement. NiSource discloses amounts recognized for the right to reclaim cash collateral within “Restricted cash” and amounts recognized for the right to return cash collateral within “Other accruals” on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Commodity Price Risk Programs.   NiSource and NiSource’s utility customers are exposed to variability in cash flows associated with natural gas purchases and volatility in natural gas prices. NiSource purchases natural gas for sale and delivery to its retail, commercial and industrial customers, and for most customers the variability in the market price of gas is passed through in their rates. Some of NiSource’s utility subsidiaries offer programs where variability in the market price of gas is assumed by the respective utility. The objective of NiSource’s commodity price risk programs is to mitigate this gas cost variability, for NiSource or on behalf of its customers, associated with natural gas purchases or sales by economically hedging the various gas cost components by using a combination of futures, options, forward physical contracts, basis swap contracts or other derivative contracts. Northern Indiana also uses derivative contracts to minimize risk associated with power price volatility. These commodity price risk programs and their respective accounting treatment are described below.

Northern Indiana, Columbia of Pennsylvania, Columbia of Kentucky, Columbia of Maryland and Columbia of Virginia use NYMEX futures and NYMEX options to minimize risk associated with gas price volatility. These derivative programs must be marked to fair value, but because these derivatives are used within the framework of the companies’ GCR or FAC mechanism, regulatory assets or liabilities are recorded to offset the change in the fair value of these derivatives.

Northern Indiana and Columbia of Virginia offer a fixed price program as an alternative to the standard GCR mechanism. These services provide certain customers with the opportunity to either lock in their gas cost or place a cap on the gas costs that would be charged in future months. In order to hedge the anticipated physical purchases associated with these obligations, forward physical contracts, NYMEX futures and NYMEX options are used to secure forward gas prices. The accounting treatment elected for these contracts is varied in that certain of these contracts have been accounted for as cash flow hedges while some contracts are not. The accounting treatment is based on the election of the company. The normal purchase and normal sales exception is elected for forward physical contracts associated with these programs where delivery of the commodity is probable to occur.

Northern Indiana also offers a DependaBill program to its customers as an alternative to the standard tariff rate that is charged to residential customers. The program allows Northern Indiana customers to fix their total monthly bill in future months at a flat rate regardless of gas usage or commodity cost. In order to hedge the anticipated physical purchases associated with these obligations, forward physical contracts, NYMEX futures and NYMEX options have been used to secure forward gas prices. The normal purchase and normal sales exception is elected for forward physical contracts associated with these programs where delivery of the commodity is probable to occur.

Northern Indiana enters into gas purchase contracts at first of the month prices that give counterparties the daily option to either sell an additional package of gas at first of the month prices or recall the original volume to be delivered. Northern Indiana charges a fee for this option. The changes in the fair value of these options are primarily due to the changing expectations of the future intra-month volatility of gas prices. These written options are derivative instruments, must be marked to fair value and do not meet the requirement for hedge accounting treatment. However, Northern Indiana records the related gains and losses associated with these transactions as a regulatory asset or liability.

Columbia of Kentucky, Columbia of Ohio and Columbia of Pennsylvania enter into contracts that allow counterparties the option to sell gas to them at first of the month prices for a particular month of delivery. These Columbia LDCs charge the counterparties a fee for this option. The changes in the fair value of the options are primarily due to the changing expectations of the future intra-month volatility of gas prices. These Columbia LDCs defer a portion of the change in the fair value of the options as either a regulatory asset or liability based on the regulatory customer sharing mechanisms in place, with the remaining changes in fair value recognized currently in earnings.

20

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

As part of the MISO Day 2 initiative, Northern Indiana was allocated or has purchased FTRs. These FTRs help Northern Indiana offset congestion costs due to the MISO Day 2 activity. The FTRs are marked to fair value and are not accounted for as a hedge, but since congestion costs are recoverable through the fuel cost recovery mechanism, the related gains and losses associated with marking these derivatives to market are recorded as a regulatory asset or liability. In the second quarter of 2008, MISO changed its allocation procedures from an allocation of FTRs to an allocation of ARRs, whereby Northern Indiana was allocated ARRs based on its historical use of the MISO administered transmission system. ARRs entitle the holder to a stream of revenues or charges based on the price of the associated FTR in the FTR auction, so ARRs can be used to purchase FTRs in the FTR auction. ARRs are not derivatives.

NiSource is in the process of winding down its unregulated natural gas marketing business, where gas financial contracts are utilized to economically hedge expected future gas purchases associated with forward gas agreements. These financial contracts, as well as the associated forward physical sales contracts, are derivatives and are marked-to-market with all associated gains and losses recognized to income. NiSource established a reserve of $3.5 million and $25.6 million against certain derivatives as of March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. This amount represents reserves related to the creditworthiness of certain customers, fair value of future cash flows, and the cost of maintaining significant amounts of restricted cash. The physical sales contracts marked-to-market had a fair value of approximately $72.9 million at March 31, 2012 and $136.8 million at December 31, 2011, while the financial derivative contracts marked-to-market had a fair value loss of $115.8 million at March 31, 2012, and $155.5 million at December 31, 2011. During the fourth quarter of 2011, NiSource recorded a reserve of $22.6 million on certain assets related to the wind down of the unregulated natural gas marketing business. During the first quarter of 2012, NiSource settled a majority of the contracts related to the reserve noted above. As a result, NiSource wrote off $43.8 million of price risk assets and recorded notes receivable of $20.7 million.

On October 31, 2011, cash and derivatives broker-dealer MF Global filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. MF Global brokered NYMEX hedges of natural gas futures on behalf of NiSource affiliates. At the date of bankruptcy, NiSource affiliates had contracts open with MF Global with settlement dates ranging from November 2011 to February 2014. On November 3, 2011, these contracts were measured at a mark-to-market loss of approximately $46.4 million. NiSource affiliates had posted initial margin to open these accounts of $6.9 million and additional maintenance margin for mark-to-market losses, for a total cash balance of $53.3 million. Within the first week after the filing, at the direction of the Bankruptcy Court, a transfer of assets was initiated on behalf of NiSource affiliates to a court-designated replacement broker for future trade activity. The existing futures positions were closed and then rebooked with the replacement broker at the new closing prices as of November 3, 2011. Initial margin on deposit at MF Global of $5.7 million was transferred to the court-designated replacement broker. The maintenance margin was retained by MF Global to offset the loss positions of the open contracts on November 3, 2011. NiSource affiliates are monitoring the activity in the bankruptcy case and have filed a proof of claim at the Court’s direction. As of March 31, 2012, NiSource affiliates maintained a reserve for the $1.2 million difference between the initial margin posted with MF Global and the cash transferred to the court-designated replacement broker as a loss contingency.

21

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

Commodity price risk program derivative contracted gross volumes are as follows:

(a) Basis contract volumes not included in the above table were 16.5 MMDth and 15.9 MMDth as of March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

(b) Basis contract volumes not included in the above table were 24.1 MMDth and 29.9 MMDth as of March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

(c) Megawatt hours reported in thousands

Interest Rate Risk Activities.   NiSource recognizes that the prudent and selective use of derivatives may help it to lower its cost of debt capital and manage its interest rate exposure. NiSource Finance has entered into various “receive fixed” and “pay floating” interest rate swap agreements which modify the interest rate characteristics of a portion of its outstanding long-term debt from fixed to variable rate. These interest rate swaps also serve to hedge the fair market value of NiSource Finance’s outstanding debt portfolio. As of March 31, 2012, NiSource had $6.6 billion of outstanding fixed rate debt, of which $500.0 million is subject to fluctuations in interest rates as a result of the fixed-to-variable interest rate swap transactions. These interest rate swaps are designated as fair value hedges. NiSource had no net gain or loss recognized in earnings due to hedging ineffectiveness for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011.

On July 22, 2003, NiSource Finance entered into fixed-to-variable interest rate swap agreements in a notional amount of $500 million with four counterparties with an 11-year term. NiSource Finance receives payments based upon a fixed 5.40% interest rate and pays a floating interest amount based on U.S. 6-month BBA LIBOR plus an average of 0.78% per annum. There was no exchange of premium at the initial date of the swaps. In addition, each party has the right to cancel the swaps on July 15, 2013.

Contemporaneously with the issuance on September 16, 2005 of $1 billion of its 5.25% and 5.45% notes, maturing September 15, 2017 and 2020, respectively, NiSource Finance settled $900 million of forward starting interest rate swap agreements with six counterparties. NiSource paid an aggregate settlement payment of $35.5 million which is being amortized from AOCI to interest expense over the term of the underlying debt, resulting in an effective interest rate of 5.67% and 5.88%, respectively. As of March 31, 2012, AOCI includes $10.9 million related to forward starting interest rate swap settlement, net of tax. These derivative contracts are accounted for as a cash flow hedge.

As of March 31, 2012, NiSource holds a 47.5% interest in Millennium. As NiSource reports Millennium as an equity method investment, NiSource is required to recognize a proportional share of Millennium’s OCI. NiSource’s proportionate share of the remaining unrealized loss associated with a settled interest rate swap is $19.4 million, net of tax, as of March 31, 2012. Millennium is amortizing the unrealized loss related to these terminated interest rate swaps into earnings using the effective interest method through interest expense as interest payments are made. NiSource records its proportionate share of the amortization as Equity Earnings in Unconsolidated Affiliates in the Condensed Statements of Consolidated Income (unaudited).

22

Table of Contents

ITEM 1.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

NISOURCE INC.

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) (continued)

NiSource’s location and fair value of derivative instruments on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets (unaudited) were: